And it's not just pets either, wildlife also gets affected by firework

That's because when you just type "source?" and nothing else people perceive it as you challenging/denying the claim in a slightly hostile manner

Yeah it's, what, pretty much just a fancy looking wand that shoots a fancy looking projectile?

Edit: I was wrong. It was a bow

In my experience it typically is unsolicited advice. Like, you're explaining why you're having a tough time, and then they try to offer solutions, when you just wanted to explain why you're having a tough time without requesting them to help you with it, directly

Though of course, it depends on the context yeah. In one form of the situation you're right

Because it's regarding common "mainstream" solutions such as, for example, "have you tried exercising?", "have you tried going outside?", "have you tried keeping a todo-list?", etc. And not like, "have you tried this therapy session that I'm offering you for free?", or "have you tried this medication which I'm giving you access to yet?"

Because chances are, there are things that are yet to be done, but those are not things that the average person who is about to suggest something might be able to do

To some degree that's true. But these days the ground contains more dangerous objects than it used to. Specifically hazardous man-made stuff

If it was just nature and we still mostly had like forest floor and such, then probably for the most part it'd be safe yeah. Well, with the exception of plants or animals that could damage your feet or bite you

I mean, sure, but that's really easier said than done. Good luck getting good mental healthcare for cheap in the vast majority of places

I don't think it's a criticism? It's more about highlighting the slight absurdity of super-high tech power generation still using the same method that has been used since the very start of electricity generation. A turbine spun by evaporated water.

Except she still gets royalties and uses those to donate to political organizations, so you know

"why should disabled people have a life outside of work?"

I do listen to "both" sides! That's exactly why I'm a leftist!

I don't get why centrists think that you have to be "centrist" to listen to both sides, or why doing so makes you a centrist.

The thing with AI, is that it mostly only produces trash now.

But look back to 5 years ago, what were people saying about AI? Hell, many thought that the kind of art that AI can make today would be impossible for it to create! ..And then it suddenly did. We'll, it wasn't actually suddenly, and the people in the space probably saw it coming, but still.

The point is, we keep getting better at creating AIs that do stuff we thought were impossible a few years ago, stuff that we said would show true intelligence if an AI can do them. And yet, every time some new impressive AI gets developed, people say it sucks, is boring, is far from good enough, etc. While it slowly, every time, creeps on closer to us, replacing a few jobs here and there in the fringes. Sure, it's not true intelligence, and it still doesn't beat humans, but, it beats most, at demand, and what happens when inevitably better AIs get created?

Maybe we're in for another decades long AI winter.. or maybe we're not, and plenty more AI revolutions are just around the corner. I think AIs current capabilities are frighteningly good, and not something I expected to happen this soon. And the last decade or so has seen massive progress in this area, who's to say where the current path stops?