Well yes, the joke here is that they already talk so fast, who would notice a 25% bump in speed! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WTd7MEaN3Y

Is there a Gilmore Girls movie? Because if there’s a Gilmore Girls movie, then probably the Gilmore Girls movie.

Would really appreciate something in the post titles to indicate when it’s a video rather than a text article. Something like [video] appended.

https://adultswim.fan/ for adultswim and related programming.

Whatever happens, Peggy should be (re-?)reading her copy of A Dinner of Onions.

The actual teaser video here really catches me off guard. Hank pressing himself against the glass feels out of character. Peggy’s suicide remark feels more harsh than it was probably meant to be. The animation style. I’m happy to get more of the Hills, but I can tell this is going to take some getting used to for me.

I definitely don’t think they’d get away with killing off Luanne and Lucky. I think the sting of an orphaned Gracie would be a bit much. My own feelings are that Luanne and her family will be referenced as offscreen in phone calls, etc., where we get infrequent updates through Peggy or Bobby, and eventually the characters are seldom, if ever, mentioned again until the eventual revival finale.

Or maybe they’ll recast them, who knows.

Tell your mom to subscribe, we’d love to have her!

Other things I saw:

• Dale’s orange Mack hat now says “Bait Shop” with a fish
• New patio umbrella

I’m no expert on this, but I did some reading up on extending WiFi range in my house before I landed on just going with a mesh system. The issue I’ve heard with simple range extenders is that a lot of times devices will try to hold onto the last clawing bars of a connection before finally letting go and connecting to a stronger source. Smarter mesh WiFi is supposed to be checking signal strength while you roam and doing the switch more efficiently for you.

Also if you have a coax outlet in your basement have you considered MoCA (Multimedia over Coax Alliance) and an access point? Others might be able to speak to whether it’s any good.

I’m responding because I think you prove the point that there are situations where this policy does not work.

This is not the proper forum to be having a “discussion” like this, because there is no proper forum to have a discussion like this. The misuse of the term “mental illness” is a nonstarter. Mental health disorders become mental illness when those disorders begin to consistently and negatively impact an individual’s emotional, physical, and/or social functioning. Simply being homosexual does not do that. Prejudice associated with, and stigma attributed to, homosexuality are the root causes of mental health issues among homosexuals.

Incorrectly labeling homosexuality as a mental illness must be rejected outright and provides no room for further discussion.

Careful. “Forty percent of Americans are subject to” is different from “40% of Americans subject to.” The former means that 40% of Americans are under the jurisdiction of or are affected by something. The latter means that 40% of Americans go along with it regardless of how many are affected in total. Entire states are subject to age verification laws, but perhaps only half of all adults in those states subject to those laws (allow the law to take force over them), implying that the remaining balance either abstain from activity requiring age verification or they find a way around it.

Most interestingly, the original Techdirt article meant the former—that a simple 40% of the total population of Americans live within states that have age verification laws, meaning that the linked article actually misrepresents what was being said, because the citing article’s language would indicate the second form of the usage of “subject” above. That is, that 40% of all people allow age verification laws to be activated and take force over them by virtue of their participation in activities that require age verification.

Edit: We agree that it’s not ideally worded in the linked article, regardless of the intended usage of “subject to.”

“Subject” is being used as a verb here. So it’s not “subject to age verification laws,” but “subject to age verification laws.” They are subjecting, or subjugating themselves, to verification laws. It is a complete sentence. A weirdly written one, but a complete one.

Wikipedia | Argument from anecdote

Couldn’t you submit your own attempts (or a commission) to GitHub, or directly to @aeharding@vger.social to consider for inclusion? I’d personally prefer for the primary developer to focus efforts on continuing to make app functionality awesome.

Agree. It might be easy enough to keep the characters of Luanne and Lucky going offscreen through one-sided phone calls if they wanted to, but addressing the loss of Johnny Hardwick is going to have some growing pains at best.

Feels like this is the best way really. Having a separate account would also let you save those communities you’ve blocked on your primary account as favorites under your secondary account for quick retrieval.

I think everyone is reading this as NPS not allowing Jane Employee to show up in uniform at Pride and hang out. Maybe they’d frown on that. But what appears to be happening is that employees are petitioning to march in Pride parades, or otherwise somehow participate, as they have in years past, and which supports the LGBTQ+ Special Emphasis Program of federal agencies, and NPS is letting those requests sit.

For anyone wondering why NPS or any federal agency might participate in external events or allow employees to attend events in uniform: LGBTQ+ is one of several areas of special emphasis for federal agencies in recruitment, retention, and awareness. Others include, for example, women in government; Asian, Black, Native American, or Hispanic heritage; and people with disabilities. Special Emphasis Programs (SEP) are codified by executive order. The major intents are to dispel stereotypes, promote inclusion, and recognize the advances made by and contributions of people belonging to these groups.

As an example of the kind of participation agencies have shown under SEPs in the past—a local office may attend and set up a booth at a career fair for a Historically Black College or University. This serves employment-related outreach efforts under the SEP for the agency while also observing and recognizing this group. There is no similar Big Gay Hiring Event at a large scale, so Pride participation makes sense to further efforts under this SEP. Even apart from recruitment, the recognition of LGBTQ+ individuals—which NPS already explicitly supports through their management of Stonewall National Monument—and outward displays of inclusion for this group are equally important for prospective and current employees, as part of the culture of the agency.

What NPS has done is allow requests to participate in local Pride events as a form of observance and outreach to languish on the desks of NPS leadership.

OP’s right on top of that, @Astronaut_M_Dexter@lemmy.world!