English is pretty bad at naming these things. In North-American English they’re often called "Semi"s, which is short for either “Semi-Trailer” or “Semi-Truck”. Why? Who knows, I’m guessing it’s because the trailer part is only half of the whole. The front part with the engine and trailer hitch is sometimes called the Tractor Unit. But, that’s confusing because “Tractor” mostly means the thing you drive around on a farm. The purpose is basically the same, and the name comes from the fact it’s focused on something that pulls, but farming has such a hold of the “tractor” name that that’s what people think of when they hear that.

18 wheeler makes sense for the whole unit together. It’s also good because it identifies the thing that is instantly visually unique about these kinds of vehicles, all the various wheels. But, I’m sure there are many cases where it’s not 18 total wheels. And, when they’re used as road trains with more than one trailer, I’m sure it’s much more than 18 wheels.

The Brits like “lorry”, or “articulated lorry” but where does that come from? And sometimes shortened to “Artic” which makes it sound like it’s really cold.

Other names include “HGV” for “Heavy Goods Vehicle”, but that’s confusing because it’s not clear whether it’s the goods that are heavy or the truck. Presumably they’re also used for light but bulky goods.

Oh well, dumb language, we should start over with Spanish, I’m sure their name is better.

Are those the trucks that are only able to move 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11 or 13 things at once? (I’ve never heard that term before)

the Koala community

(called “Ute’s” here, “trucks” in the USA)

Pickup trucks in the USA. “Truck” is a more generic term that covers just about everything from semi trailers (a.k.a. articulated lorry, heavy goods vehicle) to vans.

The riding he’s chosen to run in is one of the most conservative in the country. The guy who’s stepping down won something like 80% of the vote.

But, the Liberals should run someone who actually lives in that riding and keeps reminding the voters there that Poilievre doesn’t live there and doesn’t know anything about his new riding. It won’t be enough to keep him from winning this time, but there’s a chance that over time it will start to matter to voters that their MP doesn’t live there and knows nothing about their riding.

The good news is that the riding he has to run in is incredibly rural. He’s going to hate it.

Poilievre is a city boy. He grew up in the Calgary suburbs. Then he moved to Ottawa to become an MP. The only job he’s ever had involving physical exertion is when he was a paperboy as a kid. Now he’s going to have to spend some time in his new riding surrounded by farmers. The biggest “city” there has a population under 20k. Everything else is towns, villages and hamlets. Assuming he buys a house in Camrose, if he wants Thai food, he’ll have to drive over an hour to get to Edmonton.

Maybe because the conservatives have such an overwhelming majority in Battle River - Crowfoot, they won’t care that he’s a carpetbagger and he won’t have to put much effort in there. But, I think eventually he’ll have to spend some time in his riding, and it will be a major culture clash.

Wow, you should really call up her family and tell them they’re wrong. Those poor fools who knew her and were with her day after day think she committed suicide, but you, some guy on the internet, you know better. They have a right to know! Go call them up and inform them how wrong they are!

And suicidal people are always honest about not being suicidal, right?

Here come the conspiracy theorists.

Could it be that being in the spotlight is exhausting and depressing? Could being a victim of sex trafficking have a huge mental toll? Could it be that her relatives actually know her mental state better than some dude sitting on a couch halfway across the world.

No, of course not, it has to be murder because that makes everything more exciting.

I assume that bunkers protect you from a chain reaction, but that at some point the explosion is big enough that a chain reaction is exactly what you get.

This definitely seems like it would have been big enough to cause a chain reaction (and/or big enough to show that a chain reaction happened). If so, I wonder what fraction of bunkers exploded. I’m glad we live in an age of civilian satellites, so it’s probably just a matter of time before we get to see the damage for ourselves.

someone had set money aside

That’s a very nice way to say “embezzle”.

There are money people?

That took seconds, listening to everything Jordan Peterson puts out takes hours and hours.

I know one woman who, from her 60s to her 80s, lived in a building that she co-owned with two good friends. Each one had her own full apartment. But, they were able to support each-other. I also know plenty of younger women who have roommates.

I don’t think being single necessarily means being alone. Although, it’s true that modern western society makes the coupling up option much more low-friction than other ones.

You don’t need to stay with a devil at all.

Some women are apparently terrified of being single. I’ve known some who have never been single for more than a few days since they turned 15 or something. I know it can sometimes be more complicated than that, but it’s a contributing factor.

That’s also bad. You regularly hate-watch him? Don’t you have anything better to do with your time?

It should only take you about 15 minutes of watching him to understand his gimmick. He used undefined and undefinable terms like “cultural marxism”. He cherry picks out of context sciencey stuff to back up his point of view. He acts super serial all the time to make people think he’s a serious person. That’s it. You don’t need to watch any more.

And, part of the reason for that is section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996.

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

If a TV station or radio station has a call-in show and the caller swears, it’s the station that gets fined. If the station runs a late night informercial where someone is defamed, the station is liable. But, do it online and you’re fine. The YouTube algorithm can pick out the juiciest, most controversial, most slanderous content and shove it into everyone’s recommendations and only the person who posted that content is responsible.

Section 230 makes sense in some situations. If you’re running a bulletin board without any kind of algorithm promoting posts, then it makes sense that you shouldn’t be held accountable for what someone says in that bulletin board. But, YouTube, Twitch, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. have all taken it too far. They don’t personally create the content, but they have algorithms that analyze the content and decide who to show it to. They get the protections of a bulletin board, while curating the content to make it even more engaging than a segment on Newsmax or MSNBC.

Luckily, they probably won’t have any.

“When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart's_law

Or, if you prefer a clip from The Wire, juking the stats.

No, there aren’t special rules that give corporations more freedom. Citizens have the same freedoms. The difference is that they’re freedoms that may intrude on other people’s privacy, or on their mental well-being, etc.