The criteria is that it’s a horror villain of your choice. So, I don’t know why you’d choose a boss zombie or one of those really bad variants when you could choose one of the zombies from Shawn of the Dead.

But I’m also not completely sure that a random zombie really counts as a “villain”.

Strangely, I’ve never had someone say that my username doesn’t check out who also explained clearly why they thought that way. I think this is the second time.

And being called names by strangers online doesn’t really register as anything but noise. I guess if it was in this thread, it would be slightly on topic, but elsewhere, it would probably just lead to reports and blocks.

I wonder if it can be ad hominem if it’s a personal attack that technically bolsters your opponent’s argument. For example, if you’re debating a scientist about some scientific subject, and you call them an egghead or a nerd. I think it still counts.

a lack of intelligence doesn’t necessarily imply that something said by a given person is wrong

This doesn’t seem convincing to me because it’s the exact same sort of criticism you’d make about any other ad hominem statement.

The smooth side does indeed face the owner. But it’s about maintenance, not appearance. If the fence faced the other way, you’d have to be standing in your neighbor’s yard to fix your own fence if it has a broken board.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that some people don’t install their fences backward.

I mean, that’s right on the mark. The reason they called themselves National Socialists isn’t because they were socialists, but because they knew that their true beliefs were so abhorrent that they needed to lie about being socialists.

Elon Musk has been recently shown to have done the same thing.

I’d think it would be obvious that a country wouldn’t want to depend on a foreign country’s proprietary product when an open source alternative exists. Even if it’s not spying, what if the US forced Microsoft to put some kill switch on their products? Even if it doesn’t affect your most secure systems because of air gap, it could still cripple enough to cause huge problems.

There’s simply no reason to take the risk.

If I was running a government, I would strongly desire proof that all of my government software is doing only what I want it to. That means not only do I have access to the source code, but I also need it to be simple enough that my government teams can actually audit all of it.

Obviously, that’s not going to be feasible in every situation. There might be proprietary software that is protected from competition via IP laws, and some software is so necessarily complex that it would be really hard to audit completely, but overall, I find it shocking that any foreign government would run a Microsoft product when a feature comparable open source alternative exists.

I also over analyze everything, which is why I always remove my eggs from the right side of the carton.

The left side of the carton is always towards me in the refrigerator, and I also always have the left side towards me on the counter.

As a result my first grab out of the fridge is always the most stable grab possible.

The way I figure it is, the most dangerous time is pulling it out of the fridge when I don’t always remember where the eggs are and where I have to grab it from one end. I don’t want to be surprised by it being heavy away from me.

Once I have it safely in my hand, I no longer have to consciously think about how to hold it, as that can all be done unconsciously.

This is the same market that tried to add blockchain to everything when that first became well-known.

Some of the biggest forces in the market are extraordinarily stupid people trying to ride every buzzword that comes along.

Heraclitus said that no man ever steps in the same river twice.

I heard a lawyer describe it as something like, “If a law firm can’t even defend itself, then why would anybody hire it to defend them?”

The change actually makes a lot of sense. If it’s a light reflecting off of a cloud or the atmosphere somehow, which is something that has been called a UFO before, then it’s not flying and it’s not an object.

And it also helps to distance from the “flying saucer” connotation. If UAPs eventually become equivalent to “aliens”, then they’ll be forced to switch the name again, because even if you believe aliens have come to Earth, it simply can’t always be an alien.