The sign said “anything”

You’ve obviously never been an addict.

You can absolutely hate a thing you’re using and feel like quitting isn’t possible.

YOLO is for throwing with constitution

Summary
Forgejo v15.0 refines areas of day-to-day usability and security, and incorporates new capabilities in advanced Forgejo Actions usage.

UI enhancements in issue filtering and the releases list make Forgejo easier to interact with. Auto-linking containers to repositories removes a manual step from repository administrators. Git notes can now be modified from the single-commit view in pull requests.

Repository specific access tokens allow for more secure API interactions.

Forgejo Actions can now expand reusable workflows, providing a better user experience and more powerful capabilities. OpenID Connect support allows for secure access to third-party systems. Forgejo Runner registration improvements allow a simpler installation process for most users, and ephemeral runners allow secure autoscaling capabilities for advanced integrations.

They’re being harvested into (potential) nonexistence because their blood is useful for vaccine development.

So this might be the last edition of that shirt.

I can’t not think of Gal Godot’s cringe Imagine cover.

Would you rather date a Claude or a Tyrion?

Would you rather date a Siri or a Khaleesi?

My comments:

// Do not change this timeout value. There’s a compatibility issue that causes requests to hang. Come back later to add details

// Should probably refactor this bit

// drunk, fix later

Assuming you set it up perfectly the first time, instead of it breaking for some reason six weeks later and then you spend three hours figuring out/remembering how you set it up in the first place and another two nights after work fixing it so it works as intended.

Also your use case has changed, so it needs to be retooled to address the new situation.

Other than that… worth it.

In that case, I’d rate it as “enough for an indictment” or even “highly suspicious” rather than “likely to be true”.

Calling something “likely to be true” when the evidence just isn’t there feels like an invitation for people on the internet to round up to “100% true and real”.

(Not saying people won’t do that anyway, but that’s a tendency I don’t want to contribute to.)

Are you saying, “If Snopes can’t prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, it’s probably true.”

If so, I don’t understand the logic that gets you to that conclusion.

There’s plenty of solid arguments we could make against him, especially about his predatory behavior, but I don’t think this should be one of them.

The claim is muddy at best.

And if a fence-sitter actually follows up on it, this is the kind of thing that could be used as an excuse for them to go full-MAGA.

Recent claims that new documents prove the validity of the Johnson claims are false, because these documents are from 2016 and have nothing to do with what have become known as the “Epstein docs.”

Viral claims that Trump has a history of sexually assaulting children first emerged with the Johnson lawsuits in 2016. Pictures of court documents related to the case have lent perceived credibility to additional unsourced claims of child abuse that followed, and memes frequently combine the two claims.

Such claims are not new, come with several red flags and originated with an aggressive push by a serial fabulist.

Is this literally true?

I know he’s been a creep forever (and a felon, and a racist, and…), but I don’t remember literal statutory rape.