My constructive suggestion was for people to stop saying they are unintentionally boycotting things. It just seems self-congratulatory and smug and every boycott discussion is just choked with those comments.

I was writing third paragraph about how if you aren't shopping somewhere that is being boycott, you can help by spreading the word. I deleted it once when I had the realization that it doesn't matter what I say, the next boycott post will have the same comments and that I'm getting worked up over something I can't change.

It was his stepmom's gun, not the mom's. Article was probably edited at some point, since I see at least one place where they forgot the step part.

I have a bottle of the Dr. Doctor syrup in my pantry. I forgot I had it tbh, since I haven't been drinking soda for a while. It's a decent brand if you have a machine that carbonates water.

A real judge. Immigration judges are employees of the Department of Justice and follow the orders of the Attorney General. He has another case in front of a federal judge in New Jersey who can question that determination.

I don't know why I even bother going into the comment sections of boycott posts. There's only three types of comments. Smug "heh, I never shopped there anyway" comments, self-defeating "I'll never shop there again even if they change" comments, or 'boycotts don't work, give up libs' comments if you have some conservative trolls.

The "unintentionally boycotting" ones bother me because they are always the top comments and it's not actually boycotting. You don't show up as missing revenue because they support genocide and stopping that support won't win you back. You might as well not exist to those companies. I'm happy you don't have to deal with an HP laptop, but you weren't boycotting them.

The preorders were $100 down, completely refundable.

Ahh, my mistake. It never occurred to me that the actual article continued dragging on.

It feels like they thought of "make sure the whole family is taken care of" after finishing the story and just shoved it in. It changes the tone and makes me feel validated in my opinion that reading The Onion articles just ruins the perfect headlines.

How does the last line make it any more inappropriate than the rest?

Only things I can see are you either hate oiling the barrel or you've mixed up which IRA they are talking about.

It's the final paragraph of the 12th amendment

But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

It wouldn't be as easy as just having him run as VP, since you can't be Vice President if you aren't eligible to be President.

Like a boat, you don't get to use it as much as you like and you have to keep throwing money at it.

It might. It took years and hundreds of millions of dollars to fix, but they did clean up Flint's water system.

I think people are mixing up copyright up with what Sony does with Spider-Man due to licensing terms. Like not only does copyright last damn near forever, you don't need to keep releasing stuff to renew it and it doesn't just go away because you aren't using it.

There's also a lot of confusion with trademarks. People will often defend big corporations threatening fan art because they "have to defend it or lose their copyright", which is a trademark thing and not copyright.

If the email is from a legitimate business, they must have an unsubscribe button and it has to work. They get a little time before they are required to process the request, 10 days in the US, but I've usually seen it take effect immediately.

Don't click the unsubscribe button in an actual spam email.

If you turn the disc over, you can actually count the rings without needing to cut into it! This lets you skip having to glue the disc back together after checking the age.

The choices in Fallout 4 are like if the designer had just heard in passing that games like Mass Effect had a choice wheel. The only detail they successfully copied was not having the dialogue always match the option you chose. Bioware games gave you more options (6 in this screenshot of Mass Effect I'm looking at), wasn't as clunky to use, and the options weren't as transparently meaningless.

I had to do this to get the factory oil filter off my motorcycle. Went through 3 different oil filter removal tools and all I achieved was rounding off all the edges of the filter.

Retailers do it because they pay a penalty when a chargeback happens and payment processors will cut ties with them if their fraud rate is too high.

The hospital has a method it can use if it wants to avoid losing access to federal funding without having to violate state law by pulling gender-affirming care. It can file a lawsuit in federal court and ask for a restraining order on enforcement of the executive order. That's the decision to make if the entire community's interest was in mind.

If the APIs are meant for public consumption, requiring feature parity makes a lot of sense. But when it's for internal use by your own developers, waiting means you are making a bunch of new API endpoints no one will ever use. People will write more and more code using the older endpoints and those endpoints will start getting changes that your new ones will need ported over.

I think if you are going to force people to use new endpoints, you'll need them to either write the endpoints themselves or have a team member who can write it for them and account for this while planning. If getting a new endpoint requires putting in a JIRA ticket with a separate backend team, 4 planning meetings, and a month wait, people are just going to stick with what currently exists.