Grammar is good and stuff
How dare you good grammar want
What about the people that don't have a soul
Or, all doors should have an obvious mechanical backup that doesn't require that.
That's literally one way allergies form.
https://evidence.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/EVIDoa2300311
Exposure to allergens makes you less likely to be allergic to them.
And devout jews still have rabbis suck the blood off the freshly circumcised baby as tradition dictates.
Jewish babies get an immediate bj to make up for being circumcised?
What
1000 miles a week is under 130 a day.
Just charge it at home every day and you're good.
Dolphin runs pretty badly on low-end hardware in general. That being anything worse than mid-grade desktop hardware.
Depending on the specific game, it may be playable, but I wouldn't bet on it.
As a specific example, I have a laptop with an i5-1335u, and it can't run Twilight Princess playably at all, and Metroid Prime 2 doesn't work great either.
But my previous 10600k desktop had no issues.
And as a general rule, phones are less powerful than even low-end desktop hardware.
Why do we need people to be landlords?
Housing coops and government-owned housing work out fine.
Why would anyone want toxic waste in their backyard?
It's not toxic, nor is it in their backyard.
Not to mention that the search is mainly conducted by companies, which have a vested interest in not making all the issues transparent.
What issues?
It’s genuinely not easy to find a location where anyone would be willing to claim that it will remain unaffected by geodynamic processes for millions of years.
Maybe housing shouldn't be an investment?
LVT, not property tax. You want to tax the value of the land, not the value of the property built on it.
You'd rather have an OS tab than a browser tab?
Are you sure this makes sense?
Which has nothing to do with whether technology reduces the need for working hours, which is what I was arguing.
Obviously I'm trying to rationalize what I already said, that's how an argument works.
I am arguing that better technology reduces the need for working hours.
That's it.
Yes, but that's not because technology doesn't reduce the need for working hours, which is what I argued against.
And you think they just did it because?
They obviously thought they deserved it, because... technology reduced the need for work hours, perhaps?
In response to better technology that reduced the need for work hours.
Unions fought for it after seeing the obvious effects of better technology reducing the need for work hours.
technological advancement doesn’t allow you to work less,
It literally has (When forced by unions). How do you think we got the 40-hr workweek?