Can somebody say something suggestive? I am closing some tabs and need to use a gif.
it's a hard job and we'll need to see if you're a good fit
That'll do, thanks Castle. Like, I feel like I "bought" this gif by opening the tab, and like... I didn't want to just throw it out but it was getting stale but god I just hate being wasteful. Thank you for helping me make banana bread out of my mushy gif.
You're a good dog, KP. You use every part of the gif.
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
I had the wonderful experience of getting sick in a cab in Paris after a long night out at the clubs.
I honestly thought the Cabbie was going to roll me for all my cash when we reached the Hostel, even though he didn't stop when I repeatedly asked him to (in French and English) and gave me paper towels when I first chunked. Dude was so mad.
Never doing that again.
You go in the cage, cage goes in the water, you go in the water. Shark's in the water, our shark.
0
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
Jesus Landshark, you're like that guy that always comes up in someone's conversation when they are try to one up people.
"Well, I knows this guy and he can fly a plane, and plays guitar, and writes songs, and is also an engineer and builds shit, and also a bullfighter, and star fleet captain, and the Prince of Spain."
I'm still better at Halo than he is.
for now oh god how high can he climb this is all i have
+1
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
I'm not sure how many people use Uber because it's cheaper than a cab, or how many people use Uber because it's more reliable.
Personally, I'm happy paying a little more for a taxi service that comes when I need it and isn't like playing idiot roulette.
100% the reliability
I have no idea how pricing compares to normal cabs, other than vague notions that sometimes vulnerable people are ripped off?
but I've called cabs perhaps 10 times in my life and had about a 10% success rate of them showing up. Last time we were at a party and 40 minutes after the cab was supposed to arrive someone pointed out that we could walk several blocks and through a park to get to a bar district where there would be cabs.
So yeah, disruption, regulation, I get it, but the cab industry won itself zero loyalty with consumers. Now that they have been vanquished, I'm comfortable criticizing Uber for its shitty employment practices.
someone needs to do the same for airlines, they suck too
propelr app, find me the nearest cropduster going from PDX to BOS
if wife would only let me renew my pilots license this could be totally sweet
all getting a 10 passenger plane for a family vacation and selling the other 5 spots for like $100 each
but she has this ridiculous fear of death so
Oooh. You had a private license? Jelly. I am on the fence about getting started this year. Wanted to get into it for ages.
yeah i spent all my part time job cash in high school getting one. thought maybe i wanted to do it for a career. ended up deciding nah but it sure was fun.
Right on. Yeah I looked into aviation college way back when but I'm glad I passed on that. Seems like a real rough industry. But man it would be fun to learn, and I could reasonably afford it now. Would love to eventually learn rotorcraft but I hear that's hard as fuck. My dad's cousin flies for a dropzone and once said it's like juggling while on a unicycle.
yeah just getting the private license is only 40-60 hours. i did it in like 55 but that was spread out over like 1.5 years cuz cash was limited. if you did like a crash course thing you could easily knock it out in 40 i think. rate for instruction was like $40/hr and plane time was $100/hr but that was ~15 years ago so prices are probably a bit higher.
that's $7700 if you spent 55 hours
yup
a bit less because you do some of the later stuff solo (i think you have to log 5 solo flights of at least 100 miles each way or something). the private pilots license allows you to take passengers but you can rent a plane and kill yourself without any training whatsoever.
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
In China, taxis like to ask you where you're going and give you the finger if they don't like the destination (even if its within their range of service). Taxis everywhere do this but I've never seen it on the scale of china.
One engineer showed me the ultimate power play. Cab driver asks where he's going. Instead of answering, he stalls a bit. (In Chinese) "Umm, oh I am... going... to... the..." this entire time he's getting into the front seat. I've now gotten into the back seat as well. Chinese engineer finishes sitting down and tells the driver where we're going. The driver starts to protest and tries to kick us out. Engineer reaches forward and pushes down the sign that says "for hire" on the dash. This starts the meter, complete with minimum 12 RMB fare.
At that point, the driver needs to pay 12 RMB out of his own pocket, get us to pay 12 RMB (not happening), drive us until the meter hits 12 RMB and kick us out (opportunity cost is already sunk, no point), or drive us to our destination.
It's beautiful and perfect. If I could do that to Boston cabs I would take them daily just to do it.
one time in china i rode in an illegal cab and it was awesome
the driver had on fingerless driving gloves and sunglasses at night and when we went around a corner his tires squealed so I said "tokyo drift!"
he must have understood what i was saying (maybe he knew the movie?) because he started driving faster and faster swerving in and out of traffic
i shit you not he did a handbrake turn at one point
if i hadn't been drinking chinese beers (1 liter for $1.50 US!) i probably would have feared for my safety
1 liter for $1.50 but only 3% ABV!
Also that is a very typical illegal chinese cab experience. Driver dressed like a badass, driving like an insane person. Cost 2-3x a normal cab. I'd take them all the time when I travel but they don't provide receipts.
look dongy, it is not my fault that the chinese take CON as a dump stat
on the other hand, when you have a bunch of liter beers it makes you look like you can really hold your liquor even though it's like drinking beer in utah or wherever
0
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
Likewise if I were ever bumped from a flight. The fact that it's legal to overbook and then kick people off flights randomly is crazy to me. What the hell am I buying, then?
Is it? I've never been bumped from an overbooked flight. I have been offered $$$ to willingly take the next flight, and they keep upping the $$$ until somebody takes it.
Well they are allowed to bump people who are flying on certain types of vouchers, usually employee vouchers where it's airline staff flying for basically free getting bumped. They are never angry about it, it's part of the deal.
Then after that they start offering people free flights and shit. Typically someone young, traveling alone will jump at a free first class upgrade on a later flight.
I go with agnosticism. It's like atheism but with zero effort it's great.
You prefer the only position that pretends like it's a thing but isn't?
*in janis joplin's voice*
agnosticism's just fancy word
for i ain't got a clue
it's "i'm an athiest all but one time, because that time is the one that is dominant in my current culture"
The universe is a book written in a strange language.
Each religion is some stab at gleaning meaning out of the text.
Atheism is saying the letters are just arranged that way by chance (or some mechanical rule that reduces to chance).
Agnosticism is admitting you have no goddamn idea what the book says.
this... just no
I know that some vocal chatters have inane opinions on atheism (or rather, atheists) but just no.
If you insist on being so reductive as to making Twitter-sized nuggets of non-wisdom then I'd say:
Atheism is a null hypothesis. It doesn't make any claims to randomness. It doesn't make a positive statement of how the universe works. It is stating that the concept of a divine entity as implemented by human religions requires indulging in baseless assertions. It is a refusal to make the absurd leap from Not Knowing to A God(s) Did It.
Agnosticism is admitting you are either ignorant (willfully, as in "I don't care", or not) or are an atheist who is afraid of the social consequences of admitting it.
I really don't get why you insist that any human religion has some validity. This "everyone has a piece of the truth" kind of idea. Why? It is overwhelmingly more probable that noone does.
I'm not going to squabble over the meaning of the terms because both your definitions and mine are employed equally often and the difference between which of them you choose to use is fundamentally a political statement. Atheism can be and is used both as a negative statement about non-belief in the existence of god and a positive statement about the belief in the non-existence of god. Regardless of which meaning of atheism you actually personally subscribe to, if you use the self-descriptive term atheist it is generally because you believe that other people should not believe in any god (even if you are tolerant of their right to do so). Even given I believe that people should radically change their concept of what god is, I do not believe they should disbelieve in god, and so I do not identify myself as an atheist.
And yes, I do believe that everyone has a piece of the truth, because necessarily they do. Each individual has their unique personal experience, and while the conclusions they draw from their personal experience are almost always false in some way because we each view the universe through our own narrow lense, the experience itself is valid: you cannot deny that this is what they experienced, you can only deny the reasons used to justify why they experienced it (or call them liars, but even then you must fit the fact that they made the claim of that experience into your picture of reality). In absolutely everything that is experienced there is some reflection of the truth, even if that truth is incredibly indirect or heavily buried.
Someone seeing a ghost may not say something true about ghosts, but it at least certainly says something true about brain function, or psychology, or sociology, or any manner of possible statements about the true nature of our reality, and it's only by drawing together the disparate accounts of people who've experienced such phenomenon with the knowledge we've gained from empirical science that we can begin to suss out the actual meaning behind what they saw. To simply say "ghosts do not exist" is an incredibly incomplete picture of the truth, and rightfully any assertion of the type must be paired with a positive assertion like "ghosts are an illusion" or else it conflicts with the evidence, because undeniably it is true that people think they have seen ghosts.
One cannot hope to hold a consistent view of the universe in which they disbelieve in god without also making a positive statement explaining why people claim to experience god nonetheless, and this is where my problem lies; under scrutiny all of our existing theories explaining the "god delusion" are far too ridiculously simple to explain the evidence, because the evidence is a massive proportion of all human endeavors throughout our entire history and the deeper I explore the various concepts of gods that people have experienced, the bigger and more complex the "god delusion" has to get. Spiritual experience is about something; it happens because of something fundamental to our minds and their relationship with the world around it, and the deeper I delve towards that explanation, that positive assertion that replaces god, the deeper I go down the rabbit hole because it becomes immediately apparent that this illusion of god is an incredibly, incredibly big thing.
It's easy to replace "wrathful man in the sky" with "silly misattribution of intentionality", but a true explanation of each varied account of various individuals' experiences with god(s) across every culture and time period in history is not easily done without just blindly dismissing truly vast quantities of evidence, all the artifacts of humanity and its endless fascination with god. That feeling of absolute beauty, of witnessing something truly profound, that drive to understand the world not merely in terms of what will further our genetic legacy, that insatiable hunger for meaning and the unbearable emptiness of its absence, and our psychological need to express these things to one another: we can easily explain all of these things as merely physical functions of our brain, but we cannot yet truly explain why they are there, and the more I examine the explanations we have the more shallow and puerile our current explanations appear. Is all art simply the useless byproduct of a chance confluence of machinery selected for human survival that has somehow not just persisted but positively flourished over the course of our history? Is culture just utterly inundated with useless detritus, or is there actually a valuable interplay between all of our complex beliefs that is more complicated than we've yet to truly understand? Why are gods such an incredibly successful belief, arising so massively many times over human history and in so many varied but overlapping forms? Wasn't it religious sentiment and our search for the true face of god that gave us science to begin with?
It used to be believed that stars were small points of light affixed to rotating heavenly spheres made of quintessence. This was incredibly false. Nonetheless, the stars do most certainly exist. Now, one could propose that the stars are simply a trick of the eyes; there are any number of informal theories you could throw out there that might explain how the stars are all just a shared illusion. I mean after all, the constellations are different in different parts of the world, various stars have different names in different cultures, people in places with lots of ambient light can hardly see them at all, and hell, it's unlikely but some people might never look up and see the night sky in their entire lives. And when it comes down to it, when unexamined the stars just aren't practically important to us in our day-to-day lives; if you didn't realize you could use them to navigate, you'd probably never have a reason to look at or think about them at all except to stare up at them and regard their incredible beauty. When we examine the stars closely, however, with rigor, with the comparison of various accounts of the stars from different places and at different times, a clear pattern in their true nature emerges. And if we suppose that they might be real; real objects that maybe approximate our immediate reality in some ways, maybe not in others, we can begin to apply patterns that we find in nature to explore that notion. What we've found, over the centuries, was that not only were these stars real, they were vastly more awe-inspiring than we ever could have imagined; spheres of burning hot plasma sometimes over a billion times the size our entire world, separated by distances the human mind can hardly comprehend, and there are over a billion trillion of them in just our observable universe. The idea that stars are small points of light affixed to a rotating sphere seems incredibly stupid now; an explanation for phenomenon we experienced that was severely limited by the imagination that direct experience and culture had supplied us with up to that point. But the stars were there. We just didn't know what they really were yet.
So, yes, I think god is real.
+3
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
sounds fun i bet some of them are terrific in the sack
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
That seems like it would be hella hard to organize.
"Yeah guys. Im totally with yall. Workers of the world unite!"
*opens uber*
*basks in the delicious surge fares*
So apparently people think that the finebros are going to say it was all a prank to try and back peddle on this thing and do a meta "people react to our REACT announcement" meta react video as if it was part of the plan all along.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
if life experience has taught me anything you want NO PART of this
+2
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
if life experience has taught me anything you want NO PART of this
I THOUGHT OUR TIME WAS MAGICAL!
*runs away sobbing*
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
sounds fun i bet some of them are terrific in the sack
it's weird this place does 23-37 and 32-49
there's an overlap!
i guess a woman over 32 would probably do the older one but a guy would do the younger one cause sexism???
0
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
if life experience has taught me anything you want NO PART of this
are you speaking with my experience or your own
if i went through with it, i'd basically be the guy from the show Review (which is an awesome show)
So apparently people think that the finebros are going to say it was all a prank to try and back peddle on this thing and do a meta "people react to our REACT announcement" meta react video as if it was part of the plan all along.
Oh I hope. That'd be so much fun to watch burn to the ground.
+2
Options
firewaterwordSatchitanandaPais Vasco to San FranciscoRegistered Userregular
ya rotorcraft is wayyyyyy harder. but looks fun as hell.
I've been helicoptered around a bit in NZ and those pilots are some of the most solid people I've ever met. Just 100% no bullshit ability. Especially around the southern alps. Took this photo of our pilot dropping off our rafting gear - dude was a monster. Just swung in at speed, dropped the payload, and tore off in one smooth shot.
firewaterword on
Lokah Samastah Sukhino Bhavantu
+2
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
one time in oklahoma city of all places i took a cab where i legitimately feared for my life
this dude that was driving me had some kind of cellular internet connection (this was in like 2007 or so, so that shit was even more 'spensive than it is now) and was watching youtube videos on his laptop next to him
while he drove
For some reason, those little cities in the middle of the country get every tech thing first. Google or verizon or whoever slips the city council a hundo and all of the sudden they're the nation's first pilot program for wireless viagra.
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
+3
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
sounds fun i bet some of them are terrific in the sack
it's weird this place does 23-37 and 32-49
there's an overlap!
i guess a woman over 32 would probably do the older one but a guy would do the younger one cause sexism???
some guys in their late 30s refuse to date older women. it's a thing.
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
if life experience has taught me anything you want NO PART of this
are you speaking with my experience or your own
if i went through with it, i'd basically be the guy from the show Review (which is an awesome show)
That show does not get enough love. TY for lovin
+2
Options
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
helicopters are terrifying. Like...the way they operate in general just seems like a terrible idea
I will never forget the Turkish uber driver at PAX last year.
One of my favorites here in DC was a young Afghani who use to translate for the US military there. Cool dude. Even if translating paid him better money he was sick of the danger so he was driving uber for a bit.
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
sounds fun i bet some of them are terrific in the sack
it's weird this place does 23-37 and 32-49
there's an overlap!
i guess a woman over 32 would probably do the older one but a guy would do the younger one cause sexism???
Or just anyone can pick the one that best suits them?
One time I did see an airline (Southwest) give a dude a first class upgrade, *and* a voucher for a free flight at a future date, but that was because everything was full that day and he was volunteering to delay his travel a full day.
Which is kind of a big deal so yeah they deserve to eat it on that for being that severely overbooked.
haha, i just got an email about a speed dating (i went one time so they spam me) for a 32-49 PRE VALENTINES day one. the cougars would dine on tasty manflesh.
if life experience has taught me anything you want NO PART of this
are you speaking with my experience or your own
if i went through with it, i'd basically be the guy from the show Review (which is an awesome show)
That show does not get enough love. TY for lovin
that it circles back around to the eating a billion pancakes in the end of season 1 is
so perfect
the show cannot be described accurately. it just... isn't what you expect. but it is maybe necessary to understanding the human condition or afterlife.
Posts
You're a good dog, KP. You use every part of the gif.
I honestly thought the Cabbie was going to roll me for all my cash when we reached the Hostel, even though he didn't stop when I repeatedly asked him to (in French and English) and gave me paper towels when I first chunked. Dude was so mad.
Never doing that again.
I'm still better at Halo than he is.
for now oh god how high can he climb this is all i have
yup
a bit less because you do some of the later stuff solo (i think you have to log 5 solo flights of at least 100 miles each way or something). the private pilots license allows you to take passengers but you can rent a plane and kill yourself without any training whatsoever.
look dongy, it is not my fault that the chinese take CON as a dump stat
on the other hand, when you have a bunch of liter beers it makes you look like you can really hold your liquor even though it's like drinking beer in utah or wherever
Well they are allowed to bump people who are flying on certain types of vouchers, usually employee vouchers where it's airline staff flying for basically free getting bumped. They are never angry about it, it's part of the deal.
Then after that they start offering people free flights and shit. Typically someone young, traveling alone will jump at a free first class upgrade on a later flight.
@RiemannLives
I'm not going to squabble over the meaning of the terms because both your definitions and mine are employed equally often and the difference between which of them you choose to use is fundamentally a political statement. Atheism can be and is used both as a negative statement about non-belief in the existence of god and a positive statement about the belief in the non-existence of god. Regardless of which meaning of atheism you actually personally subscribe to, if you use the self-descriptive term atheist it is generally because you believe that other people should not believe in any god (even if you are tolerant of their right to do so). Even given I believe that people should radically change their concept of what god is, I do not believe they should disbelieve in god, and so I do not identify myself as an atheist.
And yes, I do believe that everyone has a piece of the truth, because necessarily they do. Each individual has their unique personal experience, and while the conclusions they draw from their personal experience are almost always false in some way because we each view the universe through our own narrow lense, the experience itself is valid: you cannot deny that this is what they experienced, you can only deny the reasons used to justify why they experienced it (or call them liars, but even then you must fit the fact that they made the claim of that experience into your picture of reality). In absolutely everything that is experienced there is some reflection of the truth, even if that truth is incredibly indirect or heavily buried.
Someone seeing a ghost may not say something true about ghosts, but it at least certainly says something true about brain function, or psychology, or sociology, or any manner of possible statements about the true nature of our reality, and it's only by drawing together the disparate accounts of people who've experienced such phenomenon with the knowledge we've gained from empirical science that we can begin to suss out the actual meaning behind what they saw. To simply say "ghosts do not exist" is an incredibly incomplete picture of the truth, and rightfully any assertion of the type must be paired with a positive assertion like "ghosts are an illusion" or else it conflicts with the evidence, because undeniably it is true that people think they have seen ghosts.
One cannot hope to hold a consistent view of the universe in which they disbelieve in god without also making a positive statement explaining why people claim to experience god nonetheless, and this is where my problem lies; under scrutiny all of our existing theories explaining the "god delusion" are far too ridiculously simple to explain the evidence, because the evidence is a massive proportion of all human endeavors throughout our entire history and the deeper I explore the various concepts of gods that people have experienced, the bigger and more complex the "god delusion" has to get. Spiritual experience is about something; it happens because of something fundamental to our minds and their relationship with the world around it, and the deeper I delve towards that explanation, that positive assertion that replaces god, the deeper I go down the rabbit hole because it becomes immediately apparent that this illusion of god is an incredibly, incredibly big thing.
It's easy to replace "wrathful man in the sky" with "silly misattribution of intentionality", but a true explanation of each varied account of various individuals' experiences with god(s) across every culture and time period in history is not easily done without just blindly dismissing truly vast quantities of evidence, all the artifacts of humanity and its endless fascination with god. That feeling of absolute beauty, of witnessing something truly profound, that drive to understand the world not merely in terms of what will further our genetic legacy, that insatiable hunger for meaning and the unbearable emptiness of its absence, and our psychological need to express these things to one another: we can easily explain all of these things as merely physical functions of our brain, but we cannot yet truly explain why they are there, and the more I examine the explanations we have the more shallow and puerile our current explanations appear. Is all art simply the useless byproduct of a chance confluence of machinery selected for human survival that has somehow not just persisted but positively flourished over the course of our history? Is culture just utterly inundated with useless detritus, or is there actually a valuable interplay between all of our complex beliefs that is more complicated than we've yet to truly understand? Why are gods such an incredibly successful belief, arising so massively many times over human history and in so many varied but overlapping forms? Wasn't it religious sentiment and our search for the true face of god that gave us science to begin with?
It used to be believed that stars were small points of light affixed to rotating heavenly spheres made of quintessence. This was incredibly false. Nonetheless, the stars do most certainly exist. Now, one could propose that the stars are simply a trick of the eyes; there are any number of informal theories you could throw out there that might explain how the stars are all just a shared illusion. I mean after all, the constellations are different in different parts of the world, various stars have different names in different cultures, people in places with lots of ambient light can hardly see them at all, and hell, it's unlikely but some people might never look up and see the night sky in their entire lives. And when it comes down to it, when unexamined the stars just aren't practically important to us in our day-to-day lives; if you didn't realize you could use them to navigate, you'd probably never have a reason to look at or think about them at all except to stare up at them and regard their incredible beauty. When we examine the stars closely, however, with rigor, with the comparison of various accounts of the stars from different places and at different times, a clear pattern in their true nature emerges. And if we suppose that they might be real; real objects that maybe approximate our immediate reality in some ways, maybe not in others, we can begin to apply patterns that we find in nature to explore that notion. What we've found, over the centuries, was that not only were these stars real, they were vastly more awe-inspiring than we ever could have imagined; spheres of burning hot plasma sometimes over a billion times the size our entire world, separated by distances the human mind can hardly comprehend, and there are over a billion trillion of them in just our observable universe. The idea that stars are small points of light affixed to a rotating sphere seems incredibly stupid now; an explanation for phenomenon we experienced that was severely limited by the imagination that direct experience and culture had supplied us with up to that point. But the stars were there. We just didn't know what they really were yet.
So, yes, I think god is real.
sounds fun i bet some of them are terrific in the sack
They just need ways to "deal" with scabs.
if life experience has taught me anything you want NO PART of this
Thanks! I think so, as long as she can forgive my rambling and the weird shit I say or believe
It's ok, I'm not with the press or police.
I THOUGHT OUR TIME WAS MAGICAL!
*runs away sobbing*
*laments genetically *
it's weird this place does 23-37 and 32-49
there's an overlap!
i guess a woman over 32 would probably do the older one but a guy would do the younger one cause sexism???
well i haven't run into any challengers in a while
most of them can't even talk tho so it's p easy
Open the stall.
Someone had pissed on .. everything
walls floors, toilet,
everywhere
So I ran up 3 flights up stairs to the "no students" restroom
are you speaking with my experience or your own
if i went through with it, i'd basically be the guy from the show Review (which is an awesome show)
Oh I hope. That'd be so much fun to watch burn to the ground.
I've been helicoptered around a bit in NZ and those pilots are some of the most solid people I've ever met. Just 100% no bullshit ability. Especially around the southern alps. Took this photo of our pilot dropping off our rafting gear - dude was a monster. Just swung in at speed, dropped the payload, and tore off in one smooth shot.
goddam i already gave this an awesome but this post deserves further recognition A++++
For some reason, those little cities in the middle of the country get every tech thing first. Google or verizon or whoever slips the city council a hundo and all of the sudden they're the nation's first pilot program for wireless viagra.
some guys in their late 30s refuse to date older women. it's a thing.
ilu.
That show does not get enough love. TY for lovin
One of my favorites here in DC was a young Afghani who use to translate for the US military there. Cool dude. Even if translating paid him better money he was sick of the danger so he was driving uber for a bit.
Or just anyone can pick the one that best suits them?
Which is kind of a big deal so yeah they deserve to eat it on that for being that severely overbooked.
Oh uh I thought I sent you a PM saying I didn't go?
that it circles back around to the eating a billion pancakes in the end of season 1 is
so perfect
the show cannot be described accurately. it just... isn't what you expect. but it is maybe necessary to understanding the human condition or afterlife.
They are right up there with small planes on my "lol, no, I'll drive kkthx" list.
I remember on trutv or something seeing a helicopter that stayed in one place for too long and just fell out of the sky
the guy said it chopped through all the air???????
I never really found a way that it made sense for me but I watched it and everything on tv is true so
nope, you bum