

I think you may have whooshed: this person was pointing out a “th” that slipped through.
Public Key Fingerprint: 0x7FFAE9D0 7D64C571 8DB0297E AD51C258 0E479CD4
I think you may have whooshed: this person was pointing out a “th” that slipped through.
127.69.420
127.69420
127.42069
I’ll figure it out
Combining the suggestions from 1 and 3 is where things fall apart for me. If the statute does not specify what objective standards must be met in order for someone to be eligible to vote, then the ruling party gets to decide on their own.
Maybe the next updates to the standardized test just “accidentally” favor the ruling party.
Some questions to challenge your proposal:
No matter how I try to answer these questions in a way that’s consistent with reality, all my ideas dead-end at outcomes that suck and only get worse over time.
James, while John had had “had”, had had “had had;” “had had” had had a greater effect on the teacher.
I can’t even imagine how my friend would take it.
OK, OK, time out. You haven’t tried talking with them about it? If you have as strong a mutual (platonic(ish?)) relationship with them as you say you do, then it should be able to survive a serious conversation about your shared future, especially if you emphasize that you want to try to keep them in your life in a major way like this.
That conversation will probably be hard, and I really can’t think of a solution that would feel perfect if I were in your shoes, but I would sure as hell rather have that conversation than the “I made a decision, and here is how you will be impacted” one, or the “I kept my life on hold because I was worried how you might react to talking about it” one.
I don’t know your personality or your friend’s personality, so I can’t promise that you will sort it all out without emotions running high, or what the ultimate outcome of such a conversation will be.
But jeez, bud, you’ve GOT to be able to have serious talks with people whom you trust and care about.
How could this happen to me
I could of course say this as well. It’s clearer with additional punctuation like “I could, of course, […]”, but I don’t think the comma-free version is technically incorrect (anymore, if it ever was).
New Zealand was not Kung Fu fighting
Their main site – not generated by the LLM – has buttons for “Try le Chat” and “Build on la Platforme” even though I’ve got the British flag selected for language.
That’s because “le Chat” and “la Plateforme” are their language-neutral marketing names for their products.
Sort of like how “GM” is still the name of the car company in like France even though it stands for “General Motors” which is an English term.
Attempts to prevent this phenomenon involve using what is called the “wait calculation” to predict how long to wait to launch an interstellar journey.
From the perspective of phylogenetics, if you believe that all trout species and all shark species should be called “fish”, then all mammals are also fish, including you.
Rockwell Retro Encabulator: https://youtu.be/RXJKdh1KZ0w
I’m good until I run out, I guess.
Its going from 7 to 77, not 57
“from 2 7°C to 77°C” is either “from 27°C to 77°C” with an extremely problematic line break position, or something unintelligible.
Would you say that the meme about the tilting window manager got you tilted?
Why are they encrypting their communications? Do they have something to hide?
If they’ve got nothing to hide, then they’ve got nothing to fear.
Or so I’ve heard, anyway, right?
Technically, the spec does require it, but given that we’re in a thread about ecosystem support for a file format that’s approaching its 15th birthday, it’s worth considering how many image viewers will actually be able to work without the DCT step that is the essence of what typical JPEG does.
I don’t have a Windows machine handy to test, but it’s entirely possible that maybe lossless JPEG won’t display in its default viewer.