If that’s the case, it probably means you just get to “own” products as a subscription; which collectively covers supposed “refurbished” product replacements when they break.

Assuming quantum computing has finally delivered on its promises by that time, how would I interpret that single bit?

I agree. But on the other hand, it also means mass-manipulation should, in theory, become more complicated.

Because if you guilt-trip the population into believing, their misfortune is due to majority vote, being in favor of controversial policy (which is bipartisan); they will fight amongst each other, as opposed to their monarch. But with today’s surveillance technology, a monarch would be able to avoid mass protest: by impairing leaders during the early stages of their movements; prohibiting these from snowballing out of control. This would further simplify the process of control, as opposed to having to ensure corruption, in the binary left-right politics.

If you mean: in a constant stream of content, people rarely stop to appreciate the tremendous work, that went into the creation of good pieces. I agree, and it’s especially offensive when quickly washed away, with low effort garbage like AI “content”.

So not just speech, but any sound one could be responsible for? Like screaming, loud music in the middle of the night, or ripping a fat fart. Sounds like a solid idea

Similar to memory foam :)

The biggest privacy loophole in WhatsApp is cloud backups. By default, unencrypted updates to the backup, flow through WhatsApp servers in a readable format, to be encrypted on the server-side by the cloud providers (Google or Apple). Even if specifically opting into E2EE backups, the cloud provider still receives the contents in readable format (as it does the encryption of the backup). Even if you personally don’t have this “feature” enabled, the other end might; and your interactions are also included in their backups. On a stock device there’s an entire myriad of other potential vectors; too many to list here.

Word

My sweaty butt crack alone would create a soggy portal to another dimension

That’s another angle I didn’t consider. So you mean the traits one initially fakes, may become part of their personality (and therefore doesn’t require faking anymore)?

‘Till you make it’ suggests to me, one ceases to be fake after success. Which either means they return to their pre-faking state, or the faking becomes part of their personality (and therefore doesn’t require faking anymore).

That could be a valid explanation: they’re just never satisfied, which is why they keep faking.

Both: I used the bulb, droplets and colors of the Showerthoughts icon, and did the pencil part myself. Thanks for the compliment though! :)

I even made an icon for it (with a voting pencil instead). Is there anyone who would be interested in making this thing a reality? As stated in the body of the post, I’m not politically involved enough to be a mod for the community.

It seems the mods have decided otherwise, whereas a dedicated community can set its own rules. Like I said in the body, I’m not interested in constantly being bombarded with political posts; ideally only when I explicitly choose to visit such communities.

Yeah, if you really start breaking down sentences, to their individual words and their respective concepts, everything falls apart. But it’s important to keep context in mind: which generally limits room for interpretation enough, for most to roughly interpret them similarly (unless your autistic brain makes you go on a detour…). If you start formulating your wording carefully enough, you can start writing legal documents; and ironically make sure, 99% of the population, can no longer follow a word you’re saying.

If you want citizens to keep working their ass off, you minimize worker capital through taxes, fines, profit, or any other artificial expenses; so they’re stuck in a perpetual struggle for stability. And as a byproduct, the parasitic upper class can live royally, of the working class’ hard work.

So you mean to say: we personalize interpretation of someone else’s writing, therefore we’re rather responding to our own thoughts, than in response to the other’s writing? If so, I would say this is true for the majority of people; especially when discussing anything political for example, where a strong bias is present.

If you mean to say: there’s too much politically charged posts on here, despite rule number 3 being ‘No politics’; I wholly agree.