Skua @ Skua @kbin.earth

Posts

22

Comments

2,110

Joined

1 yr. ago

There was no distinction between V and U when W first started being used. They were considered the same letter, with V just being the style for writing it at the start of words (like that long S that looks like an f). So you would write "have" as haue and "upon" as vpon.

When it was representing a consonant in classical Latin, it sounded like a modern English W. So the famous veni vidi vici - I came, I saw, I conquered - was pronounced more like wenee weedee weekee.

Eventually the V sound started to emerge in some places where Latin and its descendants had used that W sound before, and people started treating the two forms as different letters. By this point the W was already in widespread use, though, so whatever people already called it had a good chance of sticking

"WE CAN'T PROVE THEY WEREN'T HUGE FATBIRDS"

The entire breakdown of my electricity bill in the UK is a rate for energy use, a standing charge that is independent of usage, and VAT. Strictly speaking I've got two different usage rates because my heating is on a separate meter, but that's an unusual situation

If anything on this Earth should look like a Jurassic Park dinosaur it's hippos

Hippos and rhinos get pretty big on that diet! If anything plants are a better diet for something really chunky because plants cannot run away

The post was clearly written sometime in the 14th century when the UU digraph had become widespread but the U-V distinction had not. No wonder it is so yellowed, I'd say it's actually in great condition for its age

Well Romania is only called Romania because Romans lived there. They still speak a Romance language today

So this is basically a 2balkan4you post is what I'm really saying

I don't think it matters too much because what the family looks like isn't important, but I agree that it seems intended to imply that that is a photo of the family

It is pretty funny that they chose the most stock-photo-looking stock photo ever taken though

I think it's just an issue with the cars not working on this track. The Monaco Formula E race a few weeks ago looked great

I used to live near an ice cream shop that switched over to doing doughnuts and cookies in the winter

That's fine, that just means the ethical question is now "is accessing it in one of those ways worth the consequences of doing so?" You might well say yes or, as others in these comments have, argue that the consequences are negligible. You might say no. It's still a relevant debate in the topic OP is asking about even if we completely accept your position about which ways of getting access are ethical

I think the question includes a discussion of whether or not that access is worth sending money to the author, right? Like, even if OP completely agrees with your position about the author deserving money for access and also wants access, they may want to both avoid sending money to the author and to avoid stealing it more. Of course you mentioned the possibility of finding it in a library and someone else in the thread suggested finding it second hand, which are probably both preferable solutions here if they are practical

I don't think people expect that you have to agree with everyone you give money to, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to try to avoid sending money to a Holocaust denier specifically for his Holocaust denial

Homebrewing places will sell you hops, that'd probably replicate the flavour without effects

It's actually ingenious, there's no space for the Porsches to spin all the way around like they usually do. It's basically a safety feature!

This is entirely beside the point of the actual article, but I'm kinda fascinated by that choice of photo. At least to me, the negative is barely legible; I can see all the features, but they barely come together as a coherent face in my mind. So I inverted it and suddenly it went from "I understand conceptually that there's a person there" to "hah this guy looks like he'd be either hilarious or completely insufferable"

Specifically not embedding the image so that everyone that wishes to can see the inverted one from the article first https://imgur.com/a/E2Vws3q

It would seem it to me, yeah. Enforcing stringent rules that are, as far as I can tell, completely unwritten is just manufacturing reasons to ban people. Between that, the bizarre Garfield comic edits, the fact that a solid half of the account's entire history is "thank you for creating [descriptor] content!", and the near-total refusal to actually talk to anyone, I have no fucking idea what's going on with that account

This mod does this kind of thing... a lot. Search for "qrstuv" and take a look at other mentions of them in this community

qrstuv does not appear to be a Zionist, though

cos that's a great name, next question