If there are a bunch of posts on a particular topic, shouldn’t it keep at least one of them? Otherwise it would tend to completely filter out the most significant or interesting topics.

I had a really good pizza topped with stinging nettle once.

I always insist on colors within the visible spectrum.

(4) you pass, barely

That implies that 1, 2, and 3 are all failing (perhaps with different degrees of embarrassment). If all failure is equivalent in practice, you might as well maximize the non-failing outcomes and go with A.

Small phones, structuralism, and Mr. Rogers.

Don Mclean’s Vincent.

“West Martians”.

“This Land”.

No, not any more than someone telling you the plot of a book would count as reading it—that’s generally the extent of the original work’s content that survives the process of adaptation. (Possible exceptions are faithful adaptations of stage plays like Shakespeare or Euripides—in that case watching a subtitled production might be considered the equivalent of reading the script.)

I don’t understand—you think you’re one of the last people left who started using the internet in the 90s?

It sounds like she’s constructed two competing versions of you in her mind—an idealized version that always understands and sympathizes with her, and a second version constructed from all the times you’ve failed to live up to those expectations.

If you can’t be her idealized version of yourself, you can demonstrate that you’re not the second version, either. Focus on proactively doing things for her when she’s not expecting you to—everything you do that doesn’t match what her mental model of you predicts you’ll do will weaken that model in her head.

Jumping off the ISS wouldn’t cause you to de-orbit—it would just put you in a slightly more elliptical orbit that would eventually intersect the ISS again.

And if you did get into an orbit that took you down into the atmosphere, no parachute would save you—parachutes are for slowing to a safe landing speed from terminal velocity, not from orbital velocity. You’d need to go through atmosphere too thin to fill a chute, but still fast enough to burn you up.

Nobody notices things that conform to their expectations—but when anything violates their expectations, they assume it’s a deliberate message. (Even if it’s fiction violating their genre expectations in the direction of reality.)

And if they can’t figure out what the message is supposed to be, they let other people tell them. And if people tell them different things, they go with the one that makes them feel the strongest reaction.

Most of it is not actually in verse.

Misleading/wrong posts don’t usually spoof the origin - they post the wrong information in their own name.

You could argue that that’s because there’s no widely-accepted method for verifying sources—if there were, information relayed without a verifiable source might come to be treated more skeptically.

I could see it working if (say) someone tries to modify or fabricate video from a known news source, where you could check the key against other content from the same source.

Looks similar to Footlight. Maybe it’s by the same designer (Ong Chong Wah)?

I tested mine with an infrared thermometer: Starting cold, I turned one burner to medium and another to high, and measured them as they heated up. They heated at the same rate until the medium burner reached its target temperature.

that putting the thermostat up higher will heat the house up quicker

Same with electric range/ovens.

Clip art/stock art.

That is, “art” that’s intended to be meaningless until someone else uses it in a context that supplies a meaning.