It's obvious they're plastic ducks on a string, but I'm curious as to what they're used for. I'm not sure about the hunting decoy theory, as I believe ducks would spot the unnatural formation. Geese and crows certainly would.
May 23, 2024 at 2:15 PM
It's obvious they're plastic ducks on a string, but I'm curious as to what they're used for. I'm not sure about the hunting decoy theory, as I believe ducks would spot the unnatural formation. Geese and crows certainly would.
Curious, what's that used for? Does it divide the pond for some reason?
May 23, 2024 at 11:52 AM
Curious, what's that used for? Does it divide the pond for some reason?
It's fewer than you'd think.
May 20, 2024 at 7:29 PM
It's fewer than you'd think.
I thought the beak looked larger than what I expected from a crow.
May 20, 2024 at 7:22 PM
I thought the beak looked larger than what I expected from a crow.
In real life the size difference is noticeable, but on a picture it's quite hard.
May 20, 2024 at 7:21 PM
In real life the size difference is noticeable, but on a picture it's quite hard.
I might totally be wrong about this.
May 20, 2024 at 7:20 PM
I might totally be wrong about this.
Looks more like a raven.
May 20, 2024 at 2:36 PM
Looks more like a raven.
This would be so simple to solve, though.
May 17, 2024 at 3:29 PM
This would be so simple to solve, though.
James Acaster would probably approve if he hadn't quit social media. 😅
May 16, 2024 at 3:53 PM
James Acaster would probably approve if he hadn't quit social media. 😅
I can do both eyebrows individually, even without lowering the other one.
May 16, 2024 at 3:46 PM
I can do both eyebrows individually, even without lowering the other one.
There are a couple of books, albeit not necessarily about strategy:
www.amazon.com/Tic-Tac-Auto...
www.amazon.com/Tic-Tac-Auto...
www.amazon.com
May 13, 2024 at 4:04 PM
There are a couple of books, albeit not necessarily about strategy:
www.amazon.com/Tic-Tac-Auto...
www.amazon.com/Tic-Tac-Auto...
It sounds like you want to believe this wasn't random. It probably wasn't. However, I'm sure you could've worn any kind of scarf big enough to hide things underneath and they would've done the same.
May 13, 2024 at 9:03 AM
It sounds like you want to believe this wasn't random. It probably wasn't. However, I'm sure you could've worn any kind of scarf big enough to hide things underneath and they would've done the same.
You seem to be so focused on finding something to be offended about that you missed the point he made.
May 11, 2024 at 11:48 AM
You seem to be so focused on finding something to be offended about that you missed the point he made.
Looking at the comments, it's that quite some people thought it was a quote. Impact > intention.
May 11, 2024 at 11:45 AM
Looking at the comments, it's that quite some people thought it was a quote. Impact > intention.
I don't like defending Jack, but I dislike spreading misinformation more than tech bros.
He's talking about strategic decisions, about whether Bluesky should focus on being part of a larger infrastructure as an open source protocol, instead of being just yet another app or company with a brand.
He's talking about strategic decisions, about whether Bluesky should focus on being part of a larger infrastructure as an open source protocol, instead of being just yet another app or company with a brand.
May 10, 2024 at 11:11 AM
I don't like defending Jack, but I dislike spreading misinformation more than tech bros.
He's talking about strategic decisions, about whether Bluesky should focus on being part of a larger infrastructure as an open source protocol, instead of being just yet another app or company with a brand.
He's talking about strategic decisions, about whether Bluesky should focus on being part of a larger infrastructure as an open source protocol, instead of being just yet another app or company with a brand.
I know, that's why this is so believable. But really he's on about something different.
Even that screenshot above is (most likely deliberately) misleading.
Even that screenshot above is (most likely deliberately) misleading.
May 10, 2024 at 11:06 AM
I know, that's why this is so believable. But really he's on about something different.
Even that screenshot above is (most likely deliberately) misleading.
Even that screenshot above is (most likely deliberately) misleading.
Of course it's not a quote. Not even close.
May 10, 2024 at 11:02 AM
Of course it's not a quote. Not even close.
The quotes make it appear as if he actually said that, while in reality he talks about strategic decisions which would lead Bluesky down the same road as Twitter / X, becoming a brand, instead of focusing on open protocols and decentralization.
May 10, 2024 at 11:01 AM
The quotes make it appear as if he actually said that, while in reality he talks about strategic decisions which would lead Bluesky down the same road as Twitter / X, becoming a brand, instead of focusing on open protocols and decentralization.
True. They could've clicked that link. I still appreciate folks who leave such comments for others who stumble across the post later.
May 8, 2024 at 2:14 PM
True. They could've clicked that link. I still appreciate folks who leave such comments for others who stumble across the post later.
People sometimes forget that on a public platform many comments aren't directed at the original author, but instead at other readers stumbling across the same post.
May 7, 2024 at 7:20 PM
People sometimes forget that on a public platform many comments aren't directed at the original author, but instead at other readers stumbling across the same post.
Thing is, the original post includes a picture, not a link. I can't click and see the result (and I'm not interested enough to Google it).
Anyways, I appreciate the heads up when something is paywalled so I don't need to click unless I'm interested in the actual topic.
Anyways, I appreciate the heads up when something is paywalled so I don't need to click unless I'm interested in the actual topic.
May 7, 2024 at 7:18 PM
Thing is, the original post includes a picture, not a link. I can't click and see the result (and I'm not interested enough to Google it).
Anyways, I appreciate the heads up when something is paywalled so I don't need to click unless I'm interested in the actual topic.
Anyways, I appreciate the heads up when something is paywalled so I don't need to click unless I'm interested in the actual topic.
May 7, 2024 at 7:17 PM
Thing is, the original post includes a picture, not a link. I can't click and see the result (and I'm not interested enough to Google it).
Anyways, I appreciate the heads up when something is paywalled so I don't need to click unless I'm interested in the actual topic.
Anyways, I appreciate the heads up when something is paywalled so I don't need to click unless I'm interested in the actual topic.
It's not even about trying to avoid paying for journalism, but rather about the lack of context for some of those very short statements people post on micro blogging platforms.
May 7, 2024 at 5:04 PM
It's not even about trying to avoid paying for journalism, but rather about the lack of context for some of those very short statements people post on micro blogging platforms.
How should they know it's the author posting the link?
If there's a random person linking out to some article, it's absolutely fine to point out if something's paywalled, because they might not realize that most of their audience can't read the context of what they're referring to on social media.
If there's a random person linking out to some article, it's absolutely fine to point out if something's paywalled, because they might not realize that most of their audience can't read the context of what they're referring to on social media.
May 7, 2024 at 5:02 PM
How should they know it's the author posting the link?
If there's a random person linking out to some article, it's absolutely fine to point out if something's paywalled, because they might not realize that most of their audience can't read the context of what they're referring to on social media.
If there's a random person linking out to some article, it's absolutely fine to point out if something's paywalled, because they might not realize that most of their audience can't read the context of what they're referring to on social media.