850473 pts · March 2, 2013
Imgur is becoming rife with points-obsessed twits. Don't be one.
it'd heat up if left long enough, not shock herpath of least resistance
chika-chikaaahh
Hellion. Rapscallion. Funyun.
ah, it's high altitude nuclear test season
the highlights on the hair and the waves <3 (I don't care that the Moon is on the other side - let's assume there's another light source)
then it's one of those instances of inconsistency - I only got a warning when it was some rando in the video, and SpockIsMyHomeboy explained it to me nicely
https://despair.com/products/limitations (the original ones)
yep, smug
Thats the name I was trying to remember. I went "she did that scene with Holly Hendrix" and googled.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_génie_du_mal
bames nond had a stronk
It depends a lot on the post - is it a model showing her butt like these, or some rando viewed from behind? The latter is sexualization, though of course there's a gray area.
some people don't even think of keeping the can's rim clean, which also applies to glue and everything in a recloseable container
Lexxxus Adams, Sally Squirt, JMac
the outlet is a threaded fitting
Traduttore, traditore. The first victims are puns but usually you don't notice anything amiss. Then there's failure to adapt the different sentence structure or amibiguity. Adding "Autonomous" to "Instinct" doesn't change the meaning much but it does seem redundant.
I was better off before the reminder that this asshole exists. Also it's a bit belated.
I just looked it up - I thought Better call Saul was dramatic. It's somewhat funny but I can't blame him.
Oh, there's ways to add nuance, so partly the joke is being so laconic and non-dramatic about a cute slice of life.
Point is you don't have to be a creator to be a critic. You can call out that Death Note had rules being exposed bluntly just to support the next plot device every episode.
To me, bad writing is about sins, lazy writing for effect: inconsistency, misleading the reader, easy to hate characters, pet characters, unidimensional characters, preaching, exposition, pandering (bad guy gets horrible comeuppance, etc).
I understood it. Literal translation:Today there was(were) a huge watermelon(s), so I ate it after I bought it. I was tasty so I recommend it.Seriously, that's it. No nuances were lost.
this one was by Peter Schilling though obviously referencing Bowie's Major Tom
musk's times have always been hot air. But, the superheavy booster (not Starship) is actually flying right and landing back. And the weird upper stage is doing so-so but not a total loss - already managed two vertical landings with some reentry damage.
> won't ever get there without new managementOf course you mean elon musk (lowercase intended). This is interesting, because I keep hearing that there's a dedicated team jangling keys in front of him so he doesn't break things, and at the same time he's behind Starship's troubles.
Starship is not a production item. NASA must have known something if they awarded SpaceX a few cool billions to develop it as a luanr lander, I'd say.
STS was a bit of a boondoggle too, costing about $6B in 1981 dollars when Columbia first flew. The marginal cost was about $2B in today's dollars.But it was conceived in 1972, 9 years before vs 15 for SLS, and it took that long was mostly because it didn't reuse anythingAlso it got some serious scope creep because USAF wanted to send up their spy birds with it.
SLS is the big joke here. Bilions over budget and a decade behind schedule, for a marginal cost (that is, not amortizing R&D) of about $2B a pop.Just that launch tower was estimated to cost $2.7B: https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/08/nasas-second-large-launch-tower-has-gotten-stupidly-expensive/
Fujimoto IRL
it'd heat up if left long enough, not shock her
path of least resistance
Hellion. Rapscallion. Funyun.
ah, it's high altitude nuclear test season
the highlights on the hair and the waves <3
(I don't care that the Moon is on the other side - let's assume there's another light source)
then it's one of those instances of inconsistency - I only got a warning when it was some rando in the video, and SpockIsMyHomeboy explained it to me nicely
yep, smug
Thats the name I was trying to remember. I went "she did that scene with Holly Hendrix" and googled.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_génie_du_mal
bames nond had a stronk
It depends a lot on the post - is it a model showing her butt like these, or some rando viewed from behind? The latter is sexualization, though of course there's a gray area.
some people don't even think of keeping the can's rim clean, which also applies to glue and everything in a recloseable container
Lexxxus Adams, Sally Squirt, JMac
the outlet is a threaded fitting
Traduttore, traditore. The first victims are puns but usually you don't notice anything amiss. Then there's failure to adapt the different sentence structure or amibiguity.
Adding "Autonomous" to "Instinct" doesn't change the meaning much but it does seem redundant.
I was better off before the reminder that this asshole exists. Also it's a bit belated.
I just looked it up - I thought Better call Saul was dramatic. It's somewhat funny but I can't blame him.
Oh, there's ways to add nuance, so partly the joke is being so laconic and non-dramatic about a cute slice of life.
Point is you don't have to be a creator to be a critic. You can call out that Death Note had rules being exposed bluntly just to support the next plot device every episode.
To me, bad writing is about sins, lazy writing for effect: inconsistency, misleading the reader, easy to hate characters, pet characters, unidimensional characters, preaching, exposition, pandering (bad guy gets horrible comeuppance, etc).
I understood it. Literal translation:
Today there was(were) a huge watermelon(s), so I ate it after I bought it. I was tasty so I recommend it.
Seriously, that's it. No nuances were lost.
this one was by Peter Schilling though obviously referencing Bowie's Major Tom
musk's times have always been hot air. But, the superheavy booster (not Starship) is actually flying right and landing back. And the weird upper stage is doing so-so but not a total loss - already managed two vertical landings with some reentry damage.
> won't ever get there without new management
Of course you mean elon musk (lowercase intended). This is interesting, because I keep hearing that there's a dedicated team jangling keys in front of him so he doesn't break things, and at the same time he's behind Starship's troubles.
Starship is not a production item. NASA must have known something if they awarded SpaceX a few cool billions to develop it as a luanr lander, I'd say.
STS was a bit of a boondoggle too, costing about $6B in 1981 dollars when Columbia first flew. The marginal cost was about $2B in today's dollars.
But it was conceived in 1972, 9 years before vs 15 for SLS, and it took that long was mostly because it didn't reuse anything
Also it got some serious scope creep because USAF wanted to send up their spy birds with it.
SLS is the big joke here. Bilions over budget and a decade behind schedule, for a marginal cost (that is, not amortizing R&D) of about $2B a pop.
Just that launch tower was estimated to cost $2.7B: https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/08/nasas-second-large-launch-tower-has-gotten-stupidly-expensive/
Fujimoto IRL