Which wouldn’t be so bad if they actually had shit that people wanted to buy. But all the guillotine shops are out of stock, with expected ship dates after December 4th.

You can even add a search plugin directly in the client.

Huh. Well, that’ll make things easier.

I am not sure where you are getting that “theoretical” bit. It’s not theory.

In theory, you can purchase a gun with no training whatsoever. In practice, you’ll have a tough time avoiding the bare minimum safe handling instruction the seller is going to give you. Upon receiving that instruction, you can’t really say you have had “no training” whatsoever.

Looking at it another way: I don’t personally know anyone over the age of 6 who has never received any sort of training on safe gun handling. In Theory, such people exist and can suddenly decide to buy a gun on a whim with zero research or experience. In practice, not so much.

Try it.

No, seriously, try it.

Go in, tell them you’re a first-time gun buyer, and try to walk out without receiving basic safety training, referrals and/or invites to ranges and practical training.

It is theoretically possible to buy a gun with absolutely no experience or training. But, you would have to go in to the process with some sort of malicious intent, even if that intent is just to cast FUD on the purchasing process.

Prime is garbage. Even if it’s free on Prime, I hoist a sail.

The GPS almanac is a table of the exact orbital information of every satellite. Every receiver needs a copy of the almanac to understand where the satellites are supposed to be, so that it can determine where it is in relation to those satellites.

When their clocks all shift one minute simultaneously, the almanac isn’t updated. Every satellite is 60 seconds away from where the almanac says it should be.

If the satellites were geostationary, receivers would still work, they’d just be off by 0.25 degrees of longitude as the entire constellation would be shifted the same amount. But the GPS constellation consists of satellites in a variety of inclined orbits. Nothing is where the almanac thinks it is, and nothing is where it is supposed to be in relation to anything else.

Parent comment is correct: GPS will immediately fail, and remain down until an updated almanac is published and distributed.

I left a trade job after we got a new division manager with a background in sales. Despite the entire staff being on 20hr/week mandatory overtime, dipshit was holding 3x daily 30 minute shift meetings, and monthly 90-minute all-hands meetings to complain about productivity.

Two months after I left, corporate shitcanned the asshole.

If the US reestablishes the 91% top-tier tax bracket we had for most of the 20th century, the rest of the world will quickly follow.

Nobody will be in that bracket; they will take great efforts raise their tax deductible “expenses” (or reduce their revenue) in order to avoid it.

Insanity is expecting the system to work in a way other than the way it actually works.

By the way, I did discover that EU labeling does include a “% RI” for sugar, which is functionality identical to the “recommendation” you were complaining about as being illegal.

It is mandatory for the manufacturer to make an affirmative claim as to the cholesterol and trans fat content (along with several other items) of every food product sold in the US. The manufacturer is only liable for what they actually claim; this labeling standard forces them to make certain claims.

With the labeling you describe of the EU, I could look at every item in my pantry and refrigerator, and not realize that my diet is entirely missing any source of vitamin D, for example. If nothing in any of my labels even mentions vitamin D, I might not even realize it is something I should be looking for in my diet.

When every single item in my diet affirmatively claims “Not a significant source of vitamin D”, it’s a big clue that I’m not eating right.

There is a distinct difference in liability between “accidentally” forgetting to include the sodium content of a product, and affirmatively claiming it has no significant amount of sodium.

When I’m on a low sodium diet and a soy sauce manufacturer fails to list its sodium content on the label, I bear a large part of the responsibility. It is common knowledge that soy sauce is usually extremely high in salt, so I can’t reasonably claim their mislabeling was the cause of any harm I experience. But, if they were to affirmatively claim “not a significant source of sodium”, I’ll own their asses.

Mandating claims of these specific, important nutrients certainly does add meaningful information.

Anything that’s marked NSFW requires a login on Reddit.

The listed items are all mandatory parts of all labels. Everything inside that box is required, in that format. “Nutrition Facts” boxes are highly regulated. Remove those statements, and this label is no longer legally compliant.

You’ll note that “good” content (dietary fiber, vitamin d, calcium, iron, and potassium) are also listed, even though this product does not contain them.

Because all of these items are mandated to be present inside this box on all products, there is no implication that another product may or may not contain these items.

The content of that box is not considered “advertisement”. It’s just a simple, consistent, statement of facts.

and then BOTH trucks would drop off in the same pile, in the same landfill with zero recycling done.

That’s not true, especially for cans. It’s more effective to sort trash at a central location than to have consumers do it beforehand. Aluminum recycling alone turns a significant profit. Glass is also profitable by itself.

Waste management companies should be paying you for your cans; if they are charging you for recycling, you should consider taking your cans to a scrap yard rather than leaving them in your trash.

The labeling of what’s NOT in the drink is also under similar regulation,

For consistency, the regulations on labeling requires listing quantities of all of those specific nutrients, whether they are present or not.

You would have a point if the recommendation was a minimum daily intake. It’s not. It is a maximum. A recommended limit that you should not exceed.

The USDA recommendation is that sugar should make up no more than 10% of total caloric intake. The percentages you see are based on a 2000 (kilo)calorie daily diet.

That recommendation is perfectly consistent with your assertion that “we can do perfectly well with zero grams of sugar every single day”.

Police Procedural shows.

Law and Order, Criminal Minds, NCIS, CSI, Lie to Me, Dexter…

Basically, anything that makes people think that police are more effective at solving crime than they actually are.

The people who say they don’t experience intrusive thoughts are liars. They are too anxious about how the world would react if they told anyone they sometimes think about jumping off a roof, or driving into oncoming traffic.

The people who don’t actually have intrusive thoughts are psychopaths. Lacking empathy, they don’t even consider how such actions would affect anyone around them. They do, or do not, as they choose.

The healthiest are the people who recognize in themselves behaviors they don’t observe in their peers, and they are concerned enough for everyone’s safety to risk being seen as abnormal.

There is a difference between “intrusive thought” and “suicidal/homicidal ideation”. Experiencing these ideas as irresistible urges to partake in the behaviors might warrant a trip to a pshrink.

Experiencing them as vivid scenes of violence and destruction, without a compulsion to actually act on them, is not unusual or concerning. They’re your own private action movies; Enjoy them.

I stopped using cursive my sophomore year of high school. Started using smallcaps, and everyone was happier.

Bill pay through your bank. Fuck their payment processor.

When an old landlord pulled some bullshit on me, I paid a month’s rent with 31 paper checks, delivered once a day, direct from my bank.

And yet, we’re both wearing plastic bags…

My point is that synthetic fiber is the area we have to focus on to address your primary concern.