Printable View
https://hillreporter.com/catholic-mo...ing-app-107426
Wtf on many levels..
- Not banning abortion is bad enough to get denied from church, gay sex isn't?
- That you can identify a single person from Grindr data should be worrying, if you care about privacy.
- So bishops who molest kids are reassigned/ covered up, but a bishop who has gay sex has to resign..
Pretty sure the resignation is because of the hypocrisy.
USA #1! :cheerleader:Quote:
Originally Posted by Flixy
Loki, it's the Legal Conservatorship system that's being questioned...and whether the courts are actually "protecting" someone with mental illness, or if they're letting others use/exploit them for their own profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
There's a double standard here, particularly for women. Name one male Hollywood "star" with mental illness whose behaviors (and reproductive decisions) are dictated by a legal conservator/guardian....
Human life in the U.S. is worth less than $166,000
But our investors...
"Corporations are people, too". :rolleyes:
https://rachaeldenhollander.com/how-...le-girl-worth/Quote:
"How much is a little girl worth?"
Simone Biles quoted her during congressional testimony about the multiple systemic failures that failed to protect young athletes from sexual abuse for decades. It's the same damn sad story for victims in the military and church groups.
I've come to the conclusion that *men in power* don't really give a shit about anything but holding onto their power. And they're willing to overlook, minimize, or de-legitimize all sorts of abuse and exploitation, just to keep that power.
I want to be wrong about that. I've tried for years to convince myself that it's just a "few bad apples", and that correlation doesn't mean causation. But at the same time, since men still dominate most spheres of power, it's hard not to blame most of our problems on mens' penchant for patriarchy.
:popcorn:
I've been having super weird and detailed dreams lately, but this is the first time it's included one of you. Last night, I dreamed that OG won $31.4 million dollars in a game of chance at Disney World - as far as I can remember, it was a weird combination of slots, dominoes, and yahtzee. I don't even know if you can gamble at Disney, but there you have it.
Congrats, OG! Spend it wisely.
That explains how he could afford the mansion. :o
lol, closest thing Disney had to gambling was the 4 story arcade called Disney Quest but they shut that down years ago.
The down payment for my new place is coming from my current place (30% increase in 5 years) and crypto (60% in 1 month). We had our first open house last night and the agent said we should be expecting multiple offers from it and we have another open house today. Plan to take the best offer on Monday.
https://www.realtor.com/realestatean...il/M5907774031
Crazy part is that I saw this post while attempting to check my powerball tickets, so watch for an edit.
Honestly I love the exterior color there, and the bar facing the kitchen window in the screened-in porch is also really cool! Hope you get a bidding war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Are you moving for more space? Maybe I'm too used to squatting in abandoned Berlin attic/converted servant quarters but it looks like a ton of space already.
I currently have 7 people in a 4/2 @ 2100 sq/ft. I'm the only guy. 30 year old wood frame house.
Moving into a 6/3 plus a flex room and 20x20 loft. 4 year old concrete block.
We have space, but we all really want our own space.
Okay that's a lot more people than I expected, and I agree the only ratio that really matters is the bathroom-to-human ratio :eek:
That's some interesting priorities.
Tweet has been deletedQuote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Twitter LinkQuote:
Originally Posted by Flixy
Haven't checked whether they unpublished the article :o
TIL that the PM of Finland is younger than me. It was bad enough that the new mayor of Boston is about the same age, but now prime ministers? I have clearly not been applying myself in life... and/or these political leaders are wildly inexperienced for jobs of this magnitude. I'd known about Sebastian Kurz, of course, but in his case I knew he was woefully underqualified.
Ditto. :o
:haha: Pretty soon you'll be old enough to be your doctor's parents.
Twitter Link
Source: De Beers
In a social media group there was this American guy who started to chat in a group. He complained about losing his family in the middle east. Then he tells the story of how he met this man who he considered like a son, but the guy was a bad guy who killed his family and he did something that made this guy die painfully, and he feels like a monster after that. My guess is this guy belongs to some US intel. It does not seem safe to talk to this guy.
You do realize that De Beers has gone in relatively aggressively on lab grown diamonds, in contrast to some other producers. This is more market research for them than trying to protect a dying business - their lab grown diamond brand is focusing on cheaper 'costume' jewelry rather than engagement rings, the big driver of traditional diamond sales. And this decision is partly a business one (they want to keep the cachet of an expensive and hard to source diamond ring and all of the commitment this implies) but also a realistic one - consumers couldn't care less about getting a 'fake' diamond for lots of costume jewelry, but haven't yet been convinced that it's as impressive to get it for something important.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
I looked hard for lab grown gem quality diamond engagement rings when I shopped for my wife back in ~'08, but they didn't really exist in any substantial number/size (nor were they all that cheap). But I'm an exception because I attach no sentimentality to a 'natural' or 'unique' ring, I just wanted some shiny bling to make my girlfriend happy. Others take longer to be convinced, and De Beers isn't being stupid by doing their research.
I suspect that long term they will become a dominant player in the lab grown market and try to control the price of stones in such a way that the luxury premium of a 'real' diamond will still give their traditional mining business some revenue. But they are no longer shunning the space entirely; they're just trying to coopt it.
I actually did realize that. I also realize they're still heavily invested in marketing natural diamonds as intrinsically superior. Which is a point you made yourself... so what's the objection?
My point is that the source certainly has an incentive to portray 'real' diamond as more emotionally relevant as it helps to underpin their core business. But they don't have an incentive to just make stuff up to trash the market for a successor product they're investing hundreds of millions of dollars in and positioning themselves as a future power player.
I assumed that your quoting this heavily tweeted graph was to doubt the veracity of famous diamond mining company trying to show how consumers view their product vs a successor. I find it more likely that the data are real (though likely selective) and part of their research on how to position their new product to make the most money. Why DID you post it?
I posted it because it's funny that Bloomberg are using De Beers, a company with as you put it, "an incentive to portray 'real' diamond as more emotionally relevant as it helps to underpin their core business" as a source for their 'article' on whether or not people think a real diamond is more emotionally relevant than a synthetic one. Then they just leave the attribution right there in the twitter image for the whole internet to see. Gotta make those advertorials a bit less on the nose, guys.
The article was talking about how much lab grown diamonds are rapidly gaining market share while dropping in price as more retailers and consumers get on the bandwagon (including Pandora, which precipitated the article). Big advertorial for mined diamonds there.
But they just don't conjure up the same emotions as natural diamonds, alas.
Nessie-bait:
Twitter Link
https://www.goal.com/en-in/news/craz...c8770f3e0f5a3f
Lol. I mean, I can understand one mistake, but twice in a row? Plus some apparently questionable decisions regarding penalties and red cards.