FriendOfDeSoto

I’m not going to press you on an answer about your emotions if you don’t want to tell. You probably have it in you to change your behavior. If the bad touch response is frustrating you, there is probably a time span you can aim for in a shower that will be equally frustrating but without using the phone. Find that time.

Showers can be an incredibly wasteful way of washing. Finding ways to make them longer, especially on the reg, is something to consider avoiding.

What emotions are you having that cannot deal with 5-10 minutes of pure bodily hygiene focus?

No. At least not yet. I don’t think they will be because that would entail having any of 47’s children succeed him. And I feel like they know they are a shade duller than Hegseth.

You have unlocked the stylistic tool of the hyperbole.

Hands up if you didn’t already know that. Or intuited it. To me this seems to be something only US-Americans who argue purely ideologically for a “small government” need reminding of. They’re paradoxically often the first in line calling for government intervention when their drinking water is full of poop or something.

I think technologically this is something an engineering team should tackle. It would probably benefit people who use touch devices for work in dirty and wet environments as well.

How long do you spend in the shower that you have time to doom scroll? Maybe it’s time to switch to baths if you have a tub. If you don’t, I would boringly suggest just not taking the phone into the shower if you know that the touch sensor will be wonky. It may speed up the shower and lessen your water consumption as a side effect. That’s good for your wallet and the environment. The internet can wait 5-10.

I get the meditative effect of a hot shower after a long day. I enjoy that on occasion as well. At no point did I ever think the experience would be improved by a cell phone with a camera being present.

I think you need to be more specific with the query. If I’m the only passenger plus crew, yes. If the plane is full of people going to a place to help out, no. If this flight could be done by train without multiplying door-to-door travel time more than 2.5 times, yes. If my blood type or bone marrow was so rare I could save a life, I think I’d be okay again even if I was a lone passenger. There is plenty of gray here to consider.

Did you skip high school? You’re equating normal with socially desirable. I don’t. There are plenty of people who behave normally while not being nice. E.g. bullies, mean girls. Some of them never grow out of it.

I beg to differ. If I were a c-word, this behavior would be par for the course.

This is not the behavior of a friend.

By European standards nothing to write home about. By Asian standards, a Mount Everestrian protrusion.

I don’t mind your suggestion. I think universal mail-ins are a good idea. At the same time, I have an inkling that you didn’t read my comment all the way to the end.

I have sympathy for non-voters in the US. Not so much out of principle but because of how it is done. Voting takes place on a Tuesday. That’s because in ye olden days you had to allow people to attend church on Sunday before making the trip on horseback to participate in the election. That’s a cute tradition but clashes with the way the economy works today. People are very dependent on their low-wage jobs that they can be fired from easily. If you’re working two of those jobs to make ends meet, you may not have the “luxury” to skip work to go and vote on a normal weekday. That luxury often includes having to fill in a booklet of stuff that’s on the ballot. You’re not just voting on a president, a senator, or a congressperson. You may be asked your option on a plebiscite, a judge, a sheriff, a school board, etc. It is overinflated in my view and explains long slow moving lines at ballot stations that you don’t often see elsewhere. And that’s after a possibly Kafkaesque registration process to be eligible in the first place or to get mail-ins in some states. It is almost designed to keep people away. Maybe you’re taking these structural problems as something “politicians cling to.”

Make election day a public holiday that forces businesses who are open anyway to allow all their employees to go and vote.

I’m being put in a difficult situation here because I’m gonna have to go ahead and defend the American “snowflakes.” When it comes to interpreting the phrase “free elections” I think all democracies or close enough to that (which therefore includes the US) chose to say free means you’re also free not to participate. Except for the Aussies. And while I’m not an American snowflake, I’m still a snowflake because I agree with that interpretation. It wouldn’t just ruffle feathers in the US if mandatory election participation was prescribed. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. Horse = voter, drink = vote. And I don’t think the Aussie governments of the last two decades have proven to be superior because they’re backed by a larger voter base. Remember the guy who ate raw onions?

Lenmy offers me the freedom to get mad at many different people running instances and not just one godforsaken company running roughshod over everything communities had created over years.

I’m not mad at anyone though because I don’t share your views at all. I’m a happy Lemmy user.

And what is Lemmy dot world acting like at night?

Technically, they don’t have to be. They could elect a venerable whippersnapper cardinal - Dan Brown wrote a book about that. And that tells you how likely that is if he wrote the story. But it is possible.

It would be rare because it takes seniority to get into the position. And politics to be well liked enough to be put forward and then elected. By mostly old people. Some of whom would like the job themselves.

This is already location-dependent. I think Iceland has the most restrictive legislation with a prescribed list to choose from. Other countries have a layer of “is this really a name?” checking as part of the registration process after birth and parents can be sent back to square one.

I think there is a balance to be had where you can’t get away with xc1>df or whatever but you could name your kid after a GoT character that tragically turned evil in the last season. My suggestion would be to include a second given name that is more established than Khalisi or Dumbledore, e.g. Kelly and David. If Khalisi Kelly’s last name is Knox obvs I wouldn’t insist on the alliteration. My point is then your child has a plan B when they get mocked for being called Hobbit in school. They can just go by Henry or whatever other boring name made the cut. That way you don’t need to get into a complicated legal situation where a minor would have to override the wish of their parents.

After reaching adulthood legally, virtually anybody can try to change their name. Although the process may involve having to prove harm to get it approved in some places. I think there is a correlation between a laissez-faire attitude to naming and ease of getting a name change. In countries that are stricter to begin with, the hurdles are much higher and can be much costlier.