I doubt it is ai. The same room with the fireplace can be seen in both the picture featuring it and the hallway shot where it is barely in view, but the same furniture, blinds, rug, wall molding, etc. is visible in both. The apparent discrepancy in dimensions is likely the focal length on the lenses used.

The last shot is from the sequel. Same house still. But I don’t think that the after shot is necessarily the same room. The windows and fireplace placement doesnt line up.

I do not care for the stark white walls everywhere. I don’t hate the monochrome, though, so long as there is still some mid-tones to break things up a bit. In my opinion, stark white should be used minimally, like for trim, the fireplace mantle, stair steps/railing, etc. More grays on the walls, more variety in tones. And then the occasional accent piece that has a a bright saturated color to it, or a warm tone, will stand out like crazy in the space and provide a distinct feel to the room.

I don’t love the busy repeating wallpaper patterns in the original, but overall it has a very warm comfortable esthetic to it. Neither esthetic is bad. But I think the original was more cohesive and homey than the latter.

Bro is arguing that Emma Watson isn’t a beautiful woman. Not the hill I’d die on.

To me, cold meals taste much better compared to hot meals.

Cold foods and drinks actually limit the flavors you can taste in food. The temperature of foods change the sensitivity of taste receptors (primarily for sweet, salty, and umami flavors), the amount of/intensity of aromatics released by the food, and the textures of fats, gels, and syrups.

It is all down to preference, of course. But if you prefer the flavor experience of chilled foods that are normally served hot, then you likely prefer foods that are less/more subtly sweet, salty, and savory, and more sour and bitter. You likely do not care as much to the aromatic smells of food that accompany and enhance/alter the flavors of food. And you probably prefer the firmer, thicker textures of foods that would usually be softer and thinner with heat.

The downside with foods being cold, health-wise, if you do like things to be sweeter, for example, is that you need far more sugar to get the same sensation of sweetness from a cold food (like ice cream) than a warm food (like pie). Same with saltiness. A cold soup needs more salt than a hot one, usually.

Alternatively, warm fatty foods spread fat-soluble flavors across the tongue while cold fatty foods usually block taste receptors more while providing little flavor itself. So if you’re cooking for the purpose of eating the food cold, maybe you’ll use less fats and save yourself some calories/cholesterol and also get more flavor in that form factor at the same time.

The “centrist”/right-leaning/neo-liberal democrats would rather rip the party in half than to use this swell of popular support for leftist ideals to win elections and make real change. The old Dems will flail and writhe and hurt themselves in confusion as the old guard dies and change happens whether they like it or not. They’ll try to kick leftists out, jump ship themselves (going independent, forming a new third party, merging with libertarians, or maybe going all the way to going Republican), and bomb the entire party with infighting, fixing nominations with anti-democratic party tricks, and intentionally letting republicans win rather than supporting a socialist candidate. Can’t wait for this cluster fuck.

I feel like these people are ignoring the context that most people in Japan are racist as fuck. It is more xenophobia (fear of outsiders/foreigners) than about physical traits or racial stereotypes like you see in the US, for example. For the most part, anyway.

It is not necessarily a fomented hatred for foreigners as much as it is a strong aversion against non-conformity. Modern Japanese culture and racial makeup is nearly homogenous, and so dealing with someone that doesn’t fit into that monolithic culture, doesn’t speak the language fluently, or is physically very different, etc. is a discomfort that many find annoying, scary, or anxiety inducing. Some to the point that they choose only to serve or interact with native Japanese people.

But it not being about hatred, per se, doesn’t really change the fact that, if you look different in Japan, you don’t speak fluent Japanese, you have an accent, etc. you’ll get treated worse. They regularly deny “foreigners”/“gaijin” (often including born-and-raised mixed-race Japanese citizens, “hāfu”) basic business services and housing. At minimum, you’ll get stares and thoughtless/ignorant questions and comments that can be very insulting. You may have trouble accessing shelter and services offered freely to native and typically appearing Japanese people. And worse, you may have legal troubles by police assuming you are a trouble maker by virtue of being different. There is a huge racial profiling problem with Japanese police.

There are not comprehensive anti-discriminatiom laws, or even a general government recognition of systemic racism, so you will likely have no legal recourse for the prejudice you would likely face there, too.

The fun thing is that none of those things have ever been a symptom of communism/socialism. The authoritarian states, that refer/referred to themselves by those names despite having nothing to do with them in reality, wished to maintain unitary control of the people and implemented those things and bled the people dry in spite of the egalitarian nature of their supposed communism/socialism. But those things absolutely are symptoms of capitalism, where unitary control and draining every dime you can from anyone you can is part of the system.

Using a flexible dryer tube for a toilet drain is… I’m gonna go with ill-advised.

My wife said “But how will we learn their life story!?”

If the last 4 ingredients need mixing together first, then you simply have a mix column with just those ingredient rows under the mix column from above to show that those get mixed independently in parallel. This recipe implies that is unnecessary for this food though.

“These charges are bullshit. I missed a day every once in a while. Performance anxiety.”

Don’t eat the lotuses in Schenectady.

A fur suit. Like … OwO?

I’m sure you work somewhere where the public is allowed. Maybe a convention center or something? But I was picturing cubicles, fluorescent lighting, rolling chairs, computers, and a man in a full panther costume who goes by Space Paws

Even if it is offensive to you, having such a broad non-specific policy about denying service for “offensive” clothing is ridiculous.

Say I, a lefty, am a flight attendent. Can I deny entry to anyone wearing a MAGA hat, an anti-trans (“try to milk a bull”) t-shirt, a vaguely threatening pro-gun (“come and take it”) shirt, a fur jacket, etc? I genuinely find such things offensive. So I can kick those people out? No? Tell me what is different about that. What about someone wearing a shirt that says “Aborting kids is not healthcare”? I can’t think of a more direct and likely parallel than that. Is that too offensive to board a plane? Explain to me why not. Explain it slowly and think about your words as you do.

His shirt didn’t even specify an event, any parties to the event, or any sort of threat. It is not explicitly about any specific person or party. It is about children in general and those who would bomb them and call that warfare. It was just stating a moral stance, and a pretty low bar one at that, one that most people would agree on without any other context projected on it. Her offense was almost certainly due to a projection of meaning that she put upon it, not even the shirt itself. A meaning that she assumed was true for no reason but her own and that she found offensive due to her personal politics around the parties or events she connected it to. How can you enforce a policy broad enough to allow someone to project a specific interpretation on a non-specific phrase and consider that projected meaning offensive, thereby barring them from the plane.

If I wear a shirt that says “he did nothing wrong” with no further context, do you get to decide who “he” is and bar me from you plane because maybe I mean someone who you think did do something wrong and you are offended by the alternative view? What if I actually mean a fictional character like Thanos? What if I mean someone whom you happen agree did nothing wrong? What if it is just a shirt I got from a thrift store and it has no known meaning to me at all? You see why that is stupid as fuck?

Andy and Randy from Sex Drive?

The right against self incriminating is the 5th amendment. And he’s being charged for destroying evidence, not for not providing it. But I love the spirit.

I’m saying that the Pinocchio nose thing is clearly based on his lying, i.e. on stating something he knows/believes to be false, not an objective truth. It is the theme of the story.

And all too commonly, Christian (and other) fundamentalists extend beyond mere faith into delusion where they lose track of what is their personal belief and what is ubiquitous accepted reality. Sometimes to the point that that they actually cannot accept that others simply don’t believe in their deity. They genuinely think that their deity not only definitely exists, but such a fact is unquestionably apparent on the face of it to everyone and competely beyond reproach. So when one claims to be an atheist, or hold another faith, the only conclusion that they can come to is that you actually do know their deity exists and so your denial of them is either out of evil, misplaced anger, brainwashing (by evil men or the devil or something similar) or you are a grifter with some other agenda. Whatever it is, it most certainly can’t be a sound, justified, reasonable lack of belief in their god. That’s nonsense.

Again, that’s not all of them, but any means. But it’s not uncommon either.

Agreed about PHM. Disagree about The Martian. The movie was decent. The book was far better.

Christian thinks that belief = truth. News at 11.

Fuck. Off. Already.