I think it's that people like certain levels of specificness. Like, bread, pizza, and broccoli are all foods, but if you said "I had a food for lunch" that'd sound weird.

It's not necessarily that cake isn't a type of bread or that the two aren't closely related. It's that we have a super-common and more specific word for it (cake) so it sounds awkward when you use a different word that might be technically accurate, but is a weird choice in practice.

Same for a lot of things. A hot dog and a sub are technically the same thing. But if a waiter dropped off your hot dog and said "here's your pork sub", you'd probably look at them funny.

So... At what point do gamers start sending a message. "Microsoft: why are players cancelling their game pass subscriptions?"

Or does the smackdown happen from the creator side "Microsoft: why doesn't anybody want to make games on our platform anymore?"

They wouldn't pull this kind of shit if there were monetary repercussions. So, why do these bullshit strategies work?

"sick-puppet-ish". Haven't heard that one before. Checked urban dictionary but... I'm guessing that's not what you were going for?

What's up with the acorns? Saw another meme of "Taylor Swift ending some cop's career" by dropping an acorn from a plane.

Googled a bunch but found nothing. What's the connection between OP and Trevor?

Ehhhh careful. That line of thinking could easily turn into "I am the age that I say I am and I don't care that you think Gary is a creepy pedo. My body is 8 years old but I feel like a 40 year old and Gary understands that!"

To your point. Age shouldn't matter beyond that one transition from "legal guardian protects you while your brain finishes development" and "you are now legally an adult and in control (and responsible for) your own actions".

I think this is why the US legal system actually gets this one pretty close to right.

I agree in theory. But then I see people breaking the rules when it doesn't "make sense" (as far as they could see) and then nearly fucking things up. My rule is "if I break this rule and it turns out that I didn't actually have all the important info such that I really should have followed the rule... Well, that'll be on me. So how confident am I that I really do have all the relevant info?"

What is this from?

I'm also curious how this would stop someone from using AI to generate an image and then just using a digital camera to take a photo of their monitor. "The photo of <politician> executing someone in the street seems to be legit. There's provenance metadata showing that the image hasn't been tampered with since it was taken and cryptographically signed by Nikon's physical sensors" edit: formatting