I see what you did there

How did you get an account?

Same

It’s Michael Keaton for me

Very hot in Celsius is like… in the 30s. At 100C you’d be dead.

Instead of comparing every single individual users votes with every other one, you create clusters using data science techniques and bucket all users into those clusters, which are calculated on a nightly or weekly basis. By controlling the cluster size you can keep the number of comparisons managable, and still achieve OP’s vision.

Agreed. I bought the lifetime membership back then and I still have to deal with ads and upsells. Unfortunately they are still the most comprehensive tab source.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Im American. I might read the number 615 as “six hundred fifteen” in some cases. Like if I was counting.

But I would not say “six hundred fifteen giraffes”, I would say “six hundred and fifteen giraffes”

Thanks for spelling out why this felt wrong to me

The problem is people acting like the alternative to Biden is any better

exactly the sort of nudge that’ll put em off.

You could say this about so much of what he has said and done, and it hasn’t “put em off”, at least not enough

The word phobia may also refer to conditions other than true phobias.

For example, the term hydrophobia is an old name for rabies, since an aversion to water is one of that disease’s symptoms. A specific phobia to water is called aquaphobia instead. A hydrophobe is a chemical compound that repels water. Similarly, photophobia usually refers to a physical complaint (aversion to light due to inflamed eyes or excessively dilated pupils), rather than an irrational fear of light.

Several terms with the suffix -phobia are used non-clinically to imply irrational fear or hatred, such as Xenophobia and Homophobia

They target areas where they know it will predominantly affect PoC (or just democrats in general)

Interesting, I’m glad I got your perspective in addition to the article, thank you. The article clearly has an opinion and doesn’t treat the issue neutrally.

You said it’s true that the bad decisions these parents make are due to social problems linked to their poverty - sure it’s not “directly” the cause, but wouldn’t making sure this funding helps those families reduce the chances of them making those bad decisions?

I’m sure even if we helped impoverished families as much as we could financially, there would still be a need for CPS to step in and protect children. So it seems like both need funding. But since this money was meant to help families in poverty, using it instead to boost CPS does seem wrong, in that right-wing “punish people instead of improving society” kind of way.

Weve never had to worry about it before, there’s no precedent

Nah it’s real

Shouldn’t it be battle “royale”?