What? I'm really not into us politics and also it's pretty clear that the two party system is shit, but I never got the feeling that the two parties are similar in any way?
Offenders aren't victims of changed rules.
I'd say they are, if the rules are shit. In this case though the rules are fine imo.
I think I can see their point. As they said, fragile isn't meant as a slur here. If after the tenth time it happens, this kind of thing breaks you, then you're fragile because the nine times before that made you fragile. Which obviously isn't your fault but the fault of the people who were assholes to you.
Well, the thing is that they are right, and that's what hurts.
How tf is a comment like this one which is basically on some ISIS-like kill everyone level beeing upvoted?
Als kosteneffektiv gelten meist Maßnahmen, die zur Verhinderung des Verlusts eines DALY bis zu dreimal das jährlich BIP pro Kopf verwenden. Als sehr kosteneffektiv Maßnahmen, die weniger als einmal das BIP pro Kopf, kosten.
Wo wird sowas festgelegt bzw hast du dafür ne Quelle? Finde den Ansatz auf jeden Fall interessant
Wait, I thought the decentralized version of Twitter was Mastodon
Even in a world where everyone is vegetarian or even vegan (but remember that this wasn't always the case), this is still a somewhat funny joke. I, e. g. don't eat meat, but found it hilarious.
I'm a beautiful woman, most men would say "yes" to me
Maybe start with a bit more modesty idk
I wouldn't even know where to get something like this. I only heard about this pumpkin spice thing on the internet
The good old "we were first, so we're the only ones who belong here", which always brings up the question, how far we want to go back in time to determine who really was first. There is no answer to this question, hence it's the reason for so many conflicts across the globe and through history.
You're forgetting all the free advertising when your cars show up in the news all the time /s
Damn that's crazy. Thanks for the demo
Dass Regierungen die Plattform nutzen, legitimiert sie als offizielle Informationsquelle
Sehe ich anders. Nach der Logik dürfte die Regierung überhaupt kein Social Media nutzen. Ich kenne jedenfalls keine Social-Media-Seite, die man auch nur im entferntesten als "offizielle Informationsquelle ansehen sollte.
X ist eine Plattform, auf der sie viele Leute erreichen. Klar, ich find Mastodon auch besser, aber wenn die Regierung von X auf Mastodon wechselt, würde sie nur noch einen Bruchteil der Menschen erreichen und das kann irgendwie auch nicht das Ziel sein.
That's standpoint is way to reasonable. People want black and white.
I don't think it's about laziness, but rather about having deadlines set by management that you can only possible meet by reusing stuff as much as possible - even if you only actually need 5 % of this stuff but got to package everything of it in your application for it to work.
Wir wissen: Krieg gibt's nur weil man an Waffen viel Geld verdient. Lösung: verbieten.
Wie stellst du dir das denn vor? Wo verbieten? In der EU? Der Nato? Putin lacht sich kaputt. Oder willst du sie weltweit verbieten? Dafür müsstest du erst mal die ganze Welt unter deine Kontrolle kriegen - vermutlich mit Waffengewalt.