My grandma always told of a legendary man in my hometown, who would always take his horse to the local bar in the 1950s. When he got too drunk and fell asleep, the other patrons would carry him outside and sling him sideways over the horse, which would then trot off in to the night, supposedly delivering him safely at home.

I know that’s not very scientific evidence, but I always took it to be true. Maybe someone can concur.

deleted by creator

Assistant Post Flight Fluffer

Oh, wait

Hannah Monta!

Hannah Montana!

The UK sports experience

I can hear the laugh

That’s her exhaust fan, you pervert!

I always read it as *griner griner*, even though i know it was supposed to be griner godt lol.

I feel like the difference between good game and laughing would be the asterixes.

I remember this GG ^^

And then you gotta type your smiley faces with a nose :-D

Well, incidentally, porn bots. And he doesn’t want to lose them, too!

What drawbacks?

Literally

deleted by creator

It’s So Meta Even This Acronym

At the same time, I feel like we shouldn’t let that happen because imagine if he actually succeeds? And then we just have immortal crackhead Lex Luthor with a hallucinating ChatGPT whispering further delusions directly into his brain. That can’t be good for any of us.

Like not doing enough LSD, apparently

You should note that this was a Gmail feature that is now made available by a bunch of email providers, but you might wanna check that you do indeed get your emails delivered to plus addresses before you rush out to change your contact info everywhere. Some providers have lacking support and sometimes emails may fail to send to plus addresses even if your side does support it. Using a catchall will always work because you know, that’s just how email works.

It is definitely the exact opposite of this. Even though I understand why you would think this.

The thing with systems like these is they are mission critical, which is usually defined as failure = loss of life or significant monetary loss (like, tens of millions of dollars).

Mission critical software is not unit tested at all. It is proven. What you do is you take the code line by line, and you prove what each line does, how it does it, and you document each possible outcome.

Mission critical software is ridiculously expensive to develop for this exact reason. And upgrading to deploy on different systems means you’ll be running things in a new environment, which introduces a ton of unknown factors. What happens, on a line by line basis, when you run this code on a faster processor? Does this chip process the commands in a slightly different order because they use a slightly different algorithm? You don’t know until you take the new hardware, the new software, and the code, then go through the lengthy process of proving it again, until you can document that you’ve proven that this will not result in any unusual train behavior.

deleted by creator