Let us not forget the revolutionary idea to-- now pay attention cause this is BIG-- to prioritize player experience! Can’t believe nobody has thought of that before.
Let us not forget the revolutionary idea to-- now pay attention cause this is BIG-- to prioritize player experience! Can’t believe nobody has thought of that before.
Tbf, I don’t think wagon trains typically dealt with RPG-toting wolves.
We need an offensive conservatism, not merely one that tries to prevent the left from doing things we don’t like.
Doing a great job at the offensive part, fellas 👌
Ah okay, lol. Sounds like you’ve got it under control.
Oh, no, I mean I have an account, but I never (…exceedingly rarely) go on Facebook itself. messenger.com is just the messenger with no feed or other features, and there’s a standalone mobile app called Messenger as well, same idea. I use those when I need to interact with someone over Facebook so that I’m not exposed to most of the crap.
I don’t know anything about using it totally without any account.
You know, you can just use Messenger on its own, on desktop web or mobile. I also need to use Messenger in some limited capacity and I have no idea what my feed looks like :)
Can someone OOTL this for me? What’s going on in Texas?
Yeah, I’m wondering about how they characterize “bot activity.” It seems like “any traffic not proximally related to a user’s synchronous activity” is a little too broad.
I’m not sure if fediverse syncing is bot activity. Or my laptop checking for software updates while I’m sleeping. Or my autopay transactions for utility bills.
Oh, mine live either in my pocket or on my desk in most cases, so it’s usually pretty quick. You can also start the call without them and then switch to them after a minute or two once you’ve performed the necessary extraction procedure.
Oh, that’s too bad. There are band-style or hook-style versions that could maybe help with that, but yeah most of them are buds.
One thing I’ll say is that when I used to wear wired buds, they would fall out all the time and I thought I just had weird-shaped ears or something… But when I got into wireless buds, I tried out a bunch of styles and found that without the cord, they stay in way more reliably. Wired ones would fall out when I turn my head or just walk 10 steps, but with wireless ones, I can shake my head or run or anything, and they stay in. I guess the weight/movement of the cord makes a big difference, at least for me.
Lol I’ve experienced that too, especially if they can’t see my ears.
I just pop em in then answer. Or answer then pop em in.
Have you considered Bluetooth (or wired) earbuds? I can’t stand phone calls without them. Speakerphone makes me self-conscious in public and I can’t help but get shouty, and I have the same problem as you do with face-smush mode. But my Bluetooth earbuds are exactly how I want my phone call experience to be.
That’s… gotta have at least one mistake in it, right?
Lol dammit, I knew that asking about a term that I hadn’t heard before would out me as completely illiterate. Caught me 😏
Anyway I dug a little more and made an edit above, if you’re interested.
I did not know that. I believe you, but that seems like a pretty strange word to use. I couldn’t find any references to it online, either… I wonder if it’s colloquial.
EDIT: I did manage to find some references to the phrase with a little more digging. I wasn’t getting far with “anger” or “in anger,” but the phrase “fire in anger” started leading to some interesting results.
Dictionaries - MW and Dictionary.com don’t contain the phrase “fire in anger” or “in anger,” and their entries for “anger” don’t support this usage. Oxford has an entry for “in anger,” which just means “when angry.”
Cambridge Dictionary’s entry for “anger” doesn’t support this use either, but it does contain the phrase “in anger” per se, which notes that the phrase is a) primarily in UK English, and b) is considered an idiom… i.e. not an ordinary use of the word “anger.” Interestingly, it doesn’t mention the military context, and uses examples (mostly) unrelated to warfighting.
Wiktionary contains “fire in anger” (but not “in anger”). It’s described as a military idiom consistent with the usage in OP’s article. It doesn’t suggest usage outside of that context.
Etymology - I can’t find any compelling etymology of “fire in anger” or Cambridge’s idiomatic sense of “in anger,” and the etymology of the word “anger” itself (“grief, sorrow,” cognate with words in other languages for “regret”) doesn’t really help. I have my guesses, but who knows?
Conclusion - It seems to be chiefly British, largely but not exclusively used in a military context, and it’s not so ubiquitous as to be represented in most dictionaries. Definitely exists as a phrase though, and perhaps in some circles, it’s very common. TIL.
“In anger?”
There are lots of reasons to want fewer spam bots and verified identities other than cost.
Look, they only had $70m to work with, okay? You gotta make some compromises when you’re on such a shoestring budget.