Go team grass! 😁
Ah, well, if he was wearing sneakers then the boots theory does not apply. I am not sure. You have many possible answers already… The actual answer might end up being quite simple though. He may have realized the grass was wet a second too late, and by that point chose to commit as he was wet already.
I walk a lot through grass and mud. Most of the times I am wearing water-repellent boots, but there have been times when I am wearing sneakers and I step into some wet mud or grass by habit and get them all wet. This person may be used to walking in grass/mud. Perhaps they work in the field, or enjoys hiking through wet grass and mud to find amphibians. So, that is one thing to consider: people experience different levels of discomfort when walking through mud.
You mention that he was wearing sneakers. Are you sure about that? Water-resistant boots make one extra comfortable about walking through wet terrain.
If the sidewalk was so broad that you could have two people side by side comfortably with extra space, then it is a bit weird but it could still be a habitual reaction to giving way to others.
Since I like walking on grass and I know that others might not, it is not uncommon for me to walk into grass to get out of the way. I also do this on the bike when the bike path is narrow because I am driving either a hybrid or an mountain e-bike and I know these handle the grass better than many other bikes.
Our relationship is built on tiny hills to die on. Of course, it is always playful 😜
She will use a common grammatical construction in Spanish (“a por”) that became technically correct in Spain (where she is from) long after the conquest. I am from Mexico, where that construction is not used (we don’t insert the “a” before “por”). So, when she uses “a por” I act like I don’t understand and argue that it is not in the spanish her ancestors taught mine.
I will know what they mean, but if I notice it is 12:01 I will absolutely take the opportunity to respond as if they meant 1 minute ago
The split between “Today” and “Tomorrow” is at midnight, not when one sleeps/wakes up.
This comes up often after midnight when my girlfriend asks me about “tomorrow”. Why discuss breakfast for tomorrow when we still haven’t had breakfast today??
I think the difference in time is too big. Also, in the talk page’s archive it is stated that the wikipedia was updated because of this meme, and not the other way around. This is from the talk page:
Looking through the archived history of the talk page, I can confirm that the claim on the wiki page is derived from the viral post, and not the other way around: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gulf_of_Mexico/Archive_3#Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl
How did I miss that?!
My timeline is incorrect then. Since the post from sassymetischick.bsky predates the wiki edit, it is more likely that the wiki edit was made in response to this meme, and not the other way around. This pretty invalidates what I said above…
I still can’t find any evidence of this being an actual trend, but I no longer have a good guess about the origin.
Cuando quieras! 😁
Yes, but that version is in German. That website also has one in English: https://annas-archive.org/slow_download/24154814bfe1e676d79509c3db1f74a4/0/0
Let’s see…
Woah, interesting. The author is José López Portillo. I thought he shared the name with a former Mexican president, but, nope, the author is a former Mexican president.
The title of the English version is a bit different, but the text appears to be the same. It is a novel, and I can find no mention of the gulf of Mexico or of Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl in this book. To me it looks like a mistake in the citation.
The claim appears to come from this text (citation 1): https://www.scribd.com/document/703207646/Dioses-prehispanicos-de-Mexico-mitos-y-deidades-del-panteon-Fernandez-Adela-1992-Mexico-D-F-Panorama-Editorial-9789683803061-cbee5
Unfortunately, that book does not contain references nor is it stated where this claim comes from.
EDIT: As indepndnt mentioned in a comment below, the OP was posted on February 14, which pre-dates the wikipedia edits. So, my conclusions below about the timeline are not valid.
Hah, sure, let’s investigate 🕵️♂️
The term ‘Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl’ was added as a potential Aztec name to the English wikipedia page on February 15, 2025, by user ‘Mxn’.
The description of the edit is the following:
Frum says the Aztecs had no specific name for the gulf, which is plausible in a practical sense, but Fernández gives a specific religious name and is more of a reliable source on this topic
If we investigate a bit further, we can see that the term Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl is described to be a name for the ‘Gulf of Mexico’ in the spanish Wikipedia: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl
This page was updated to include the description of Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl as the ‘Gulf of Mexico’ in September 16, 2018. I don’t have access to the citation so I don’t know if the citation specifies if this term is still known/used.
If you check the history you will find that the same ‘Mxn’ fixed a typo in this page on February 15, 2025.
So, from this sequence of events it is highly likely that the term ‘Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl’ was included into the Gulf of Mexico wiki page as a result of the user Mxn performing an active search for Aztec names for the Gulf of Mexico, and finding this connection between the term an the gulf by searching on Wikipedia. This information did not come from recent news about the term being used by natives.
I can find no evidence of native people referring to the gulf of Mexico as ‘Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl’ more frequently or at all. I can find no mention of this becoming viral in Mexico.
I find it highly unlikely that:
AND
More likely…
And this concludes my little investigation 🧐
These are being developed by a Dutch company: https://www.oneplanetresearch.com/innovation/ingestibles-for-gut-health/
Ooh, cool! 😁 That detector seems to be working only in “Geiger mode”, which means that it can count the number of X-rays/Gamma particles but it does not estimate their energy. So, the dedicated devices are still better in that they allow you to identify the source of the radiation by measuring the counts and the energy distribution simultaneously.
It probably would not be too difficult to build the open gamma detector into something like a pinephone. I don’t think that has been done yet.
My experience with phone zoom has been underwhelming so far, but I would like to check out the Samsung S2x’s 10x zoom when I have the chance!
Still, I really like using binoculars because they transport me next to what I am looking at and do so in very high definition. I do have >100€ binoculars though, colors look very nice through them. I think it will be difficult to replicate via a screen.
Yes. The camera pixels generate a current in response to light. You can add some filters to block certain wavelengths of light (like UV) from getting to the camera sensor, and tune the pixels so that they respond more to to specific colors. But X-rays and gamma rays can just pass through the filter. Often they will pass through sensor as well, but, in the cases that they do get absorbed by the sensor, they can also produce a current that to the camera’s readout electronics looks like other light would.
The gamma detectors I mentioned are very very sensitive. They respond to single X-ray/Gamma ray particles. These detectors can count how many individual particles collide with a small crystal cube every second. These crystals are special in that they produce a very tiny flash of light when an X-ray or gamma particle collides with them. As an added bonus, these sensors can directly measure the energy of the particles by measuring the strength of the flash, and from this information they can construct not only the total counts but also a spectrum. With this extreme sensitivity these detectors can measure small quantities of radiation that come from space, from rocks, and from other materials.
I looked for a video of a phone going through an X-ray machine, and found these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8iSoPhtY3s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1YaroH6lHA
The white specks that you can see near second 25 (first video) and second 34 (second video) could be a result of the X-rays. I am not sure, but it seems reasonable to me. On contrast, when I put my radiacode through the X-ray machine in the airport the radiacode reacts very strongly and becomes saturated.
Radiation detectors. Such as the Radiacode or the Open Gamma Detector.
Binoculars are quite portable, very useful, and phones don’t do a good job at zooming in like that.
Smart watches integrate with phones but the phones by themselves are not so good at measuring the heart rate and other parameters directly.
Mini projectors. UV flashlights. Tools in general… There is so much actually. What type of gadgets are you looking for?
Only those who complete life without believing in a God pass into the next stage of the simulation.
I have used XMPP for some time now and I tried Matrix for a bit, but have stuck with XMPP until now.
I found it practically very easy to set up a prosody XMPP server in a raspberry pi. In XMPP you have the core standard that is kept quite minimal and then you can extended your implementation using XMPP extension protocols (XEPs) in a highly modular fashion. This approach of building on top of a light core using well-documented extensions I like very much.
With Matrix, JSON is used instead of XML. I think that JSON is a nice format when trying to look under the hood at how the message data is structured. XML is a bit of a pain to look at in my opinion. And I think JSON might be more efficient in how it moves the data around. So, that is a big positive for me. But I Matrix appears to be more focused on being feature rich than on having a flexible modular structure. While it does have extensions, successful extensions do have a chance of being eventually integrated into the core protocol. This makes the core feel bloated to me, because I have very minimal requirements.
In terms of security, in XMPP you start with the core and then you select the type of encryption that you like (OpenPGP, OMEMO, etc). OMEMO encryption has plausible deniability built into its design, and for me, plausible deniability is a property that I consider important for messaging. The modular approach to XMPP also means that these are choices that one gets to make in an active manner, and the protocols are open protocols that come from outside of XMPP. With Matrix you get their encryption protocol as part of the core - it is a protocol that they designed and that you need to accept to use their tool with encryption. It is probably a good protocol, but I don’t think it has plausible deniability built in, and that’s a choice you did not get to make.
As for moderation, I don’t know. Do they mean moderation tools, or the actual absence of moderators and unmoderated communities? Because the latter is more a property of the people using the tool that the tool itself. You can have your own private communities.
If someone asks me, I could recommend Matrix but would rather recommend XMPP, depending on what they are looking for specifically.
Snowden’s Permanent Record book was a strong motivator for me.
Xni’pek
In the Netherlands I use adjuma pepper instead of habanero and mix sweet orange juice + lime as the sour orange replacement.