Sunsofold

Thank you for at least not being a prick about how your time is too valuable to spend explaining.

As for those examples, I'd class them a bit differently, not even similar to each other. Movie was a new word for a new thing. I wouldn't class that as slang so much as naming something that didn't have a name. Motion picture isn't a name, it's a descriptive phrase standing in the place of one.

TV, on the other hand, I would class as abbreviation, basically an initialism. It's closer, but I wouldn't say the OECD was a slang term. Slang has at least the distinction of not being the 'official' name of a thing. 'Pie' cannot be slang for 'pie.'

Telly, on some other hand I'll have to borrow, I would probably class as slang, but just a piece that entered the common lexicon. It's so ubiquitous that I don't expect there's any way to tell who first coined it, but you could make a pretty safe bet it was some clever dick who made the choice to not use the established word for the thing, either putting the cognitive load on the listener rather than bear even the tiny load of just saying the word, or being intentionally obscurant to feel clever. I don't know what you would call someone who puts a load on others to make their own life better, but it wouldn't be 'nice.'

Death is like chicken pox, right? Deal with it once and you never have to worry about it again?

1. Linguistic as in 'of language' not as in the university department that studies language.

2. Saying 'you're wrong,' but not providing an explanation as to why, has the same ring to it as 'If you'd just do your own research, you'd agree with me on vaccines.' If you don't want to take the time to explain, it's worse than nothing to merely say 'you're wrong,' and serves only to let you feel superior for a moment.

Palestine is/was a not-quite-nation-state kept mostly under Israel's thumb for decades. October 6 was a wild moment but it was probably the hardest hit Hamas could muster after years of prep. Iran is one of the prime centers of power in the middle east, a nation state with enough economic and political power to have a nuclear program, and who was mostly staying out of things regarding the Palestinians. Regardless of the ethical considerations, I can't see how opening this second front with a much more powerful enemy could be a good idea for Israel.

There are three kinds of people in the world. One kind realizes the purpose of slang is to create a linguistic in-group, to display loyalty to the in-group by excluding the out-group, and decides not to use slang because they are good and kind people who don't want to otherize people based on something they didn't choose. The next kind of person realizes it and actively chooses to be an asshole because it's more fun for them than being nice. The third kind is too stupid to understand. Which do you want to be?

Gazelle 3: I'm sick of this. We should empower somebody to act, who's allowed to do that kind of stuff, but only to the bad animals, who aren't allowed to do the bad stuff.

Gazelle 4: Who wants to volunteer?

the herd: ...

Hyena: I'll do it! I love fucking shit up! I should be allowed to do it, for the sake of the herd!

Hyenas: Fuck yeah! Let's go!

Gazelle 3: Does anyone else want to volunteer?

Herd: ...

Gazelle 5: I guess I could do it.

Hyenas: Fuck yeah! Welcome to the pack! Just so you know though, if you try to stop or question our ways, you'll be gutted as a traitor.

Gazelle 5: Um... Maybe I don't want to join, actually.

Hyenas in uniforms: Give us your fucking shell, tortoise! Civil forfeiture! Fuck yeah! Or we'll kill you!

Gazelle 6: Hey! You're not allowed to do that!

Gazelle 7: We should set up a group that's allowed to do things like that, but only to stop those who do things like that.

Gazelle 6: Any volunteers?

You don't actually have to converse. I get by with 'Hei' and 'Takk' on most transactions, and sometimes just with a nod or two. You can go through the whole process without ever even looking up from your phone if you like.

And it doesn't really go any faster. You still have to scan the same stuff, probably no faster than someone who has experience doing it every day as their job. You have to bag it, which sometimes can be done by a bagger in a normal lane, so parallelism grants possible speed there. The machines also have lag, sometimes not letting you scan your next item until the last one has nicely settled on the bagging scale. And if you want to buy an age-restricted item, or if there's anything that doesn't go perfectly, you have to wait for the human to come over and handle it anyway, which can be a long or a short wait, but still dead time.

Worst of all, though, is the machine talking at me. If you hate a cashier talking to you I don't know how you can tolerate a machine making you listen to it explain how to do the painfully obvious, while simultaneously preventing you from doing the thing you aren't being paid to do. That part alone generally is going to make it slower than a normal cashier.

I'd recommend Pavel. He has an excellent work ethic.

Or Tubular

The high level view of 'copying' is purely abstracted, and not very useful. It's a layperson's understanding. Copy A and call it B makes a thing called B that contains the same data as A. Anything deeper than that will be completely language dependent. Whether a copy is a copy or a reference depends on language and implementation.

Unless you mean how data physically is copied/recalled at the hardware level... that's language agnostic and happens in mostly just a few ways.

Battling anything is built of two parts, making it immoral, and making it illegal. Making it illegal makes it easier to argue that it's immoral, because many people take cues for their morality from legality, but if you want to keep it illegal you have to maintain the cultural belief in its immorality. Each reinforces the other.

I'll start using self-checkout when they start paying me to work at their store as a cashier, though not if they're going to have cameras showing me myself doing it. That costs extra.