plemer

I’ll engage with you in good faith. The new account hasn’t earned that trust yet.

[flagged]

Yup. An accomplished scientist friend of mine looked up a topic in which he’s an expert and was deeply unimpressed - outdated, inaccurate, incomplete, misleading info (perhaps because much relevant research is paywalled). LLMs are amazing but not all-knowing.

Millennials don't watch TV.

I get it, but have you reviewed high-quality sources or actually tried the product?

Association fallacy: “You know who else was a vegetarian? Hitler.”

In what way do you think Colbert sold out?

Or maybe many did genuinely enjoy RR but you just weren’t the target audience? If it was created to combat the summer reading slump, it likely wasn’t targeting already avid readers.

FWIW, though, my experience was similar to yours: I read a ton and loved the feel of the show, but the actual content was a little slow.

Then you and he have different preferences.

But also, if you value appearance, perhaps invest in looking great while not wearing a suit.

I cherish your pedantry. If not here, where?

Would you mind identifying a few of the "smuggled presumptions"?

Then we agree.

Passive voice often adds length, impedes flow, and subtracts the useful info of who is doing something.

Examples:

* Active - concise, complete info: The manager approved the proposal.

* Passive - wordy, awkward: The proposal was approved by the manager.

* Passive - missing info: The proposal was approved. [by who?]

Most experienced writers will use active unless they have a specific reason not to, e.g., to emphasize another element of the sentence, as the third bullet's sentence emphasizes approval.

-

edited for clarity, detail

Sorry - I was making a joke that I literally was typing in those words, not replacing them with my own info. Apparently that didn’t land at all, maybe should’ve used quotes.

Theirusernameinitsppace@gmail.com bounced too.

OK, lay it on us.

But minimal determination over their own lives. Thank God for cheap LCDs, though.

Foster?

You loathing others’ preferences /= them self-loathing. Presumptuous and insulting.

fair point

Could be either. Nevertheless, while tone is tricky in text, the writer is responsible for relieving ambiguity.

Netanyahu’s actions endanger Jews. The rest of the world sees this for what it is. No one believes you. Disgusting.

The best reading I've found is from Raidió Teilifís Éireann (RTÉ), Ireland’s national public-service broadcaster. [1] It's treated more as a play, one part per actor. It's special - my closest other experience is watching Shakespeare.

[1] https://www.rte.ie/culture/2025/0527/1146705-listen-ulysses-...

Unhelpful

That’s nice, but what’s their incentive to build? Unless we’re just going to start decreeing the products we’d prefer.

Pay it forward

Can’t even explain what Sly means to me. Grew up on him, singing with my brother and sister in the back seat. He was summer, he was courage, he was jubilation. And his music still is. RIP.

Second best time is now

You won’t find perfection anywhere

But that’s where “we’ll get it post” comes in. The shot is just the starting point.

That said, directors shoot v differently - some will do literal hundreds of takes and still do plenty of post, others will shoot max three takes and send to edit.

Speaking as a drummer: yes, it’s completely different. The movements of a drummer are part of a single coordinated and complementary whole. Carrying on two conversations at once would be more like playing two different songs simultaneously. I’ve never heard of anyone doing that.

That said, Bob Milne could actually reliably play multiple songs in his head at once - in an MRI, could report the exact moment he was at in each song at an arbitrary time - but that guy is basically an alien. More on Bob: https://radiolab.org/podcast/148670-4-track-mind/transcript.