Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The WTF? Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guy Profumo
    replied
    RNLI volunteer charged over death of death of a grandfather who died after a boat capsized in a rescue operation


    https://metro.co.uk/2024/03/16/rnli-...scue-20476279/

    Leave a comment:


  • Janik
    replied
    One of those situations where a logical classification system based on particular features ends up placing some items into a different category to the lay understanding (tree = big plant, on3 that grow way taller than a human)

    See also
    Banana “trees” are herbs
    Tomatoes are fruit
    Birds are dinosaurs
    There are 8 planets in the solar system, or thousands, but definitely not 9.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam
    replied
    Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
    Is that tree in the front native to Wales?
    Originally posted by Nocturnal Submission View Post


    No, not at all, but palms and the like do grow in the UK so you see quite a few of them around.
    Fun fact I learnt yesterday as a result of a Twitter exchange about candidates for the title of tallest tree in the City of Buenos Aires: palm trees aren't trees. They're flowering shrubs. I know, right?!

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    Underpants Gnomes meet Generative AI Offshore

    I feel older then usual

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    This was quite a journey.

    I am so obsessed with trying to figure out who Deadspin’s new owners are that it led me to some late night spam-blog sleuthing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nocturnal Submission
    replied
    And St. John's Wood tube:


    Leave a comment:


  • Nocturnal Submission
    replied
    Torquay is particularly fond of them:


    Leave a comment:


  • Nocturnal Submission
    replied
    Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
    Is that tree in the front native to Wales?

    No, not at all, but palms and the like do grow in the UK so you see quite a few of them around.
    Last edited by Nocturnal Submission; 14-03-2024, 02:41.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Is that tree in the front native to Wales?

    Leave a comment:


  • Evariste Euler Gauss
    replied
    That bungalow is seriously disturbing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nocturnal Submission
    replied
    Originally posted by Balderdasha View Post

    Never mind the extension. The number of competing and conflicting floral patterns in that house make me want to claw my own eyes out.

    And image No. 7 on the particulars suggests that there might, just possibly, be an issue with damp in the property.

    I presume that the extension was built without planning permission!

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    I saw the graphitti highway about 30 years ago. But it’s all covered up now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Balderdasha
    replied
    Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
    Sorta like Centralia.
    Now that is AITIDKUT.

    "The Centralia mine fire is a coal-seam fire which has been burning in the labyrinth of abandoned coal mines underneath the borough of Centralia, Pennsylvania, United States, since at least May 27, 1962."

    I mean I knew theoretically that there were coal fires in some places just spewing out carbon dioxide. But I hadn't considered that there were fires that had been burning continuously for over 60 years. That's terrifying.

    Leave a comment:


  • Balderdasha
    replied
    Originally posted by Antepli Ejderha View Post
    Never mind the extension. The number of competing and conflicting floral patterns in that house make me want to claw my own eyes out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Balderdasha
    replied
    Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
    Jesus said that in Matthew and Luke.
    It is interpreted ethically and eschatologically, but like all of those parables, it refers to something that the audience would have understood. So even 2000 years ago, they knew that building a house on sand was stupid.
    This has just triggered a memory of endlessly singing "The wise man built his house upon a rock" at primary school.

    The foolish man built his house upon the sand indeed. The rain came down and the floods came up and the house came tumbling down. Falalalala-lalala-la.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    If they stop providing sewer, water, power and mail to those houses, they might leave.

    Leave a comment:


  • Antepli Ejderha
    replied
    https://twitter.com/glenglenglen/status/1767674835339997515?t=JT1S7uF0MpoGL-S5GMmlUw&s=19

    The extension. Wtf indeed?

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    True. A one-off "We'll buy your house for something close to market value, but it'll fall into the sea and you have to fuck off somewhere else, and that is that - no more offers after this one, and no more bail outs (or bale outs), anything that goes wrong, any time you flood, you're getting yourselves out of their and dealing with any mess" would be something I'd think was acceptable. I bet none of them would take it, thinking that the government was still going to rescue them next time. And they'd probably be right.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View Post
    You're probably right about Salisbury, although I'd not be 100% sure. Most of the homes on the coast look like they were built in the last 60 years or so. Still, I don't think the state should necessarily bail out people who have waterfront property, even if its owned generationally. Because once you start doing that you end up funding the rescue of all the fools who've been buying coastal property in Florida or South Carolina while ignoring geography and physics, expecting Big Government to save them while at the same time whining about Big Government.
    Bailing them out once and telling them they have to get out might be cheaper than endless temporary fixes funded by endless backroom political deals.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    I think it is “recognized” in a few other states, but maybe not “observed.”

    Leave a comment:


  • Exiled off Main Street
    replied
    Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post

    Not exactly.

    It's on Patriot's Day, which is a rare example of a state holiday, officially observed in Massachusetts and a few other states but not nationally. It honors the first battles of the American Revolution/War of Independence in Massachusetts.

    Patriot's Day was established in Massachusetts in 1894. The marathon has been run on that day, as part of the celebration, since 1897.

    People in Boston get shitfaced on any day off work.
    Although it is a State Holiday (in MA and Maine only) - only state run offices are closed. We all go to work as usual - public schools will be closed for spring break, not Universities. It's kinda of a fake holiday like Evacuation Day (Boston only)

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    You're probably right about Salisbury, although I'd not be 100% sure. Most of the homes on the coast look like they were built in the last 60 years or so. Still, I don't think the state should necessarily bail out people who have waterfront property, even if its owned generationally. Because once you start doing that you end up funding the rescue of all the fools who've been buying coastal property in Florida or South Carolina while ignoring geography and physics, expecting Big Government to save them while at the same time whining about Big Government.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View Post
    Or, at the very least, accept that when you buy coastfront property in a warming climate with more extreme weather events that you're playing roulette with the odds that your house will survive until you die.

    I think the fact that insurers won't insure and mortage companies won't give mortgages on waterfront properties is a bit of a giveaway that you're just hoping your house outlives you.
    In the case of the people in Salisbury, many of those houses have been owned by those families for many generations. These aren't all wealthy people who had other options for how to invest that money.

    Certainly, they were built long before anyone worried about climate change.

    It might be cheaper in the long run for the state to just buy them out and let nature take it's course. Sorta like Centralia.
    Last edited by Hot Pepsi; 13-03-2024, 17:18.

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    Or, at the very least, accept that when you buy coastfront property in a warming climate with more extreme weather events that you're playing roulette with the odds that your house will survive until you die.

    I think the fact that insurers won't insure and mortage companies won't give mortgages on waterfront properties is a bit of a giveaway that you're just hoping your house outlives you.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Jesus said that in Matthew and Luke.
    It is interpreted ethically and eschatologically, but like all of those parables, it refers to something that the audience would have understood. So even 2000 years ago, they knew that building a house on sand was stupid.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X