Good point, i totally misunderstood the "picture this" lead in. Yeah it's a completely feasible situation though it does seem extreme.
I don't know how accurate this is. Every time i try googling this, i get multiple help forums (brand website, Microsoft help, reddit discussions) for how to troubleshoot, with no ads for new laptops. While i typically provide a more specific search (e.g. my laptop brand and model won't boot), i tried googling "my laptop won't turn on" and received similar, albeit less specific, suggestions.
I wonder if the original poster often searches for laptop prices to find deals and maybe it defaulted to that?
I appreciate your reply and question. I think it comes across rude because the correction wasn't really necessary to understand the context of what was said, and it's even less of a correction and more of a personal preference. It doesn't add much to the conversation, which makes it seem more like grammatical pedantry. The fact that it wasn't entirely correct made it seem even more out of place.
For the record, I'm not accusing you of being rude, just identifying how the comment came across. I'm not assuming intent with your original comment and apologize if it seemed like I had.
I actually don't think this is correct. Whom is used when the unknown person is the object being impacted (to whom did you sell your car). In this sentence, "who" is actually referring to a person performing the action (the sentences "who questioned him?" And "where are those who questioned him?" Would use who, not whom. You wouldn't say "whom questioned him," but whom could be used to replace "him," such as "he questioned whom?").
As I alluded to above, you can usually see if it's who or whom by changing it to he/she (who) or him/her (whom). You may need to adjust the sentence slightly, but it will normally work. Above you need to remove the "where are those" portion to find the answer.
So I believe that your correction came across a bit rude, and I'm fairly certain it is also wrong.
To be fair, about that women's world cup team, if i recall correctly it was a PR move to play an exhibition match with those kids and they were not trying very hard to win. I don't think they would truly lose to U-15 if it was, for example, a tournament.
Your overall point has merit but i think that specific example gets overused a bit.
One of the finer points of something new is getting in at the right time. I have to imagine if you're a streamer and you force yourself to stay on your old game "for the fans," you could miss out on the shiny new thing that people care about. This could literally cost them money that they need for rent. I am confident that many streamers are not highly paid and depend on this income.
Don't forget, fans are fickle, corporations are fickle, everyone is fickle. I don't think any employee of a company should be loyal to that company if it is to their own detriment as that company will let their employees go if it needs to (better companies try harder, worse companies make worse decisions).
I don't see why a streamer should treat their career differently. Do what you think is best for you. Streamers don't owe me, the fan, and it doesn't do me any good for them to force themselves to play a game they're less interested in just to appease me.
Compared to the other Uber wealthy, he at least seems to have some sort of a code of ethics from what i can see, which is obviously limited. He's still in it to make money (obviously), but his actions seem to suggest that he won't go to the extreme of hurting everyone else just for money.
I started liking Mark more when he opened cost plus drugs. It's a pretty decent endeavor to try to reduce pharmaceutical costs for the consumer
Half of all marriages, which include people who have been married multiple times. For example, if you have 5 married couples, 4 are on their first marriage and the last couple is on their 6th marriage, then on average 50% of the marriages in this scenario failed. But it doesn't apply to everyone in the same way. Some people even remarry the same person.
The median is much lower.
That's not an analogy at all, as it's completely different from what i said earlier. I'm not trying to prove that Earth is moving amazingly fast, I'm trying to show how the headline seems grander than it is.
I also don't think a lot of people realize quite how fast the Earth is moving through space. Saying a million miles an hour really does seem impressive if you don't have that information. But as we speak, we are literally hurtling through space at half that pace.
If we weren't orbiting the sun we would end up orbiting something else at a different speed.
This would be similar to saying that San Bernardino county in California is 20000 sq mi, or about 50k km squared. It's just a number without context. But if i told you it's a county that is it was bigger than both the country of Switzerland and US State of West Virginia, that's added context for size comparison. The way that California divides its county structure does not invalidate this comparison, and is irrelevant.
I'm not really sure what your intent or point is here.
I don't think that's entirely fair to say. The headline reads sensationally about a celestial object, but our own sun is traveling at almost half that speed, and we're following it. I'm not trying to prove that the Earth is incredibly fast, only that the headline may sound more impressive than it is.
Isn't the sun revolving around the center of the milky way at approximately 450,000 mph? And the Earth revolves around the sun, so we're moving about half as fast as this new object right now. One million is pretty fast, but context makes it a little less shocking.
Not a reddit fan anymore, but this makes me think of r/portugalcykablyat
They almost certainly changed the picture to the one that was using a filter to make it more blue. I'm fairly confident the earlier photo was easier to distinguish
Edit:
I'm being downvoted, but either this thread or another thread did literally use a different picture similar to this before.
If you travel, you'll find very interesting combinations of flavors. As a few modest examples, I recently came upon paprika flavored and cheese and onion flavored Pringles, and awhile back i had sake flavored kit kats.
Travel more! Plenty of flavor experimentation going on
There are several under "unique tone" that actually seem.. Better?
I think the joke is that a dominatrix is meant to, well, dominate their client (sexually). Think like with whips and chains, for example. Unfortunately, everything in her house, even the ficus, dominates her. It's a bad first impression and she appears to be unfit for the role.
They're saying that allegedly, Christians are not big on voting, and this statement is meant to encourage those non voters to come vote just this once and everything will get better. Then you can go back to being a non voter.
I think.
Horrible wording no matter how you slice it, though.
I don't think it's fair to publicly show off and simultaneously lightly insult other people (the original post, unless it's ironic and I'm missing the joke, is trying to make such a point) but then not expect any sort of a response. These aren't people just minding their business. These appear to be extremely over confident people who crave public attention, and they (or their friends) are willing to put others down in the process.
I don't think they need to be defended.