I feel this so much. I got into stamp collecting, and I totally enjoy stamps and mail and all, but (old) people are so pretentious about it. The worst are the total hypocrites about it, too.

"I got into stamps when I was young, but I stopped when I went to university/started working/had a family because I didn't have time for it, and came back to it after I retired.

"Philately is supposed to be academic and scholarly. You're not a real philatelist if you're not doing original research.

"Young people just don't have the patience for stamps!

"The hobby is dying, why don't young people want to collect stamps anymore??"

Actually, a lot of people do and share lots of stuff online (where the old people are not seeing it and thus is not happening). We're just not writing 16-page papers about them (which is the standard a expected thing to do in "philately").

To my understanding, that's the way ancient Romans viewed it. For lack of more delicate and concise words, it manly to top, unmanly to bottom. Gay sex was acceptable if the sexual roles reflected their social roles.

The thing that I can't understand about this product is why they didn't cover the function keys. They are literally functional.

Don't take it personally, applying for a job is a game of chance as much as a game of merits. It's simply a numbers game and luck whether your resume even gets looked at in the first place, even if you're résumé how all their keywords. Hundreds, maybe thousands, of other resumes also hit their keywords.

If you're lucky enough to get through the first sifting and get an interview with the hiring person (not an HR screener who doesn't know anything about the job), then you can ask and maybe get a response on how you could have improved. (Don't ask why you weren't hired.)

I've found this to be true in general once I started working. I don't feel kinda this was a thing when I was and was integrating with other students. I had to readjust my "responsible" self who actually would follow up (to people's horror) and tell myself it's a polite saying that people don't mean. Like when people greet each other with "How are you?", they generally actually do not want to know how the other person is doing. You're expected to say "fine" or "good" and deviating from that is violating an unspoken social contract.

Mostly just Discovery and Picard is kind of halfway there.

SNW is a really fun watch once they've dealt with Pike's future (which they kind of really have to). Personally I like that they go for different genres, but I can see why some people might not like that if.

Lower Decks is a riot and a half and I think it's my favourite Star Trek, but it might be kind of cheating because it stands on the shoulders of all the other shows.

Prodigy is quite a bit different from the other shows, but it's full of optimism, hope, and friendship. It doesn't start out that way, they're all very suspicious of each other at first. They grow into it as they learn more about themselves and each other, and aspire to be part of the Federation and Starfleet.

Dukat. I don't like him a person, but he's a great character. No other Trek character has ever been written as richly or layeredly as he.

At first you assume he's your basic racist bent on hatred and power. Then you realize his obsession with Kira isn't just about destroying an enemy, but his secret love-hate for Bajoran women. We meet Ziyal whom he mostly loves, but is ashamed of. He goes mad, starts a cult, makes himself appear Bajoran and starts a relationship with Kai Winn (ostensibly with other motives, but I think he reveled in it), and ultimately dies for and in his mad faith.

DS9 is lower on my list when I rank the various series, but some of the characters, and defininitely Dukat, top the list of characters.

A lot of things that happen in season one set up or are referenced in season two. While you probably could get away with skipping season one, you'll miss out on context.

Rewatching S1 after S2 is pretty amazing, though.

But you can definitely just not watch the last season. It's basically disjointed from everything.

It's nice that "new" Trek wants to portray things like equality for LGBT people as a given; hopefully we can reach that one day. And I think it's good that LGBT people can "see themselves" on the screen without having their queerness be the focus of the drama. People just want to live their lives, and they want to see other queer people just living their lives.

On the other hand, showing the struggle and making it the focus of the drama, as Orville does, is the thing that helps people understand and confront the issues themselves. The whole story around Topa is very strong. Societal misogyny. Klyden's entire journey (his own sex reassignment, hiding it from Bortus, their separation, his rejection of Topa when she transitioned back, the family's eventual reunion). Bortus' struggle to make the right choice as a loving husband and father. Bortus having the choice taken away from him. Topa lacking female role models.

These kinds of things are still very real issues that a lot of people don't think about unless presented to them on this way. These kinds of stories help people imagine how they might need to support their own children, families, and friends.

It's not really possible to compare Star Trek vs Orville because Trek is an entire franchise (even now there are 4.5 shows) and Orville is just one. But if I had to say of the current shows, which one does society need the most for social progress, I'd actually say Orville.

I've actually come to appreciate commercials after cutting Netflix. It's a set time for me to take a little break, and it's out of my hands. (I mute it too, of course.) Otherwise I could just keep watching on and on without a break, and that's not really very good for you.

I have no will power.

They'll simply ask for it and people will give it in order to keep using the platform.

Google Ads asked me (a private individual) to provide my drivers license or passport in order to verify an organization's Google Ads account, or else the account will be suspended. I understand verifying the organization via governed registration records, that makes sense. But requiring an emoloyee or volunteer's passport?

The account is just going to get suspended.

I signed up for a Google Ads account for a non-profit I volunteer with. I had to verify the organization with governing documents, okay, fair enough. They also "require" my drivers license or passport. Excuse me? We will no longer have a Google Ads account after Sept 15 (the cut off to verify my identity).