I didn’t expect it to be included, so I didn’t even check out the article - apparently it’s not 2GB of text, and it was indeed easy to find - thanks!
Doctors determined that Lotito also had a thick lining in his stomach and intestines which allowed his consumption of sharp metal without suffering injury.
Wow, now we’re both calling bullshit. Thick lining, my ass has thick lining.
Also, how did he CHEW that stuff? And by chew, I mean make sure it fits in his mouth AND doesn’t cut through his pink parts.
Hang them on the fence inside out and hose them down with a garden hose.
You might be bad with faces, but how about faeces?
They all went to London
Let’s suppose that for some reason it’s completely normal, and it’s just simply speeding toward us.
OP says it’s billions of light years away. Doesn’t that mean that we still have a few billion years?
Notice the direction of that backslash. What they were trying to do was 🐈📦 on the power of 📦, but I guess this formatting code doesn’t apply to titles.
EDIT: …or lemmy comments. Testing: (🐈📦)📦 - nevermind. So they tried to escape the exponential symbol with a backspace, but there was no need for it in lemmy, since it’s coded differently here.
But at least I do not see it morally as a very big problem that a person explicitly says that something is acceptable and then that thing is done to him
This is why one of my wild theories is that the timing of the shot isn’t coincidental, and since there’s so little time between his answer and the shot, there’s a (negligible, too low, ridiculously small) chance that the shooter was waiting for this particular question (and the answer that follows), suggesting some connection between the person asking and the killer. I am aware of how tinfoil hat it sounds, and I don’t think that’s actually the case, but it makes some sense.
While I’ve been playing with variously wild theories myself, as well, I don’t see why a sniper would keep their crosshair right on the person they are trying to protect. However, I’m also not overly educated in snipology to be 100% sure about it.
For me it’s quite the opposite; in the small picture I saw a giant, rather angry tiger-monster face (and nothing else attached). Like, the actual ears being the monster’s eyes, and the hind legs being the ears. Like a mad tiger with a long forehead.
The flat insides are an interesting choice which I haven’t seen yet (I don’t see many ruins, though). I wonder if it serves a practical purpose or it’s more like a design choice.
Can’t it be a goatie?
I’ll be the dancer. Just make sure I can hear your conversation.
don’t get paid enough to even look up or deviate from their programming
Also, it’s literally not their responsibility to do anything about shoplifting attempts. Normally there is a security person (yes, one) employed in the store, but I wonder if they are only there to tackle aggressive behaviour or to actually peek into people’s bags and pockets. As a till worker, you can point out that those things are actually from the store, but I think it’s not legal to require you to enforce anything - especially because it isn’t (and shouldn’t be) in your job description.
Yes, sometimes, it’s IDGAF, sometimes it’s lack of critical thinking, but more often than not it’s “everyone knows but obviously it’s out of our scope to make a scene for a jar of gherkins or a cheese wheel”. Nobody will think much about it if you actually look like you need stuff, but based on my several years of experience, in the majority of the cases the employees clearly know when someone is trying to do petty tricks, they definitely judge you for that (unless you’re in need of course, but you can still ask and get stuff), the employees just won’t act for the above 3 reasons.
I can’t see the beef or the onion.
Lethal when breathed in.
So that means we’re finally over most of it. Right? Right…?