I always whole heartedly agree that it’s very complex, but we do know introducing novel gases to various parts of the atmosphere is generally chaotic and something to be avoided when we can.

Phones are stored primarily in front pockets that are nowhere near the colon in terms of biology (almost everyone has relatively dense meaty quads and femurs between the thigh and colon) or the inverse square law.

So is claiming someone didn't read a source when you disagree with their interpretation.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Many people believe that specifically the Irish Pale popularized the statement, but the OED aren't among them.

What are we disagreeing about?

I made no call to action.

I guess I should have known any time the information is something certain people would consider 'woke' it elicits a strong emotional reaction beyond the information itself.

My bad.

It doesn't necessarily have bearing, but you cannot generalize the way you are doing.

Then no word would mean anything.

The etymology is in doubt for any particular area, not the concept of what a pale was and how it was used to colonize.

That is the point of "many believe."

Also keep in mind that the major doubter is the Oxford English Dictionary...

You accepted multiple currencies without taking a spread on Forex? How did you convert it for free? Not even actual forex businesses can do that...

https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/12/beyond-the-pale.h...

This is why your grocery store partners with an ATM network to let you take out extra cash at the POS. As long as you're paying the fee, they'll do whatever they can to trade you cash for a digital deposit into their bank account.

Amazing how openly CEO's like Dimon will fear-monger about start-ups, when in reality they're just not satisfied with their own team's progress in doing the same exact thing. But of course it's OK when they eventually launch the product.

[0]https://www.finextra.com/newsarticle/37293/dimon-scared-shit...

Some of that is market, but TSLA is -15% since then.

I'm not saying the company is committing securities fraud, I am saying that if the company created a scheme as described by the commentor I was replying to, then that would be securities fraud.

If a CEO is intentionally creating a situation to make a company unprofitable and paying it back by buying shares, that is 100% securities fraud and I'm stunned anyone disagreed with that assertion.

Every common shareholder is an equal, you don't get to launder jet travel the way he's doing - that's securities fraud.

Ornithopters are designed by humans who sleep - the complex computers needed to make them work replicate things humans told them to do, right?

It is a very incomplete model of an ornithopter to not include the human.