queermunist

It's not the world that's giving Israel unlimited weapons. It's this shithole country. We are to blame. We aren't just letting this happen, we are making it happen. Our fault.

Also the world only "let it happen" because if anyone tried to stop Israel the United States would attack them. But they aren't directly funding and supporting the genocide the same way we are. It's one thing to let the US do what it wants, it's quite another to directly support it. And we do. It's our labor, our taxes, and our obedience that allows this to continue.

And this isn't the first time. We killed a million people in Iraq and we destroyed Libya and Syria and Afghanistan and Yemen.

All our fault.

AI harvesting the work of others without permission and without compensation for profit is a good reason to hate AI.

Imagine thinking you aren't a corporate bootlicker when you defend AI.

Since hiring veterans is DEI, I think that means any game with soldiers is woke. 😞

I consider my appearance to be armor. I put on makeup and cute clothes and style my hair so I can face the world. Helps my social anxiety.

Also, totally doesn't take that much time. 20 minutes max once you get into the habit of it.

If lab grown teeth give me better reception then I'm all for it!

We're doing genocide and it makes me want to die. We are all complicit. You did nothing to me, but what about the thousands of children your tax dollars are murdering every month? Do you feel any guilt for that?

Or do you think they deserve it because some of them have backwards opinions about lgbtq people?

I'm trans, they're gonna fucking kill me dawg

I just hate this God damn country

We get what we deserve. 😔

That makes sense, but it's still strange because it means in the case of a fire the entire building has to be treated the same anyway because there is something in the building that reacts with water even if its separate.

I guess it is helpful to indicate that there are multiple substances that have different reaction profiles, but it still seems strange to me.

The reason for listing them separately is because each individual chemical has its own ratings. You can’t simply take the highest of each and combine them into a single sign. For instance, in this case one chemical isn’t flammable but is explosive when heated. The other chemical is flammable but not explosive. So if you see a chemical on fire, you know it’s the second chemical and isn’t explosive. But if you see something that isn’t burning in a room full of fire, you know it’s a potential powder keg waiting to explode.

Okay, so the two signs on the building have a weird combination.

The sign on the left indicates something that isn't flammable, but reacts with water. The sign on the right indicates something that is flammable, but there's no risk of reacting to water. If the building caught fire then a first responder on the scene has to read both signs at the same time. They can't spray the building with water because the non-flammable substance would react with the water.

So why aren't the signs combined? They have to be treated the same anyway.

Critical support.