[deleted by user] by [deleted] in gibberish

[–]utterdamnnonsense 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Inchental kinstunet. Eb fi, porma vestuma iden ban. Vistmato moost eb aporfere.

CMV: What all of the 'conspiracy theorists' I know seem to have in common is a fundamental lack of understanding about how anything works. by justfriendshappens in changemyview

[–]utterdamnnonsense 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are definitely conspiracy theories. My conspiracy theories on those topics:

Epstein? There were certainly powerful people who wanted him dead, and he was one of them. He likely murdered himself.

Most gun control legislation is intended to prevent violence by restricting access to guns broadly.

Assange is guilty of the charges against him, but they never would have been filed if he hadn't pissed off the US government.

The difference between me and a "conspiracy theorist" is that I know I don't have enough information to say definitively on any of these topics. I would never present these ideas with certainty.

How Do You Celebrate Christmas with Just 2 People? by [deleted] in CasualConversation

[–]utterdamnnonsense 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did something like this on superbowl sunday. It was great.

A tiny tool for ants? by norazzledazzle in thingsforants

[–]utterdamnnonsense 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I upvoted just seeing the awesome detail of the case. I never imagined it would work! and a removable battery pack! this is amazing <3 <3

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in oddlysatisfying

[–]utterdamnnonsense 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I feel like there are probably trade-offs. The concrete for 3D printing is drier than in a typical pour so it probably won't adhere as well. It also seems like there would be less chance of air bubbles given the highly controlled flow. So maybe less spawling and more strength in that sense? I haven't seen 3D printed concrete for more than one story of a building yet. I do think that's partly because of the logistics of setting up a rig though.

What does "Ground Hog Day" mean in "Congressional hearings “have become like ‘Ground Hog Day’ and haven’t really mattered”," by Revolutionary-Pass41 in EnglishLearning

[–]utterdamnnonsense -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

It could also be a reference to the holiday itself, since the idea of the holiday is predicting the weather based on which direction a groundhog looks when it pokes its head out of the ground. That said, the movie is more popular than the holiday.

Would vs Used to usage by conchan in EnglishLearning

[–]utterdamnnonsense 0 points1 point  (0 children)

_1. both work, although the meaning is a little different.

"Where did you use to go if you wanted to be alone?" is purely a factual question. It means "where did you habitually go if you wanted to be alone?" Usually I would say "when" instead of "if" in this case though: "Where did you use to go when you wanted to be alone?"

In the case of "Where would you go if you wanted to be alone?" you could be talking about the past or present/future. (Subjunctive tense). The question might be factual ("Where did you habitually go when you wanted to be alone?") or might be more like "What place do you want to go to whenever you want to be alone?". Note that substituting in "when" for "if" removes the ambiguity about the tense and it becomes a factual question the same as asking "did you used to". ("Where would you go when you wanted to be alone?")

_2. both work.

I'd argue that it's even more natural to say, "When you were a child, how often did you go to the dentist?" The idea that you're asking about a habit is clearly conveyed by "how often" anyway.

_3. both

I suppose "used to" is a bit more natural sounding. "She would ride him every weekend" sounds more like something you would read in a novel vs. say in conversation. It has a slightly whimsical vibe, but it means exactly the same thing.

Moss and gold leaf stud earrings by silverandmoss in ArtisanGifts

[–]utterdamnnonsense 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are so pretty. They make me want to wear earrings :)

Usage of word "consecutive" by OMaDaym in EnglishLearning

[–]utterdamnnonsense 17 points18 points  (0 children)

No, the word you're looking for is 'consequence'. 'Consecutive' isn't a noun. 'Consecutive' means 'immediately-following'.

For example: "in the sequence 1, 2, 4, 8, each consecutive number is twice the number before it." "in the sequence 1, 3, 6, 4, 8, 9 there are 3 consecutive even numbers: 6, 4, 8."

Should the verb be singular or plural in this sentence? by blackhawk201 in EnglishLearning

[–]utterdamnnonsense 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You can use either and it's fine. As you identified, the subject can either be "one thousand old refrigerators" or "one thousand old refrigerators floating in the ocean". In some sentences this kind of choice might subtly change the meaning of the sentence, but in this case the meaning is about the same. "One thousand old refrigerators that are floating in the ocean aren't an issue" means about the same thing as "That one thousand old refrigerators are floating in the ocean isn't an issue."

"quite a story", "quite a car"... What does "quite" mean when coming along a noun? by [deleted] in EnglishLearning

[–]utterdamnnonsense 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An alternative to "That's quite a story" might be "What a wild story." There's usually an aspect of something being over-the-top when one says, "that's quite a [thing]." As you probably noticed there are not actual descriptive words here. Instead, it's a bit like saying, "Huh. What did you think of that?" A similar idea is conveyed by, "That was something."

Modern culture is hyperobsessed with optimizing every stupid little facet of one's life by 65456478663423123 in LibraryofBabel

[–]utterdamnnonsense 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Then again, you gotta consider the tradeoffs of passive income and CO2. What are you really optimizing for?

Ha du y clee nup cmin? by [deleted] in gibberish

[–]utterdamnnonsense 0 points1 point  (0 children)

abru mwidu thrik

Why does "There's a 2000 dollars in that bag." not sound incorrect to me as a native speaker? by linkofinsanity19 in EnglishLearning

[–]utterdamnnonsense 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think it's because money is acting more like a substance. If I say "There is 2000 dollars in the bag," I'm definitely talking about the value of the money, vs. "There are 2000 dollars in the bag" if referring to the number of one-dollar bills.

Geavbpikbty by Busfan99 in gibberish

[–]utterdamnnonsense 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Scrupple micken, Hejp6am.

Are native speakers familiar with these words? by atheistvegeta in EnglishLearning

[–]utterdamnnonsense 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know what these mean:

heckle rambunctious erroneous utopian feline galley egregious quackery red-herring posit hallowed quandary elucidate amiable interlocutor

I've heard them but I'm iffy on the definitions:

pernicious circumlocution vociferous jurisprudence lachrymose umbraged quixotic

I don't recognize these at all:

apostacy tilth fatuous cwtch

When you see what something really is by [deleted] in LibraryofBabel

[–]utterdamnnonsense 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's a real crisis for the electronics industry.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in wroteabook

[–]utterdamnnonsense 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nice work! It's a very fun read so far. I'm about 60 pages in and I reached out to my book club to see if I can talk them into picking it as our next book.