We don't need to guess and go out and talk to kids. The statistics can be looked up. Depending on studies GenZers are only about 10-20% behind Millenials. If you then look at the general distribution of *when* people get tattoos you can expect GenZ's percentage to increase further over time while Millennial's are unlikely to change from this point forward.

Anecdotes and soundbites are irrelevant.

Indeed, but when your opinions don't fit facts (such as the fact that 25% of millennials don't actually have a criminal record) just know you run the risk of having other people form the opinion that you're a judgmental arsehole.

I'm not sure what your point is. My point is there's no significant differences between generations and Gen-Z also have plenty of tattoos. Is your point that 1/3rd of people is not a big number, and that 1/3rd of people have poor self-image? If so WOW.

My anecdote: The only people I know with tattoos are those with such good confidence in their self-image that they happily display their body as a canvas. Very much the opposite of what you say.

Before I hit submit I decided to see if there was any information as to your comment. Turns out this has been studied: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/a... and it turns out only 10% of tattooed people have body image problems. Doesn't really fit your view does it...

No why would I be triggered? I'm not a Gen-Zer, I just really like pointing out that you frequently say very stupid things.

That's insightful, what open source alternatives do you propose? There's hundreds for our alphabet, but there's fuck-all out there for Japanese / Chinese, many thanks to literally thousands of glyphs existing in the language.

Here's one character https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... just one of the several thousands which has more strokes than the entire Latin alphabet, Greek alphabet, including both lower case and upper case combined.

There's multiple orders of magnitude more complexity here with multiple orders of magnitude less demand for the work. It's just not a good target for open source.

To be clear it's not that they "increased" the cost, it's that they specifically eliminated a cheaper plan that the industry was relying on. Yes ultimately it's a distinction without a difference, but I really wonder why games specifically were getting a discount in the first place?

"LandSpace Could Become China's First Company To Land a Reusable Rocket"
"UPDATE: Chinese Reusable Booster Explodes During First Orbital Test"

I had a chuckle at how close together these two posts are on the Slashdot front page.

Citation Needed. I mean if what you say was true why are the TLAs constantly suing and fighting with Apple rather than simply flipping their hidden privacy invasion switch?

Or does your conspiracy run so deep that the government and Apple run a perpetual legal battle rather than simply admit what you already know to be true?

Apple isn't pre-installing anything in Russia, not even their own OS because they do not sell iPhones in Russia nor do they have business there. They pulled out of the market in March 2022.

Now if someone buys an overseas iPhone and resells it in Russia that person would have to preinstall the app before selling it. And the MAX app technically doesn't breach any App Store rules so it is actually available to install.

Never go full hyperbole man. If you want to make a point then make the point. The direction the EU is going is bad, but when you equate it to dictatorships your otherwise valid complaint starts to lose credibility and look like ignorant biased drivel.

False, you even admitted it in your post. We know the dog was unleashed, hence the fault is completely with the owner of the dog who didn't take care of them. How fast or slow the dog entered the street is irrelevant. And the owner should be fined $500 as well since San Francisco as strict dog leashing laws.

100,000 dogs get killed each year by human drivers (sometimes just their own owners stupidity, like having them unsecured in the tray) https://www.petscare.com/news/...

So far Waymo has killed zero dogs, and one cat. And that dog that didn't even die was off-leash so the owner should be sued for damaging the car.

Which law? Cite it. Then ask the parent where their aunt lives and see if its applicable. Anytime you cite any law without quoting "where" or asking "where" you fucked up.

Waymo has demonstrated that they don't hit them. Unlike normal drivers. Maybe we should ban those instead.

Sigh. You get voted down because you generalise the point in a way that makes the question unanswerable. There is a proven link between health outcomes and ultra processed foods, but the specifics of it is difficult to establish.

"Choices" I don't think you understand what that word means in this context. For "choices" to be a relevant defense here those choices need to be free from undue influence. They are not in this industry. It's an industry that goes out of its way to not only stack the deck against you, but to also get you addicted. There's a reason when you fill up the car and go to pay you don't get greeted with a bunch of apples and bananas, instead you'll see a bag of crisps advertising how "healthy" they are because they are air fried, while being loaded to the brim with salt because research shows people love salt and any artificial chemical you can find to make them crunchier and last longer in the packet. There's a reason when you go to the fridge the water bottles are at the bottom and you're greeted with rows of Coca-Cola instead. Oh but you have a choice, make the healthy choice and reach for the apple juice, ... the one that had artificial sweetener added to the same amount as the coke because sugar is addictive and sells.

The consumer (yes even you, despite you probably not admitting it) has far less choice than you think. And that is born in the countless studies that have shown banning adverts or changing product displays has an impact on consumer behaviour and the "choices" they make.

Really I agree with you here. The city here is stupid. If you want to regulate / ban then regulate / ban. But regulating and permitting something then suing the companies that follow those regulations seems like a waste of the courts time.

I think his point is not the specifics but rather the body. You're right, they have regulatory bodies. The only people that should be allowed to be sued is the regulator. UPF includes additives that the regulator has deemed safe for human consumption and legal to sell. Why sue company for their legal regulated product?