GOTE was right there.

Looks like algae to me. You could try an algaecide, which you can pick up at any aquarium supply store, but that may just turn it brown. Chances are you're eventually going to need to scrub that off the acrylic.

You deserve a standing ovation.

Something is seriously wrong when the primary focus of running a business is to make money.

/s

As someone who drives across Texas on a regular basis, I assure you I've seen much worse than this on some of those rural backroads.

That doesn't mean it's not fake, but it wouldn't be unusual if it's not.

I loved the crap out of that game back in the day despite the really god-awful voice acting. Apologies to whichever devs they picked from the coding pool to do that part, but I hope you kept your day jobs.

Now do that, but just include search.

I'm not a fan of either company, but they're not even in the same league there.

From where I'm sitting, this is a really weird take. I get that it's upsetting to see the culture of an online space destroyed; that's the reason I rarely visit Twitter any more. It is, indeed, a festering shithole these days.

The idea that regulation would somehow have prevented that, though, is dubious. It's just as likely that regulation would have prevented the culture the writer enjoyed from ever appearing in the first place.

The problem here isn't a lack of regulations; it's a simple matter of one guy being in charge of a popular platform and enacting his own agenda on it (in addition to that one guy having a cult following that includes a disproportionate number of toxic assholes). It's unfortunate that Musk's priority with Twitter seems to mainly be to piss off as many people as possible for clicks (a tactic familiar to anyone who's followed other media for any length time), but how could you possibly regulate that in a way that wouldn't stifle innovation elsewhere?

I just don't see how any attempt to use regulations to enforce user behavior at a government would be anything but a dismal failure. It'd be subject to the priorities of whoever's in charge at the time, and it seems to me that this is one of those cases (and as a flaming liberal it pains me to say this out loud) where free market forces would do far good more in the long term than any legislation would. If Twitter continues to be a shithole, people will continue to create alternatives, and users will continue to flee.

This all just sounds like it's treating Twitter as a platform that's too big to fail, so it must be "fixed" rather than to let it go the way of countless social media media platforms before it for which there were better alternatives. We don't need to force Twitter to be better; we just need to let someone else do it.

#2, right behind egotistical billionaires.

You kind of beat me to it. I went to the theater to see this when it came out, as did a whole lot of other people I knew. $19.3M wasn't the same thing in 1983 as it is now, and while it wasn't a huge blockbuster or anything, I'd hardly say it was "overlooked." A lot of movies you've probably seen from 1983 didn't do that well.

Saw these guys in Gospel at Colonus in 1985 and it was pretty amazing.

Did some googling because I wasn't sure of the date, and was surprised to see Morgan Freeman played the narrator. It's strange to think there was a time I would have seen Morgan Freeman and not remembered it for the rest of my life.

As someone who read all the Oz books as a kid (but hasn't seen Return to Oz), what you're describing sounds... well, a lot more like the illustrations from the books than what was in the MGM movie.

My guess would be that Return to Oz is simply an adaptation of another of the Oz books, and not a sequel to the movie we're familiar with.

"Coffee-like" is an extremely kind description of what dandelion tea actually tastes like.

This goes wrong almost as often as it goes right. Tom Hanks in Elvis is a prime recent example of why this isn't always a good idea (though his performance in that was about as good as his makeup). It can be very distracting, and in a lot of cases hinders the performance more than it helps.

Could not disagree more. What people remember might be the exorcism, but the heart of the movie is a priest and his struggles with his faith, not the ceremony.

I think the important question is who is drinking the beer.

How cute must those little beer goggles be?

As far as song about dead dogs go, I'd say it's probably one of the best.

That's the B-Side, actually (Side B, "Put the Bone In," is actually about a dead dog, and not the audio porn you might assume from the title).