>dinner is done
>announce dinner
>everyone shows up 10 minutes later
Some of the food is cold because I didn't cover it, but why should I? It would have been fine if they came to the table when I announced dinner.
>next day
>dinner is almost done
>remembering yesterday, I decide to announce dinner 10 minutes early so that 10 minutes later is "on time"
>everyone arrives to the table immediately, remembering that it was cold yesterday not wanting that to happen again
>mfw
Any time a news headline asks a question, the answer is almost always "no"
Imagine a world where combined C-suite salaries were capped at the tax burden a company owes past a certain point. I think that would be incredibly funny to see the conflict of interest at play. Want your accounting/legal department to research tax loopholes to exploit? Sure thing, but it's coming straight out of your paycheck!
Oh, you "had a bad year"? Probably shouldn't be taking home a hundred million dollars then.
Combined with a "top pay can't make more than x times the salary of the lowest paid employee" with the exception being the tax thing, I could see it being a great double bind into making companies either pay their workers more or actually pay their share in taxes.
I know it would basically never happen in the US but a girl can dream
Assuming all of his traits listed are "default" is part of the problem
(I'm sorry, I know it's a joke and I do think it's quite funny but I feel like I have to bring this up as a disclaimer)
My boyfriend occasionally watches YouTube shorts, mostly for the occasional good joke or cat video. He's told me that the shorts algorithm seemingly goes out of its way to show him Andrew Tate type content as well as general Daily Wire/Shapiro/conservative 'libs owned' clips. More or less, if he doesn't immediately close out the app or swipe to the next short when one of these videos comes up, his shorts feed is quickly dominated by them.
I think the big thing is that these algorithms are often trained on maximizing watch time/app usage, and there's something uniquely attention-catching to a lot of men and boys about the way viral manosphere content is constructed. A random poor setup to a skit is likely to get swiped past, but if the next clip comes swinging out of the gate with "here's how women are destroying the West" there's a certain morbid curiosity that gets some to watch the whole thing (even out of amusement/credulousness), or at least stay on the clip slightly longer than they would otherwise. If one lingers on that content to any degree, the algorithm sees that as a sign that the user wants more of it—or rather, that it would achieve its "more engagement" goals by serving up more of it.
Plus, it's grabbing ideas on what to recommend based on user data and clustered associations. It's very likely to test the waters with stuff it knows worked for others with similar profiles, even if it's a bit of a reach.
Edit: minor sentence structure stuff
I could comment on the notion that one owns one's girlfriend but regardless, you should definitely self host if you're sharing deeply personal information with a program
Tell me you got most of your views on lesbians from porn without telling me you got most of your views on lesbians from porn
But if anyone tries to open a new thread on the issue it gets marked as a duplicate and removed
One equation, sure, but not in one valid function (without making it parametric anyways)
Wake up babe new bottom surgery just dropped
Limitations inspire creative solutions
Can we do Pathfinder instead? There are a lot of canonically sapphic relationships among the goddesses, and then there's also a random man who essentially became a god as a drunken dare gone too far and he's still just a really chill guy