For me I have a brother, and the family resemblance for both of us to our father is pretty obvious.
I also have never detected any inconsistencies in anything my parents have told me about when I and my brother were little.

Put a rainbow flag in the room where she sleeps. 😋
Maybe a picture of Reagan with quotes of how Russia is the enemy, and tariffs are bad for everybody.

You suggest librera instead of librera???

Also linking a download link directly instead of the page that describes it is bad form.
Librera reader on F-Droid:
https://f-droid.org/packages/com.foobnix.pro.pdf.reader/

Women are as different as men are.
You may still meet someone who is right for you.
But you probably need to adjust your attitude.

(Translated)

The decision not to sell VLC represents an act of resistance against the increasing privatization of software. In an era when many free applications are monetized through advertising, subscriptions or data collection, VLC remains true to its original mission:

Cool 😎
And thanks. 👍 😀

Stupid article by people who can’t do percentages.
Downvoted for false info.

with unit pricing expected to range between $180 and $200. In contrast, Qualcomm’s latest premium SoC reportedly costs smartphone manufacturers as much as $280

How is 180 less than half of 280? The saving is “only” 36%.
What is actually the case is that the Qualcomm is 55% more expensive, which is a huge difference from the claim of the headline.
MediaTek being 55% cheaper would be: $280 -55% = $126.

That’s a weird thing to say, since top Mediatek for a couple of recent generations were actually more powerful than top Qualcomm, including on graphics.
Qualcomm typically has an edge on efficiency, but it’s only an edge, not like they are in different leagues, and MediaTek is absolutely a great option if you want a high end very powerful phone.
IMO it’s by far the best (only really good) place to save cost if you want to make a flagship killer, and at half the price it ought to be a no-brainer.

HOWEVER!
After actually reading the article:

with unit pricing expected to range between $180 and $200. In contrast, Qualcomm’s latest premium SoC reportedly costs smartphone manufacturers as much as $280

The 180-200 price is repeated in the table shown. <so how is 180 less than half of 280?
Seems to me more like a saving of 36%.

I 100% dress for others, I don’t really care about clothing, and I hate to buy new clothes. I only do it because I think I may be nearing some limit of what is considered decent to wear in the presence of other people, who 100% always are better dressed than me.

The other day I was at the supermarket, and had seen they had a special offer on “plaice” I think it’s called.
Well the special offer was sold out, and I asked an employee if they had anymore.
The employee was extremely nice, and asked how many I had planned to buy? And I said 2, then he took 2 bags that had 50% more content, and wrote the price of the special offer on them, and said I should just mention his name at the register.
I though Wow that stellar service, and it was only when I came home I realized I had some of my worst pants on that are so warn they had holes in them.
I have newer pants, but I don’t like them, because they have no sway and they are some sort of stretch material to be tight, and I absolutely hate that. And I also hate shopping for clothes.

Anyways because my clothes are (to put it mildly) sub par for normal people, I figured he probably thought I was some sort of destitute.

I am married, and our economy is absolutely fine, we own an almost paid out house, and we have a car that was bought cash without borrowing, and we have a good amount of money in the bank.

Anyways I don’t care, maybe because I don’t have to. I just want clothes that are comfortable.

There is no dietary requirement for exogenous glucose in our food.

This is true, we can make all the glucose we need without eating any sugar at all.

glucose is still quite bad

True.

Fructose is twice as sweet as Glucose, and while we do use Glucose for energy the same is not true for fructose, and fructose is way way more harmful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweetness

OK, that only confirms to me that he was in fact insane. There is no way we are supposed to eat only fruit, it simply doesn’t provide any real energy, but consumes as much to digest as it yields, meaning there is no way to survive on fruit alone.

So where’s does he claim to only eat fruit?
Are you confusing it with him recommending to use Apple? 😋 (/s)

Also the man was insane. If you based on false beliefs make decisions against professional advice, that are detrimental to your well being, and even put your life in danger, that is AFAIK a very key aspect of being insane.

That’s what Google did with Android:

Not really, the part Google makes money on is Google apps, and that’s all proprietary.
If you use AOSP without Google Apps, Google isn’t making any money on it. Just like they aren’t making money on f-droid.

And now they’re killing off AOSP

I rest my case.

Because Google is an evil empire that is governed by money, and opensource can’t be monetized for advertisements.

You made 2 false claims, and now you say you don’t actually know what you are talking about.
Yes, I kind of figured that out already.

If lembot_0004 is a bot, it is in fact a shitty bot as was commented, that gives clearly false information.
It was clearly an error in judgement by the moderator to remove the above post.
Please restore!

Fructose is the element in sugar (Sucrose) that actually taste sweet, it is also the part that is unhealthy. it acts somewhat like alcohol.
Giving similar problems and can also cause dependency.

If you want to know the basics about sugar I don’t think there is much better info than this out there, absolutely worth a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

Average disregarding race or culture, spanning thousands of years.

Your question seems mostly nonsensical, we are not “house trained”, and what do you mean by “rather than controlled”?
Is your question based on biblical or another form of faith?

But in short regarding our social behavior, the principle of it is not very different from social behaviors of other group animals like dogs or chimpanzees. We “behave” because we are social animals and it’s in our DNA to work for the benefit of the the group.
Obviously misbehavior is generally rooted in conflict of interests, which can naturally occur in all groups. They are absolutely not generally a result of mania. Psychological illness is not a very significant driver for what you seem to consider “primitive” or criminal behavior.

That still doesn’t mean 30 was the maximum possible age for humans 30,000 years ago.

Yes actually it does, above 30 would be an outlier.
Of course genetically they had about the same potential as modern people, but life was simply too harsh for people to survive above 30. The struggle to survive meant they were simply worn out at that point.
We see this even today in nomadic tribes in the rain forest of South America.