This is Lemmy, you scroll for 5 mins and you’ve seen all the worthy posts for the day.
And it’s a benefit in my book.
Yes, but we don’t know if that’s what they wanted to write. But in that case, maybe they also wanted to write “shoot” and not “shot”, so yeah, fair point.
That’s what they tried to write, but to be lexically correct it should be “loiterers”.
“Survivors will be shoot again”.
They attempted to write “Loiters* will be shot* on sight”.
Her sister is Sarah Connor.
Curved relative to what?
Edit: Nvm, I understood what you mean. But I think it’s a pedantic take. They obviously mean it in the context of the surface of the sphere.
To be fair, it’s been 14 years. Time spares no one.
Is this a roast? Am I being roasted? But it’s okay, I give my consent. And that makes me (my meat) vegan 😌
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (2010), pretty weird and original movie based on a comic book series. I recommend.
I wasn’t reminding them that ham isn’t vegan, I was referencing “chicken isn’t vegan?” from Scott Pilgrim.
My guess, somebody is hitting the ceiling from below.
Is this fresh? Link to source, plox.
There aren’t that many. A good chunk of us here are Linux nerds. You don’t have to be condescending about confronting (I assume) intentional misinterpretation of comments.
I suppose, at this point, I want to understand whether you accidentally misinterpreted the context of the original comment (downloading .exe from TPB) or intentionally misinterpreted it for “comedic effect”.
So is your point to argue semantics?
“Downloading” colloquially referes to the proces of saving some data onto persistent storage device. When you open HTML pages they are loaded directly into RAM. They might be saved to drive if they are cached. But no regular person would refer to that process as downloading. Even I, as a webdev, don’t.
It’s happening on the 9th of 18th month, we’ve still got some time.