Yes, caused by a king tide, though in this case the tide is focused and accentuated by the geography of the Adriatic. This is common in restricted, narrow bodies of water

It is the aggressive megacolony of fungus embedding its mycelia in the base of the tree

They’re thinking quarterly. Improves OneDrive usage stats. They can also then coerce customers later by saying they’re running out of storage. I’m sure some users will pay, thinking they’re about to lose family photos and other important data

I set mine to auto-hide, expand on mouse over. I hope they do that as well!

Yeah, I have a userchrome css to get rid of it, but it’s definitely brittle over time

For me, Lemmy is not round or sharp.

It’s a joke to everyone but them

Ugh of course he did 🤢

PCR has been around since the 80s, though it has continued getting more efficient and cheaper

Yeah, I just made it with curry. Turned out really good! Had never cooked with a full chicken before

This is a good idea!

Yes, I worry we’re entering the exponential curve, with the new effort to put ten commandments in schools

Creeping theocracy

That is a vicious seed dispersal technique!

I’m no expert so I couldn’t say, but I think in some parts of NJ that would be considered fighting words

Everything about Jeju is just deeply fascinating. I hope to go there someday

If anyone knows how to code this together while allowing users to still set their own body text if they wish, hit me up!

The reddit had this policy to avoid editorialization, which I’ve carried over here, because we are here to appreciate the beauty of Wikipedia, which has its own carefully formulated policies on article titles. It is so rare that we can just open a link and can be confident it’s not click bait, and is exactly what it says on the tin. However, I will take a light hand on moderating this; I just know there’s no clear line of what is appropriate, and I think it’s better to let the wiki speak for itself. In this case I think all the points you brought up are mentioned in the article. Perhaps that can be the bar we set: no editorialization outside of the scope of the source article.

A classic list