Regulatory capture is a thing. And the comment could have been about that. It could have been about anything. It should have been about a debt trap of some kind, but who knows really, read into it what you like. Lots of people seemed to enjoy the sound and feel of it.

Bags of mostly water

Fair enough! If we can include animations in any format, IMDB should maybe include that vase with the jumping goats from (if I remember rightly) about 3000 BC. Or if not that somewhat dubious example, there are definitely Chinese magic lantern type devices (走馬燈) from around 1000 AD that did a bit of animation.

Are you being sincere, or sarcastic? I'm aware that each argument should be taken on its merits, but you might consider that the quality of this theory about a vague wealthy elite who engaged in various evil manipulations over a vague span of time is comparable to other theories that the same person has about UFOs (or UAPs, as the cranks call them these days in order to avoid looking like cranks). This question remains unanswered.

This is a conspiracy theory.

Do you also claim that the wealthy elite are involved in covering up non-human intelligence visiting from another reality, or is that an unrelated group?

That's a patent by John Barnes Linnett, it's not clear whether the idea was to animate photographs or just drawings. I did find Experimental photographic sequence viewers (1850s–1860s) mentioned on the Zoetrope page, though.

If you wondered why they were saying that about Mr. Murphee: he had designed a perpetual motion machine.

Nuh-uh, -ology is (from lógos) words, reckoning, and narrative. No aspect of loving any of it.

For a certain value of sane.

I guess it's hard to use a deleted object in a garbage collected language and they were probably talking about C++, but the term deconstructor seems to be to do with unpacking tuples anyway, I think "destructor" was intended. This whole interlude is a mess. In summary, donkey skins.

Ridiculous, reality isn't garbage-collected, it's written in C obviously.

Could you be a little less absolute about it, at all?

I'm not the same person you were talking to previously, I don't have to be right to prove any point, and in fact I acknowledge I'm wrong about everything most of the time. I just happen to like Wiktionary, it's my go-to.

I don't know about Cambridge Dictionary, but Merriam-Webster have a page of notes about this particular "problem word". Dictionary.com acknowledge that the "devastate" usage has been criticized. My feeling is that the one-in-ten usage (probably popular in Victorian times when every user of long words knew Latin) has had an upsurge in popularity over the last decade or so due to people on the internet being anal about it.

I don't think Brexit was awful, and I'm not certain history books will paint it as a disaster. Currently it's seen as awful because of economic impact and because of the desire to have a strong Europe to oppose Russia, along with the insinuation that Russia was trying to engineer the breakup of Europe. However, a United States of Europe would also have been a bad thing. Unions, federations, and so on are tricky because minimal collaboration between equals is ideal and maximal central government is what tends to emerge. I know it seems irrelevant in the current climate, post-covid and with Russia rampaging around, but Brexit had an overlooked role as a backlash against that.

(It's a valid role if you're troubled by giant octopus-like central governments, I mean. Not everybody is, and I know this is an unpopular opinion, as will now be redundantly demonstrated by downvotes. It is however an aspect of the picture.)

This argument about words is distracting from the interesting point about whether or not Boris decreed military cutbacks (and if so, why). However, Wiktionary has both uses:

> (loosely) To devastate

> (proscribed) To reduce to one-tenth

and all the quotations in the latter case include some extra words like "to one-tenth" to make sure it's understood literally. In summary: whatever.

I hope they will also preserve the talk pages and the long argument I had once about tablespoon sizes.

I don't know, that involves all the water boiling off. Surely there'd be a Carboniferous 2.0 before that could happen, with swamp forests everywhere.

I'm interested that this picture elicits a disgust reaction in me. I must have been conditioned.

Popular in Morocco, valuable to the leather industry there. They take good care of their pigeons.

How's Harrods doing these days? Is it still all Al Fayed influenced? Isn't he dead yet?

Both that one and the village in Iran descend from the Batman unit.

Bot
Original

Bot
Original

semprini