It’s not the heat that dewrinkles clothes. It’s humidity. Try it in a room full of steam.

Two options for dealing with wrinkles:

1. Wet a washcloth or small towel, place both the wrinkled item and the wet item in a dryer and turn the dryer on low-heat for 20-30 minutes.
2. Hang the item on a clothes hanger in the bathroom and take a steaming hot shower.

There is a third option: wear wrinkly clothes and dgaf.

Ignoring the fact that a lot of languages, and database systems, do not support generics (but do already support null), you’ve just introduced a more complex type of null value; you’re simply slapping some lipstick on it. 😊

My god that was painful to watch. Skip ahead to the last minute of the video, unless you like being tortured with over the top “Hello, fellow kids” corporate BS.

I’m probably going to get a lot of hate for this, and I do recognize there have been problems with it all over the place (my code too), but I like null. I don’t like how it fucks everything up. But from a data standpoint, how else are you going to treat uninitialized data, or data with no value? Some people might initialize an empty string, but to me that’s a valid value in some cases. Same for using -1 or zero for numbers. There are cases where those values are valid. It’s like using 1 for true, and zero for false.

Whomever came up with the null coalescing operator (??) and optional chaining (?->) are making strides with handling null more elegantly.

I’m more curious why JavaScript has both null and undefined, and of course NaN. Now THAT is fucked up. Make it make sense.

You obviously don’t suffer from a sensitive circadian rhythm. To that I’d say, lucky you. But there are plenty of people who do suffer. And by the time they finally get used to the time change, it’s time to change again. It’s vicious and disruptive; to more than just scheduling. It has a direct (negative) impact on physical and mental health.

Is this something that is going to be publicly available? If so, post a link when you have it.

Useful in fighting as it helps protect the lower jaw and teeth?

But then again, it could simply be a trait we have developed over the millennia, and there is no deeper meaning to it.

As in a signal of how manly a man truly is, comparative to still being a boy.

Edit: also, hair is counter productive in a fight, because it gives your opponent something to grab a hold of and use against you.

I can certainly relate. I do not have the traditional sense of what is beauty and what is not. I tend to also gravitate toward more natural beauty; i.e., little-to-no make-up, natural breast (even if they are small), normal fitting clothing, those damn filters on photos.

Not only is it a double standard (how would society look upon men who stuffed their pants), it doesn’t help with my inability to easily distinguish who you are out of a crowd of other people.

If you’re willing, I feel there is a bias in your argument that I’d like to explore more with you.

You make the excellent point that plants are living organisms as well, but you also make the assumption that “it is much more humane to kill life forms without a brain.” You then go on to suggest that their sole purpose for existence is nothing more than reproduction.

I’d like to challenge both of those assertions. But before I continue, I want to make certain of my position as anecdotal, as I am not an expert in these matters.

It turns out that plants can see, smell, feel, and have a memory. And according to the scientist in the article, plants and humans also share DNA.

We’ve all heard the advice that we should talk to our plants, as they react more positively (grow) to the sound of our voices. We also know that plants play a vital role in our existence.

The most obvious is converting carbon dioxide into oxygen. They also provide shelter and protection for animals. They also help produce about 10% of the moisture in our atmosphere.

As for brains, no they do not have the same type of brain or nervous system that we as humans are accustomed to having. But that is not to say that plants are incapable of making decisions.

Take the Venus Flytrap as an example: it can detect when a bug has landed inside of its mouth, and after having another external stimuli triggered will it decide to trap that bug inside before it devours it for nutrients.

I could go on, such that plants do communicate with other (e.g., grass when cut, fungus creating underground networks to each other).

To be fair, as a real-life comparison, I wouldn’t be able to recognize most celebrities because they look so wildly different out of make-up. I suspect I have partial face blindness.