I hope you are able to outrun it one day. Or even perhaps out smart it. Idk, I’ve never been on a hunt. I assume those would be ways to survive.

Good point, i totally misunderstood the “picture this” lead in. Yeah it’s a completely feasible situation though it does seem extreme.

I don’t know how accurate this is. Every time i try googling this, i get multiple help forums (brand website, Microsoft help, reddit discussions) for how to troubleshoot, with no ads for new laptops. While i typically provide a more specific search (e.g. my laptop brand and model won’t boot), i tried googling “my laptop won’t turn on” and received similar, albeit less specific, suggestions.

I wonder if the original poster often searches for laptop prices to find deals and maybe it defaulted to that?

I appreciate your reply and question. I think it comes across rude because the correction wasn’t really necessary to understand the context of what was said, and it’s even less of a correction and more of a personal preference. It doesn’t add much to the conversation, which makes it seem more like grammatical pedantry. The fact that it wasn’t entirely correct made it seem even more out of place.

For the record, I’m not accusing you of being rude, just identifying how the comment came across. I’m not assuming intent with your original comment and apologize if it seemed like I had.

I actually don’t think this is correct. Whom is used when the unknown person is the object being impacted (to whom did you sell your car). In this sentence, “who” is actually referring to a person performing the action (the sentences “who questioned him?” And “where are those who questioned him?” Would use who, not whom. You wouldn’t say “whom questioned him,” but whom could be used to replace “him,” such as “he questioned whom?”).

As I alluded to above, you can usually see if it’s who or whom by changing it to he/she (who) or him/her (whom). You may need to adjust the sentence slightly, but it will normally work. Above you need to remove the “where are those” portion to find the answer.

So I believe that your correction came across a bit rude, and I’m fairly certain it is also wrong.

C

To be fair, about that women’s world cup team, if i recall correctly it was a PR move to play an exhibition match with those kids and they were not trying very hard to win. I don’t think they would truly lose to U-15 if it was, for example, a tournament.

Your overall point has merit but i think that specific example gets overused a bit.

Compared to the other Uber wealthy, he at least seems to have some sort of a code of ethics from what i can see, which is obviously limited. He’s still in it to make money (obviously), but his actions seem to suggest that he won’t go to the extreme of hurting everyone else just for money.

I started liking Mark more when he opened cost plus drugs. It’s a pretty decent endeavor to try to reduce pharmaceutical costs for the consumer

Half of all marriages, which include people who have been married multiple times. For example, if you have 5 married couples, 4 are on their first marriage and the last couple is on their 6th marriage, then on average 50% of the marriages in this scenario failed. But it doesn’t apply to everyone in the same way. Some people even remarry the same person.

The median is much lower.

Not a reddit fan anymore, but this makes me think of r/portugalcykablyat

If you travel, you’ll find very interesting combinations of flavors. As a few modest examples, I recently came upon paprika flavored and cheese and onion flavored Pringles, and awhile back i had sake flavored kit kats.

Travel more! Plenty of flavor experimentation going on

I think the joke is that a dominatrix is meant to, well, dominate their client (sexually). Think like with whips and chains, for example. Unfortunately, everything in her house, even the ficus, dominates her. It’s a bad first impression and she appears to be unfit for the role.

Looks like a Milchkaffee, which is kinda like a cafe au lait

They’re saying that allegedly, Christians are not big on voting, and this statement is meant to encourage those non voters to come vote just this once and everything will get better. Then you can go back to being a non voter.

I think.

Horrible wording no matter how you slice it, though.

I don’t think it’s fair to publicly show off and simultaneously lightly insult other people (the original post, unless it’s ironic and I’m missing the joke, is trying to make such a point) but then not expect any sort of a response. These aren’t people just minding their business. These appear to be extremely over confident people who crave public attention, and they (or their friends) are willing to put others down in the process.

I don’t think they need to be defended.

Some companies give stock as a primary benefit. Some of those companies may provide stock in lieu of some or all of a salary. That doesn’t mean it’s necessary valuable - they typically give you some amount of stock equal to a part of your salary (or some other normal monetary amount), and you would be hopeful the value increases substantially over time.

Just the fact that the other person has stock from their time being employed by Disney is no indicator of their wealth. You can own partial stock as well. It could be worth $50. We don’t know.

I feel like the wealthy people you see are the ones who either get excitement from flaunting it or from lying about it (for example, mtv cribs was all fake). There are plenty of stories (yes i know they’re just stories) about multi millionaires who drive the same old truck, wear regular blue jeans, and have a nice quiet (albeit larger than average) home.

It’s not crazy at all. I just think we see the outliers more frequently than not because they want us to see them.

Ha, i am somewhat familiar with the genre, i just wanted to contribute :) studied ancient rome, so that is legit what i typically think of when i hear goth.

To me, goths are the people who sacked Rome in 410. None of this makes sense to me.

Looks like the label says blueberry