otter

Can you copy the seed and regenerate the world on a new save?

2

Why not wear it on the inside of your wrist?

Its easier and more discreet to check, you don't need a complicated new setup, and you won't have any issues working with your hands.

I know some people do this already, and flip it around depending on the setting. Inner wrist when walking around, and regular placement when working at a desk.

Unless I'm getting whooshed here

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

I have updated the title to the latest version in the link

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

@healthyfungi@lemmy.blueberryicetea.com has been banned from our instances

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

Those are some cool colors!

2

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

If anyone is actually worried about this

The conjunctiva is a thin membrane that covers the inside of the eyelids and the white part of the eye (sclera), making a continuous sealed area that nothing can escape from except the front.

Also the area behind/around the eye is cushioned by fat and muscle so there's no room for it. Your eyes don't bounce around for a reason.

When the eyelash randomly disappears, I assume your eyelids managed to sweep it into the middle and pick it up when they opened again. If you gently brush your eyelashes, the loose one might fall out. Unfortunately mine are a real pain to get out so they don't just disappear :')

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

That's such a cool photo

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

YouTube began as an angel-funded enterprise working from a makeshift office in a garage. In November 2005, venture firm Sequoia Capital invested an initial $3.5 million,[20] and Roelof Botha (a partner of the firm and former CFO of PayPal) joined the YouTube board of directors. In April 2006, Sequoia and Artis Capital Management invested an additional $8 million in the company, which had experienced significant growth in its first few months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_YouTube

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

Thanks, looks like the account has been banned

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

Oh that's a good point

Maybe it's a farm or greenhouse with plants in different stages of growth?

9

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

I appreciate whoever took the time to find enough berries and pre-berries, and then arranged them so nicely

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

Thank you for compiling the links :)

3

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

I can confirm that the following accounts are now banned from our instance. Some are also banned from their home instances:

1

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

These are neat! You could post this in !buycanadian@lemmy.ca and !imadethis@lemmy.zip

3

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

It's worth a read, but if you don't have time

What makes this revival uncomfortable is its timing. Phyllis could not respond. Her family, largely gone. There was no one left to correct the record or explain the circumstances. The image became a blank screen onto which modern viewers projected assumptions about drug use, morality, and personal failure.
Yet when her life is examined even briefly, those assumptions collapse. There is no evidence that she was a habitual drug user. No record of repeated arrests. No trail of chaos or criminality. Instead, there is a woman born into economic uncertainty, injured young, living through wartime upheaval, briefly targeted by an unjust legal system, and then settling into a quiet, unremarkable life.
The insult survives because it is easy. The truth requires effort.

The Reddit comment that circulates alongside Phyllis’s image captures something essential about her case. In 1944, freedom was conditional. It depended on fitting into social expectations, on being legible to authority, on not attracting the wrong kind of attention.
The same laws that ensnared Phyllis were used disproportionately against the poor, women, and people of colour. Their eventual repeal is often celebrated as progress, but repeal does not undo the damage done to those who lived under them.
Phyllis Stalnaker did not become a symbol in her lifetime. She did not campaign, protest, or write memoirs. Her story matters precisely because it is small. It reminds us how many lives were quietly constrained by laws that have since been forgotten, and how easily a single photograph can erase complexity.
Her revival online offers a choice. She can remain a joke, or she can be recognised as what she was: a woman shaped by her time, subjected to its injustices, and deserving of more than a label.

1

Otter @lemmy.ca 2mo ago

I think he still has majority voting power in Facebook