😎 is pronounced as [bad to the bone riff]

Calling Israel's apartheid "modern" to me kind of implies that South Africa's apartheid, whose transitional period ended in 1994, was somehow "ancient" or "old-fashioned"... Yeah, you can rest assured that apartheid/segregation always has been far too modern.

he has exactly one voice that he can do but lord knows that wont stop him and i respect that

yes but it's like the most Powerful voice to exist

SungWon Cho I remember in a recent-ish Q&A talked about basically this. Voice actors aren't really, like, paid to be able to mask their voices or do a million and one different impressions: they're paid to act, with their voices. Now obviously having range doesn't hurt, but range is not a necessary skill to be a good VA. SungWon really emphasized this point, and I think it kinda changed the way I look at VA as a profession.

Some chud I used to see regularly: "Blackrock is funding WOKE in the movies in order to change pubic opinion!!!"

Meanwhile, actual conservative billionaires:

※The person who lived in the USSR was born in December of 1991

"Was there a massacre in Tiananmen Square?"

—"No."

"Were people killed elsewhere in Beijing?"

—"...Ermh..."

"Ahem. I am asking you if people were killed in the area immediately surrounding Tiananmen Square, even if nobody was killed in the square itself."

—"The protesters in Tiananmen Square left after negotiations with the PLA. There was no bloodshed in Tiananmen Square."

"I understand that, but were people killed elsewhere in Beijing?"

—"Nowhere in Beijing were student protestors specifically targeted."

"Well, were non-students targeted, and were any students injured or killed without being targeted?"

—"Hey did you know that the Three Gorges Dam is the world's largest—"

"Gongchandang, my friend, I am begging you."

—"...Force may have been used when provoked by attacks."

"May force have also been used unprovoked? Could it have been that the protesters felt like they were provoked first, because you were sending tanks past the barricades that they'd put up?"

—"I mean... you know... uhh..."

"Gongchandang. Were you scared that the occupation of Beijing and the potential of a workers' revolt would threaten the survival of socialism in China, by presenting a still-socialist alternative to your rule, because societal division particularly among the less politically literate could be (and was) exploited by outside forces?"

—"OUR YOUTH ARE VULNERABLE TO IMPERIALIST PROPAGANDA, OK‽ ALSO, TANK MAN DIDN'T GET RUN OVER. SEE. HE WAS PULLED AWAY BY A PASSERBY. NOT RUN OVER."

This happens sometimes for me too. You can try opening it in browser, but I'll write a transcription for our screen-reader-using friends, too.

Transcription:

tlirsgender | Nov 6, 2020

Weird peeve time. Calling lab grown gemstones "fake" is stupid because it's the same shit just not formed naturally. An artificially grown diamond is the same shit as a natural diamond it is the exact same material bro it's all fuckign carbon

spacefroggity | 45m ago

It's carbon it's pretty and it didn't involve slave labor what's not to love??? Hi I'm having geology opinions tonight apparently. And I'm right

spacefroggity | 45m ago

There is so much bullshit in the diamonds industry to be mad about tbh. It also ties into the bullshit of the wedding industry as a whole but we don't have the time to unpack all that

val-ritz | Nov 29, 2020

not even going to lie, the day i learned i could get like 15 lab grown rubies the size of dimes for $20 is the day i spent $20 on rubies, and i have never once said to myself "man, i wish this cost $1,600 and the lives of eight children to produce

fuckyeahmineralogy | Dec 8, 2020

We are a pro-lab-grown mineral blog here, not only is it massively cheaper but massively more ethical as well in many cases.

thegreenpea | Mar 8, 2021

another very cool lab grown gem is Moissanite. It has a 9.25 on the mohs hardness scale where diamond is a 10. Moissanote also has a 2.69 refractive index in comparison to diamond's 2.419 and here is the difference

and the best thing about moissanite? It is all lab grown and it costs only a fraction of what diamond costs. So fuck the diamond indsutry and buy lab grown gems which cost significantly less

rubixpsyche | Aug 6, 2021

Also it's just cool to think of some mad scientist lookin person doing shit against the law of the universe and making pretty gems for you. Like cmon. This shouldnt be allowed probably. But humans really be like on gOD i want some shiny an just started MAKIN em

dadzathechaosgod | 46m ago

for years people wanted alchemy, well now we have alchemy and we're making gemstones out of it and suddenly "it doesn't count" anymore

Anyone looking to remember the difference: "id est" (that is) vs "exemplī grātiā" (for the sake of an example). You use the first to clarify meaning, and the second to begin a non-exhaustive list of examples.

What matters is ultimately if you can convey your ideas, so using the wrong term is fine when people can still figure out what you meant. But it's still a good idea to learn the difference, because there will be times when mixing up "i.e." and "e.g." will create ambiguity or misunderstanding.

The best idea is maybe to use "for example" or "that is to say". The former could be abbreviated to "f.ex." like in Norwegian, and the latter could be abbreviated "t.i.t.s."

...Alright, on second thought maybe don't abbreviate that one.

In any case, the Wikipedia Manual of Style recommends avoiding use of "e.g." and "i.e." in regular running text altogether, saying that these abbreviations are better fit for parentheticals, quotations, citations, tables, and lists. This is because there is no word or character limit on Wikipedia, nor is there on Tumblr, and so the language is more clear when abbreviations are avoided. Even when someone is using "i.e." and "e.g." in the prescribed way, that doesn't guarantee that the reader knows the distinction.

Curse English idioms, I literally thought they were rebranding to Mud.

As far as I understand, lemmy.world is banning/defederating piracy communities. This made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.

Yep, this is a real thing that was actually printed in a NZ newspaper.

Here's the same text in an Aussie newspaper.

The text was originally a caption for this article in the March 1912 issue of Popular Mechanics.

The earliest use of the term "greenhouse gases" was in 1896. In April of that year, a paper by the coiner of the term, Svante Arrhenius, became the first published to suggest a link between CO2 and long-term climate variations. He would in his later work explicitly suggest that burning of fossil fuels will cause global warming.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences in their tribute to Arrhenius wrote,

While Arrhenius’ prediction [of warming] received great public interest, this typically waned in time but was revived as an important global mechanism by the great atmospheric physicist Carl Gustaf Rossby who initiated atmospheric CO2 measurements in Sweden in the 1950s.

In other words, in the 1890s-1920s, the idea of the greenhouse effect and anthropogenic global warming were widely known and popular and received public interest, but fell out of favor shortly thereafter. One must wonder why.

(Links and quotes courtesy of Snopes)

RDJ_pointing_at_self: What counts as politics is a political question in itself, with a subjective answer melded by the hegemon. Absolutely everything can be connected to politics in some way.