Tlaloc_Temporal

That scutoid (possibly all of them, I don’t know) is just a pentagonal prism with a corner cut off.

I think that’s part of the joke. Instead of the snappy punchline, there’s a long and tedious realistic answer that goen on long after the point has been made.

Not all apples, but many. Including Macintosh, which was found along a road and could never produce viable seeds. There were only three trees for like 30 years before people noticed that they tasted rather good. All Macintosh apples today are grafts of the one surviving tree.

Nope, all dirty fleshbag. I just like knowing things and hope others do too. :)

That old version “Gros Michel” is what artificial banana flavour is based on. Bananas used to taste like that. The newer “Cavendish” variety is firmer and lasts longer, but doesn’t have the same flavour. It seems like both are being wiped out by disease though, yay monoculture.

Cavendish seem to be especially vulnerable because they’re all clones. They don’t produce viable seeds, so they’re grafted to new plants.

It’s not that the program you’re running is malicious, but that it has an exploitable flaw. Because it’s a GUI app, a lot of things can touch it, which might be something malicious or something with another exploitable flaw.

There’s a flavor of bazzite made for developing now, Bazzite-dx

Don’t worry, it will grow bright enough to fry Earth in only 300 million!

Flamingoes dance in large groups: https://youtu.be/QLV_K7DVeyU

More like this situation, some male Manakin birds dance in pairs: https://youtu.be/GZ2ieF2Kuek

I’m not ok with calling him one of the good ones, but one of the somewhat decent ones seems about right.

Wow, Win98 logo and media buttons? Truely between eras.

I actually like the context key above the arrow keys, another method of effectively right-click is nice. Those Win keys are crazy though, that’s the perfect place for extra function keys. Imagine having f13 & f14 that you can bind to anything without worry!

Strangely enough, Bedrock is har to use on Linux. Java is so much better though.

It would be far better for certain organic compounds though. Increase the effectiveness of drugs, eliminate side-effects, drastically cheapen the production of many componds making new products feasible.

But yeah, already living things would probably die very quickly.

Carried itens put strain along the sholders and entire spine, and contribute to a high center of gravity. Waist mounted items (like this tail) put strain on only the hips and legs, and in the most stable way. I’d only be worried if there was a particular problem with hips or legs.

There was a lot of work done behind the scenes to make sure that all those systems still worked. Probably too much, but it did work.

So far, we haven’t seen a physical infinity in any part of the universe, so if our models produce a point of infinite anything, they’re probably wrong.

That definition means a planet has nothing to do with physical state, and everything to do with the proximity of your neighbors. We could promote the Moon to a planet by pushing it further away, or demote Earth from being a planet by slinging it a bit closer to it’s hungry uncle Jupiter. We could demote all planets by extinguishing the Sun! Then the entire system stops working and it’s all just asteroid or something.

That arbitrarily chosen definition doesn’t describe the object, only it’s place in the malleable hierarchy. With this, the title of planet tells us nothing about the object itself, except that it’s orbit is only dominated by a star.

Even worse, the IAU definition is extra arbitrary, as it only counts objects that orbit specifically the Sun, so the vast majority of bodies in hydrostatic equilibrium that don’t fuse hydrogen aren’t planets. They also play very lose with hydrostatic equilibrium, as Mercury isn’t in hydrostatic equilibrium, yet is explicitly classified as a planet. And “clearing it’s orbit” is also rather indistinct, with no method to determine this is given. It’s up to argument if Neptune is a planet, as many plutoids intersect it’s orbit.

Even more worse, the barycentre of our solar system is sometimes outside of the sun! That means sometimes the Sun is co-orbiting with the rest of the solar system bodies, and therefore by this definition nothing is a planet! It’s a definition so arbitrary that it periodically stops existing!

I’m not just saying I disagree with the IAU here, but that their definitely is objectively poor, and poorly used. I agree that Pluto, Eris, Ceres, and many others should be in a different category from Jupiter, but make some categories that make sense, please!

Sounds like a sweat lodge. I don’t know how hot they get those normally.

Pluto and Charon orbit each other. The barycentre (the center of mass they both orbit) is far outside of Pluto. The Earth-Moon barycentre is still inside Earth, though this could be changed by moving the Moon further out.

Either way, Earth, the largest rocky planet, could be made into a moon by sending it to Jupiter, so I don’t think being a moon should disqualify a celestial body from being a planet.

There’s also plenty of classifications of plants based on form! Non-vascular plants, woody plants, herbaceous plants, algae and lichen…

Most of our “rocky” planets are pretty wet though. Mars is drying out, but Venus is caked with volatile chemicals and Earth is downright infected. Only Mercury is really barren, partly due to it’s small size. I could easily see three categories for gravitationally rounded bodies that can’t fuse hydrogen: Dry planets (usully smaller), Wet planets (usually larger), and Gaseous planets (gas giants).