I was skeptical because this is a picture with minimal context:

• What does the rest of the room look like?
• What time was this taken at?
• Who was the speaker, if any at the time?

So on. For context, the Daily Mirror is a dubiously trustworthy British tabloid. I think this screenshot is lousy evidence for CPAC’s attendance. I watched the Mirror’s video too, and it was still a bit hard to gauge the context.

However, I found probably a better representation of this from NPR, whose thumbnail image for CPAC 2026 shows Greg Abbott actively speaking (the event was in Dallas), yet huge swaths of the relatively small conference room are empty.

(Edit: The article also notes that Trump skipped CPAC this year.)

Ooooh my god, it’s so bad. Here’s the case view from the Supreme Court of Florida. Their findings are in a PDF under “Findings & Recommendation”.

On July 28, 2025, Judge Jordan presided over a plea hearing in a felony battery case involving a 33-year-old black female defendant. This was a negotiated plea where the defendant and state agreed that the defendant would complete 30 hours of community service. While discussing possible sanctions with the defendant and her great-uncle (who is also black) who was present at the plea hearing, Judge Jordan inquired:

THE COURT: Sure. [great-uncle] do you own any land where I could have her work it for 30 hours?

[GREAT-UNCLE]: (Laughing)

THE COURT: All my family’s farming. They’d love me out there. You ever—You ever chopped cotton before? You know what that is? You take a hoe and you knock out the weeds. That’ll—That’ll straighten you up real quick doing that stuff.[1]

All right. Well, no pulling weeds for your great-uncle then. So, let’s move on.

[1] Judge Jordan explained to the panel that he comes from a farming background where he spent summers in his youth working his relatives [I can’t believe I get to sic the fucking Florida Supreme Court] farm fields in Texas.

Upon questioning by the Panel, Judge Jordan acknowledged that this was the first and only time he has ever inquired whether a person appearing before him had ever “chopped cotton.” Judge Jordan also acknowledged that his questions and comments in this instance were ill-considered. In particular, Judge Jordan acknowledges that he failed to consider how his comments, as a judge considering whether to order a black defendant to “work the land,” immediately followed by a reference to “chopping cotton,” could have been interpreted (and indeed were interpreted) as inappropriate, especially in light of the historically demeaning stereotype associating black people with picking cotton.

There were other incidents outlined in the report, but this is the one the headline is referring to.

Clearly staged by luring the cat in with bubble wrap. Just the MSM manufacturing consent for cats to leave their natural, detached, cardboard homes and settle for these soulless, government-controlled, socialist Khrushchevkas.

That’s a good point, although I have no idea if that actually matters since you IIRC have to affirmatively consent under the GDPR. I try not to add more browser extensions than I strictly need to (and try to only use very popular ones) to try to have some small defense against fingerprinting (even though that’s rough to avoid these days).

Browser extensions like Consent-O-Matic also grant yet another piece of software access to nearly every aspect of my digital life – facilitated mainly through the browser – although it being under the MIT License, recommended by Mozilla, and developed by researchers at Aarhaus’ CAVI offset that risk a lot.

As long as uBO blocks them, that’s good enough for me.

Deliciousness is always necessary. You think you’re going to spark change when that neo-Nazi gets a little milkshake in their mouth and doesn’t taste sweet, creamy, ice-cold goodness with a hint of pistachio – transporting them back to the tin roof sundae their parents got them from Ronnie’s to make their boo-boo all better after soccer practice? I don’t think so. Slacktivism like that won’t get you anywhere.

You didn’t elaborate, so I’ll do it for you.

Just Egg tested on rats for mung bean protein isolate, their main ingredient. The testing isn’t ongoing. While they didn’t have to per se (put a pin in that) for FDA approval, other countries like Canada have booted similar products for not using animal testing. And the FDA doesn’t technically require it, but GRAS gives you the options to 1) test on animals or 2) do something else to convince them (they never specify what this is, and from what I’ve heard, with no concrete steps, you’re effectively railroaded into animal testing). This is the same thing Impossible gets so much flak for (with people ironically suggesting switching to Beyond, who didn’t test on animals™ but who use real beef during ongoing taste tests). Impossible tried no-testing and got rejected by the FDA, and we’ll never know if Just Egg did too.

In the case of Field Roast in Canada, they chose to reformulate with other ingredients that had already been tested on animals before and thus met Canada’s requirements (not introducing new animal testing, but uhhhhhhh). Even if you ignore the previous animal testing because the company wasn’t the one to commit the original sin, it seems clear e.g. with Simply Eggless (which uses lupin beans rather than mung) that you want some kind of bean if you want a homogeneous, mass-market scrambled egg substitute. This was the core ingredient of Just Egg’s product. I’d argue – alongside e.g hard-boiled egg substitutes – such a product is essential to pulling consumers away from the egg industry and making plant-based dieting more convenient for the average person (and in a world where the average person cares much less than you and I, convenience is synonymous with viability).

PETA – who I’m not listing as a generic appeal to authority to supersede this discussion but as an organization I expect to hold companies to high standards – listed Just Egg as their 2025 company of the year. They note that as of 2025, 500 million eggs’ worth of Just Egg had been sold, which almost certainly wouldn’t have been possible if Just Egg had created some inferior substitute with existing animal-tested products.

You can cite “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” if you want (even then, it’s not perpetual suffering), but it seems like the animal testing was functionally if not strictly necessary, one-time, and opened up mung bean protein isolate for everyone. While Just Egg is practicable to avoid as a product, it’s totally dwarfed in the amount of animal exploitation and suffering created by other common, definitely vegan products (O(1)) is a hell of a drug).

TL;DR: I blame organizations like the FDA, not Just Egg (plus I made some other points idk).

Milkshaking is a real thing and does mean throwing milkshakes at people as a means of political protest.

Vegan ambassador chiming in:

I wonder what the mess from a water balloon full of e.g. Just Egg looks like.

Milkshake is piss-easy, though. Unless you’re in a bigger city, you’ll be lucky to find a proper milkshake purchasable in the wild. However, you can totally make one at home and put it in a disposable container; a homemade plant-based milkshake is about as hard as a homemade dairy-based one.

Couldn’t say. I only just recently started using it and haven’t run into problems so far.

If you’re reading lines while doing lines, you may be an ambivert.

Bit of clarification: Xenacoelomorpha is the phylum that the genus Xenoturbella is under.

Someone left a tag at the top of the Xenacoelomorpha article advocating a rewrite, which I could probably quickly investigate (or even just check WoRMS) if I weren’t currently a lazy lump of dead weight. Without assessing the tag’s merits, I’d at least advise treading lightly as a heuristic.

Put the cancerous mass in the meat grinder and save 20¢ on dinner.

macOS also has this feature under the name “Shake mouse pointer to locate”.

In my experience, they usually take the counter-dad joke in stride, and we move on (sometimes they do make an obviously exaggerated expression as part of the joke). I’m probably an outlier, but I’ve always found “that means it’s free” quaint if just really trite; it’s just trying to be friendly and make my monotonous day a little more fun, and I understand from their perspective that it isn’t conspicuously overused. So I take the joke for its intent (I’ve never seen it used seriously, and imagining a remotely sane human being doing so strains credulity) instead of its actual novelty or cleverness. I will never make it because it’s so worn-out and I know it’ll make most people in retail groan, but I don’t begrudge people who do, since I’ve never seen it used in a sincerely harassing, negative way.

“Nope, actually means it’s not for sale. Sorry.”

Pepper Jack love Fraggle Rock.

YSK about Rules 2 and 5 and about basic standards of evidence, minutes-old account. Does “numerous” here mean “three”? Do you have any follow-up? Or are you just here to stir up baseless conspiracist bullshit?

Mythbusters cast reunion to test this tier list:

• Jamie tries to bust a myth.
• Tory tries to bust a nut.
• Grant (RIP, king) tries to bust a ghost.
• Adam tries to bust his balls.
• Kari tries to bust a union.

Man, am I the only one who sees emojis used in place of bullet points (especially “✨”, whatever the shit that’s supposed to convey; polish?) and thinks “An LLM definitely wrote this”?

“Ayyyy, relax, guy!”