I didn't even think it could mean anything other than that until I started reading the comments. Coming from Trump this certainly reads more like a "finish them!" than a "leave them alone!"

As far as I can tell, the word "boomer" has shifted from "an out-of-touch adult from the baby boomer generation" to "an out-of touch adult."

I managed to find love through online dating, but it's true that you need to put a lot of time and effort into making an interesting and informative profile, sorting through all the low-effort users to find the people who are actually invested, and crafting engaging and personalized opening messages for the people among them who you happen to find attractive. There's a big incentive to just spam everyone with "hey," but all that does is put more money in the company's pockets from months of no hits.

Which goes to show how legality isn't a measurement of correctness.

I always liked the name Woodrow, but I hate the nickname Woody, so it's a bit of a wash.

Again, selective breeding suffers from the same issue of introducing changes that can be detrimental to the organism itself and its place in the balance of the environment. Look at dog breeding as an example. Pugs were bred for a specific look, and that inadvertently caused them to have severe breathing issues. Dachshunds are another example, with many developing spinal issues over time. The difference, as I said before, is the speed; making a change causes unintended side effects - when you make a huge change quickly, it will produce more side effects than making a small change slowly will.

And... again... as I already said... there should be limitations to prevent rolling out new GMOs without specific testing for safety, both in a lab for potential problems to the organism or - in the event of an agricultural product - its consumers, as well as in the environment as a whole, to determine how it may affect the ecology if and when it is introduced. It may take decades to notice changes if the GMO is released immediately after being developed, but if testing protocols are made and followed, we should have no problem quickly spotting any issues before the organism is rolled out into the world.

Just like newly developed medicines need to go through rigorous testing to prevent things like the Thalidomide scandal that caused an immense amount of birth defects due to lax testing, new GMO's will need to be tested as well. But, just like you likely understand the benefits of medicine for helping people suffering from various diseases, GMO's can provide the same level of benefit to people suffering from malnutrition, among a wide range of other positive uses. The key is to study new developments to the point where we can spot and address issues. Throwing away the technology as a whole is not the answer.

As I mentioned, I have a wife who I live with and spend time with every day. We met online, and only later realized that we went to the same school, but were in different grades. We probably saw each other on multiple occasions, but we were just strangers then. I also have plenty of local friends who I spend time with as well. However, I live in completely different states from some of my oldest friends from school. We voice chat online every week, and meet up in person every few years.

I have a couple groups of people who I play video games and tabletop games with online who I've never even seen in real life, and wouldn't even recognize walking down the street, but we've known each other for years and have real, meaningful connections. Two of the friends from one group even realized they live near one another, and have since begun dating, making plans to move in together soon.

And yes, I am a part of several online communities in forums, sites like Lemmy, and elsewhere that I keep up with. We have nice conversations and heated arguments. We help each other with problems and questions. We're simply a group that any member knows they can turn to when they need to connect with someone.

Life is complicated, and there are an insane amount of different ways to connect with people. Amazingly, some of those are through the internet. The idea that some connections are real and the others are fake is complete bullshit, and you're clearly making a bad argument in bad faith to let off some steam.

Sorry, bud; you've been having a human connection this whole time.

Haha, we're in a digital age, buddy. Computers are nothing more than the latest way to connect real people in real ways. Sure, bots exist, just like spam telephone callers exist and were probably major issues when that was the main way for people to connect with one another across large distances, but you're not going to stop it by covering your ears and denying the existence of every person you can't physically see.

I have a wife and family, I have friends, and I have online communities I care about; they're all just different legitimate social circles. We may not have evolved for it, but we're living it anyway, and the faster you adapt to that, the better.

He was a decent youtuber, but I was always irked by his propagation of the "That's just a theory" phrase. I get that it was just a tagline, but it still inadvertently promotes the downplay of the scientific process.

Everybody's got a thing, and they're usually happy to talk about it to someone who's genuinely interested. Definitely helpful if you're looking into that exact thing.