It’s a consonant. Specifically it’s the voiced palatal approximant represented as ⟨j⟩ in IPA.
It’s a consonant. Specifically it’s the voiced palatal approximant represented as ⟨j⟩ in IPA.
“I could care less” is almost always said sarcastically. A hallmark of sarcasm is saying the opposite of what you mean. So, a sarcastic “I could care less” implies they could not care less.
It would be a contraction of had: “I had better write…” Using would there doesn’t make sense.
I have yellow tape measurers that are like a quarter inch wide. It’s not that rare.
I can cover the whole moon with my thumb. Is the moon the size of my thumb?
If I hold a ruler about mid-chest, I can get this effect.
Oh yeah. A PhD means you hyperspecialized for years. You get one by being the expert and advancing your field in, usually, one tiny tiny area. For anything that isn’t that tiny area? Likely to be a stupid as anyone.
Right-wing media often have weird takes about, well, everything. If there’s something negative going on in the economy, they’ll definitely blame democrats even if it makes no sense. And their solutions are just bizarre. Like they boycott products by buying them and then destroying them.
So, I think the question is is there actually evidence people are selling right now because they were told to?
That’s a valid opinion. That they’re using it to mean “figuratively” is not.
I didn’t say your statement was pedantic. Just that you specifically called out your use of literally as not used in a figurative sense and that this thread in general is about pedantry. Those two things together made it seem not totally insufferable to point out that literal was actually being applied to figurative language.
Just because you called it out and this is a thread about pedantry: road rage is an idiomatic phrase, which is a type of figurative language. So, you were using literally to emphasize figurative language rather than try to clarify you weren’t using the idiomatic meaning of the phrase but rather a literal.
Yeah. Dictionaries reflect popular usage. And I think literally has probably been in use in that sense nearly as long as it’s been used to mean something really did happen that way.
People who think anyone uses literally to mean figuratively are annoying and too caught up in their crusade to realize their take is idiotic. No one uses it to mean figuratively. People use it to emphasize regardless of the figurative nature of language. It’s semantic drift that happens to most words that mean something similar to “in actuality” (e.g. really, actually). Even in other languages.
No, because CrowdStrike didn’t bork the drivers for those systems. They could have, though.
You seemed to take issue with tossing around babies as a general concept.
Difference is, being tossed around is developmentally important for babies and toddlers.
Babies fucking love being tossed around. They demand it until your arms are jello. Their giggles are totally worth it, though.
Ok. Rephrase: why did you demand?
I would definitely save it under a new name at the start because I’d totally accidentally save it without renaming at some point if I didn’t.
In that they’re both photos surrounding the birth of a baby. Something that most people experiencing view as a precious and fleeting time they’d like to have nice pictures of.
When they’re really little, high contrast is more clear and theoretically more interesting. There’s a lot of black and white toys aimed at newborns for that reason.