Beautiful, that’s what it is

Sorry can’t be of much help but thanks for sharing

And the meme?

Most realistic illustration I’ve ever seen in a book

Something tells me that if the headline turns out to be true, people will find a workaround.

Reading other comments, I see this amount would equal to 17 years of payments. There is no right answer. If it were me, I’d go for the lump, but I’m well aware that I am good at managing my own money in the sense that I don’t overspend, no matter what the bank account says. I’m naturally frugal.

I think the main considerations you need to take are: your personality, which you suggest you can’t trust yourself with that much money; on the other hand, the payee’s personality and the unexpected, ie., are they reliable enough to pay monthly or will they owe you? What if they die in a couple years? What if they go bankrupt? Etc. (not sure if there are system failsafes for these scenarios where you live).

I would suggest get the lump, deposit 80% of if or so in a fixed account with a high rate that won’t let you withdraw in a couple years, use the remaining 20% to keep yourself alive until you find a job. Once you get a bit more used to managing your own money you can decide what to do with the rest.

Ugh. Yeah I see why they would want to move the crowds if they were stills. It’s dumb though, would have been much easier to just shoot footage of the crowds in the first place.

I didn’t like YT upscaling and sharpening content without consent, I upload some portfolio pieces occasionally and having to contend with this garbage now doesn’t make me look forward to it.

Thanks for the TLDR

I can’t do that with my thumb. Mine goes straight even if I press to force to bend it backwards. It’s the only finger joint that doesn’t overextend, all my other fingers curve backwards nicely and even more so if I apply pressure.

Bending the thumb forwards (opposite as in your photo) is a different story. The joint can bend past the 90⁰, easily 80⁰ or more if I press it against something.

I don’t know if I want to click this bait, why would you need to alter the crowds if they’re there already?

Haven’t read the article yet. Why is Google doing this??? Side loading is a feature, if you are concerned about user scams then leave a way out for people who understand the risks.

Edit: wait is this retaliation for the Play Store No Monopoly thing? Stinking bastards

They jumped out of the way

Isn’t this the same for hands?

Reading the headline I first thought they were making a statement for privacy using outdated technology.

I’ve read the definition and I guess it’s not always as overtly negative, but that’s easy to fix with one or two extra words, ie. “self-centered dilettante”

Exactly yes thanks. Gatekeeping is one of those words I tend to forget it exists

Yes, yes Cambridge, that’s right

Yesss yes yes yes I think you’ve nailed it thank you! I didn’t know this word, I’ve read the definition and it suits quite well.

It’s alright, they may be neurodivergent as I am as well, and everyone has a story and a reason to be and do etc. I’m aware this isn’t all there is to this person, I’m not trying to find two words to sum up their existence, just the part of their existence that rubs me off the wrong way.

I think pretentious is the closest match but it’s still lacking something else. Another commenter suggested two words instead of one, I guess that might be the way to go

Probably, I think one word only is too specific. So far I think pretentious fits the bill the best, but it isn’t enough to fully describe the type.

deleted by creator