Beau Brummel’s influence is the reason, though he would have detested the uniformity of it all.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beau_Brummell

A good Behind the Bastards on him: https://open.spotify.com/episode/00n2CANk00e5P2L0H348h1?si=1VhgCCRnQQueiPBFSfjJLg

Shut the fuck up dumb Russian. Being discriminatory towards a single country is neither anti-slav, nor xenophobic, it’s just anti-Russian.

Go get blown up by a mine in kursk to build Putin another palace, you dumb fucking Russian.

Hurrr durrr people are discriminating against me just because I started the first land war in Europe for no reason.

Jesus Christ, it’s becoming increasingly obvious that Russia’s best minds have either left or been been shreded by FPV drones.

Nope. It’s a factual statement since Russia invaded Europe, raped and murdered its citizens en masse, and chose to remove itself from the world order, Europe, and being a nation deserving of anything other than disgust and distain.

Russians would “think” that all Slavs are Russian.

Posting messages that make progressive people apathetic about the state of the electoral system right before an election, is literally equivalent to actively campaigning for the less progressive option. It is straight up an anti-democratic tactic frequently used by Republicans to lower democratic voter turnout.

Dude I am European, and definitely not Republican,

Russia is not part of Europe, so if you’re actually from Europe, learn to stay in your lane and not try to influence a foreign election, if you are Russian, go fuck yourself and stop trying to influence a foreign election.

Shut the fuck up with this Republican trash.

I’ve never been in, nor contemplated the possible existence of, a situation where picking the less bad option was infinitely better than picking the most bad option.

Jesus Christ, grow the fuck up.

the law wont save you. laws will prevent no one from doing this, just like outlawing encryption couldn’t prevent decentralized encrypted messengers from being used.

An illegal actor could still comb the internet and create a private face recognition db, but they would be taking on risk, paying substantial infratstructure costs, would not be able to make it widely available for fear of being caught, and would have limited options for actually making any real money from it.

It would completely prevent say, your average stalker, or jilted ex, or non techy weirdo from.being able to access it, and it would prevent corporations from spending all their time building business around privacy invasion.

No, you can address this through laws and legislation. You literally just ban people from amassing personal information on other people like Europe is doing.

You quite frankly, don’t know what happened and if you’re confident it’s intentional, all that says is that you’re a grump who likes to complain.

Yeah, cause trivial systems are a lot easier to parse and review. At a base level that’s nonsense logic.

There was a previous article on this with more explanation that I’m struggling to find.

The gist was that they do hash all passwords stored, the problem was that there was a mistake made with the internal tool they use to do that hashing which led to the passwords inadvertently going into some log system.

The difference is that Uber’s model of using an app to show you the route, give driver feedback, be able to report problems and monitor and track the driver, etc. is actually a huge improvement to both rider safety and experience compared to calling a cab company and then waiting who knows how long for someone to show up and hopefully bring you where you want to go.

Not saying that their model of gig workers, or dodging up front training is good, but they legitimately offered up a fundamentally better taxi experience than anything that came before, which I think encouraged regulators to really drag their feet on looking into them.

“This isn’t a meeting about the budget per se”

“This isn’t exactly a meeting about the budget”

If you finish those sentences, it becomes clear why per se is used:

“This isn’t a meeting about the budget per se, it’s a meeting about how much of the budget is spent on bits of string”

“This isn’t exactly a meeting about the budget, it’s a meeting about how much of the budget is spent on bits of string”

In this situation, using per se provides a more natural sentence flow because it links the first part of the sentence with the second. It’s also shorter and fewer syllables.

“Steve’s quite erudite.”

“Steve’s quite intellectual.”

I think intellectual might be a closer synonym, but intellectual often has more know-it-all connotations than erudite which seems to often refer to a more pure and cerebral quality.

“Tom and Jerry is a fun cartoon because of the juxtaposition of the relationship between cat and mouse.”

“Tom and Jerry is a fun cartoon because of the side by side oppositeness of the relationship between cat and mouse that is displayed”

For those to say precisely the same thing it would have to be more like the above which doesn’t really roll off the tongue.

“I don’t understand, can you elucidate that?”

“I don’t understand, can you explain?”

Elucidate just means to make something clear in general, explaining something usually inherently implies a linguistic, verbal, explanation, unless otherwise stated.

Honestly, these all seem like very reasonable words to me for the most part. I can understand not using them in some contexts, but for the most part, words exist for a reason, to describe something slightly differently, and it takes forever to talk and communicate if we only limit ourselves to the most basic unnuanced terms.

When people use industry specific jargon and acronyms with someone not in their industry.

It is a very simple rule of writing and communication. You never just use an acronym out of nowhere, you write it out in full the first time and explain the acronym, and then after that you can use it.

Artificial diamonds can be made with a High Temperature, High Pressure (HTHP) process, or a …

Doctors, military folk, lawyers, and technical people of all variety are often awful at just throwing out an acronym or technical term that you literally have no way of knowing.

Usually though, I don’t think it’s a conscious effort to sound smart. Sometimes, it’s just people who are used to talking only with their coworkers / inner circle and just aren’t thinking about the fact that you don’t have the same context, sometimes it’s people who are feeling nervous / insecure and are subconsciously using fancy terms to sound like they fit in, and sometimes it’s people using specific terminology to hide the fact that they don’t actually understand the concepts well enough to break them down further.

For each of these, what would you use instead?

The stated reason being political disagreement.

That was your stated reason, not theirs. Please try and keep track of your own statements at least.