There's nothing wrong with wanting supporting evidence for claims, but when someone says something that's very provable and common knowledge and you ask for proof - you become known as an idiot.

They do mention the incubation period for Rabies in the article can be up to two years, and they also mention it being found in seals starting in 2021.

You are correct that anyone bit recently may not be able to 100% confirm no transmission, but if no one bitten since 2021 has had Rabies from seal bites its still an accurate assessment.

Especially if people are bitten in (salt) water. Rabies spreads via saliva which is likely going to have a significantly smaller viral load if the bites happen in ocean water (also mentioned as a possible reason for low/no infection)

Gotta disagree about the Mist.

The monsters absolutely were the point, and something like a storm/flood/fire wouldn't flip that many people to religious human sacrifice or electing a religious leader to decide who gets sacrificed within 3 days. (the reason she was being believed was also monster related)

The monsters are what caused panic, fear, loss of humanity, and desperation. The movie makes a point to illustrate this when the generator stops working - the people needed something they could understand, and resolve, and refused to acknowledge monsters would be possible until they see part of one and some flip from impossible to act of god/devil, which doesn't really happen with fire or rain or snow.

The variety, size, and mysterious origins of the monsters are absolutely the centerpiece and couldn't be replaced by any natural disaster, as the whole point was how unnatural everything became.

I would say that Prey isn't so much a monster movie as a movie with an 'ugly' powerful humanoid. I would definitely put "The Thing" on this list, but it's not exactly modern.

Yak takes me back to classic Red Alert, never seen it anywhere else but here!

I love my 09 ranger, one of the last years before they scrapped it and went with the Goliath model.

Honestly don't see the appeal to the huge trucks unless they're for work, but it's not surprising that automakers in North America don't really care to offer what consumers actually want to drive.

For what it's worth, a government can absolutely subsidized an industry in an attempt to capture a foreign market.

There's a reason Japan and Korea have their own auto industries despite being next door to the largest manufacturing nation on earth, and it isn't because they're somehow making and distributing them for even less than China.

That being said, several automakers have blindfolded themselves about the type of cars people want. I do hope this threat is significant enough that automakers actually shift to mini-electric transportation options.

If not, I'd be happy enough buying a small Chinese electric even if the taxes made it equivalent to a larger "western" vehicle. Because it's what I want to have available to me and it's nice to fuck capitalists with capitalism.

The consequence of arresting political opponents?

A lifetime without consequences for your actions.

Lewis Black's comedy always has a special place in my heart

I've been getting the Samsung 'plus' models several years after they come out for a couple hundred bucks and still can't find a reason to upgrade from the S10+

New phones are way too expensive for a better camera and marginally faster apps, which would be entirely out matched by a dedicated camera at the same price.

Surprise surprise, I also drive an old ranger that has aux but no Bluetooth so everything works out

People saw it, but if you remember Taxis before Uber it wasn't exactly great either.

No-shows, demanding flat rates double what the meter would charge/refusing service, various forms of harassment, etc.

Turns out when there is very little competition, businesses treat their customers like shit.

Uber definitely does some things better than traditional taxis. Things like work flexibility are great, but workers still need better protections and pay (aka, a union).

Paying workers more is inflationary, but raising the cost of goods because you control the supply chain is "business"

Basically, raising product costs to cover increased labour costs are bad because actual workers are getting that money instead of the wealthy capital class.

I wish people understood boycotting more. Sure 6 companies own everything, but remember when the cost of a barrel of oil went significantly negative because people weren't driving for 2 weeks?

If people collectively decided they didn't want to buy anything but the absolute necessary staples for a few months there would be an absolute catastrophe in the supply chain and they'd be forced to lower prices significantly.

They may not lower prices forever, but modern business is built entirely on supply chain logistics. If people stop buying anything, or buy things exclusively to return them we would see some serious changes

Don't most political parties across the world use some form of ranked choice for internal elections within their parties?

Makes sense that they'd want the best consensus amongst themselves, but not for us, the people they "represent"