Are you describing strong linguistic relativity here? I was under the impression the weak form still held under study (e.g. names of colors being the popular example).

I haven't encountered the notion that "humans do not think in language." Is there a paper or keyword I can look up?

I think you might've convinced me of this just with your comment.

Also, flip "religion" and "culture" and the post still (mostly) works, though I don't think that proves anything.

The moral/preference idea is closer, but you get a lot of gray areas like sports teams and Sunday roasts (complete with threat of excommunication for non-adherence).

I'd actually assumed it'd be commonplace by now, but I can't find too many stories about it.

I wonder? Surely total viewership across those few channels was less than an episode of Friends in the 90s.

And I'd bet people watched less television and engaged in other activities, maybe came up with some jokes of their own.

(Doesn't really have anything to do with your point, sorry)

Talking about various aspects of the article is the entire point of the comment thread. Meta-discussion about what's worth commenting on is not.

> Normal Google Applications (T2), S0 RCE: $75,000 base × 1.2 for exceptional report quality.

"Easy" isn't a factor in calculating the bounty.

They could do that with green screen, so that's not relevant. Of course, now they can put the phallus anywhere else, and that's more of a problem.

There's also some propaganda power in maintaining a widely-cited encyclopedia (and maybe a psyops angle).

I think this isn't strictly true, and heavy vehicles in the US have to pay a "Heavy Highway Vehicle Use Tax." Whether that's commensurate to the damage they do, I don't know.