My friend’s mom occasionally gives full names, like forename+surname and uses them as such

While basically everything is pointing at that (and basically everyone knows, including even some MAGAts), there is no hard evidence for that at the moment, and if a newspaper mentions such a serious claim they could be sued for that. Now, unfortunately, “but come on, Mr. Judge, we all know that” is both true and unfortunately insufficient for defense. I guess that’s part of the reason they didn’t use his entire face, and they can say it’s just someone whose eyes look similar (it might even be the case, and they might reveal the entire photo). You could also say the smaller letter text under it is unrelated. I guess there is a reason they didn’t mention his name in the big text one, either.

Honestly, even if they got their hands on the Epstein files, a single name entry in a list of invitees might not be sufficient for sentencing him, since simply being there doesn’t immediately mean that you’ve done anything to minors by existing in that location. It is a great material to start a legal process or an investigation, but unless there is an actual photo, video or someone’s confession in it, it won’t stand on its own.

I guess it’s just closer to the center, and it would have been weird in place of the T.

Laden retriever…?

I totally agree with how awful this is to the environment, but should this really be in /c/memes?

They want a backdoor to your emails while terrorism has been clear as day and they still haven’t done anything about it in Gaza.

While I never heard that saying before, I can totally get behind it. I truly appreciate it, thanks.

Wow. Do you know the feeling when someone brings your attention to something that you had been ignoring pretty much all your life, and from that point it drives you mad every single time? Yeah, you have just done that with the meant to/supposed to thing. You’re SO totally right! Aaaand you cursed me.

Oh no (yes?), I totally get what you’re saying, and I’m able to process these situations (I think I’ve seen enough during that 15-20 years of playing with/against kids), that part doesn’t bother me; what I was really curious about is how you, personally, would interpret that brief response, without any prior context.

Oh yeah, I don’t have a problem dealing with the nastier version, I was just wondering how you would interpret the exchange, provided it was the first and only 4 characters you see from a random person.

While I was thinking of something similar, it’s important that in this particular case we’re talking about a conversation with a stranger, and not about breaking news. Now, I get that it all depends - what I’m curious about is your assumption of the situation’s vibe.

While I might use them interchangeably, as a non-native I would think “need to” is supposed to mean that the situation came out of necessity, such as feeling the need to pee or resorting to selling your car because of an empty wallet, while “have to” is more like the result of some rules or discipline, such as showing up to work in time - but I understand that the line between the two can be rather blurry.

As for my thing: there are a few shortened words in my language (similarly to the English “hubby”, “preggo”, etc.) that got shortened according to pronunciation, and not the original (longer) word, having a different spelling at the start (as if “circle” got shortened to “circ”, but spelled as “cirk”). It feels like a kid came up with the spelling, and now it’s the official form. It’s bugging my inner spelling nazi every time I see it.

I had the feeling - but, considering the above, which one would you think of when setting this from someone as the first reaction?

Does adding fuck really change anything?

Yeah, it makes it even worse : ). I was thinking just the same first - however, I’m not in my early twenties / late teens anymore, and I’ve been wondering if that was the case with the younger generation.

shut up is also a rude phrase in english

I was thinking the same! But I started seeing videos lately where a conversational partner (typically a young girl, but that could be some bias) responded with ‘shut up’ in a cheerful manner, seemingly meaning some pleasant surprise mixed with disbelief. And this feels rather recent to me - hence my doubt. But I’m relieved if I’m not the only one, thanks. I wonder if it’s a generational (or a non-existent?) thing.

It would surely be much more peaceful. Let’s just re-draw the borders and leave everything else. Just look at them spooning lovingly.

Wow. You got it perfectly right: everybody knows where that plastic went. This is why I wrote it like that, and didn’t have to explain how it got dumped in the ocean all along. I wasn’t playing riddles, I assumed it was otherwise obvious and common knowledge. Jeez, sorry if it didn’t come off the way I meant.

But about 15 years ago China stopped buying the waste

Guess where that waste used to go

It might be just my subjective perspective, but to me it feels like 16 year olds are much easier to radicalise, or be fed half truths. They are in the age when you feel like you want to change the world, but you might also still believe in fairy tales and/or simplified scenarios. I hope I’m either wrong or this change won’t go through, but I’m getting “propaganda audience” vibes.

I like the (un?)intentional “typo” there.