Last player alive in a 50 player survivor tournament in a 2D space shooter.
I can’t remember the name of anymore.
SpaceHQ or something.

Oh wait, I see that vmlinuz file has a version to it. I couldn’t remember if vmlinuz was the kernel or not, because I used to have multiples of them, but these days I only have one.

GRUB gets installed on your harddisk in your root partition, it’s configuration file on the boot partition and finally into your boot sector if I’m correct. UEFI is a standard for your firmware located outside your harddisk. You go from firmware -> partition layout -> bootloader (grub) -> kernel.

The firmware is closed source under BIOS or UEFI or if you’re hardcore open source, libreboot/coreboot/‘other options’ and is located somewhere on your motherboard on some chip.
Then there’s the partition layout and bootloader that are located inside /dev/sda I believe, so inside the device itself, which can be read if you want to take a peek at it.

Now the bootloader located in the boot sector /dev/sda loaded by the firmware located in some chip in the motherboard, has access to the boot partition, where it loads the bootloader’s configuration file usually located at /boot/grub/grub.cfg for GRUB. I remember UEFI having some kind of standard bootloader by itself, so it doesn’t even need a bootloader if I can remember correctly.

This what I recall as it was quite complicated for me too. Especially with software being called firmware and not being called motherbootware or pre-bootware or anything that indicates that this piece of software is the very first thing that starts running during boot.

But you look at /boot and what you can find there. There will be at least two files there called initramfs and vmlinuz, which were also part of the boot process, but I forgot what role those two played.

Not exactly a hobby and not exactly a year,
but 1998-2009 for movies & television that was not anime.

As bad as all the nostalgia-bait is today,
it’s no Idiocracy which was not a prediction of the future,
but a reflection of what the media-landscape was turning into,
during that era.

I think the OP meant when were YOU embarrassingly proven wrong.

The more detailed pictures will be of these type of objects(stars),
the harder it will be to ignore their large sizes
and thus theories about them.

Too many of these space objects are not behaving as they should have,
and so any crutch theories about them will be crushed.

Stars simply don’t work the way we think they do.
Planetary and star formation simply doesn’t work the way we currently think they do.

And the clearer the pictures are of these space objects,
the more clear it becomes that what scientists theorized
of what they thought they were looking at, just isn’t it.

One of them that should have alarmed scientists,
but hasn’t, is how comets suspiciously look like asteroids,
pure rock, while they should have looked very icy with
some dust sprinkled on them.
You might even say that they look the same, but are just
traveling in different orbits.
And that would explain why the Philae lander’s harpoons
wasn’t able to penetrate “the ice” and instead bounced back.

Diva covers of songs that don’t fit the emotional tone of the song because they’re too busy showing off their vocal cords.
And people who love these songs.

I can’t currently think of any particular women responsible for this,
or particular songs, but I’m quite sure it must have been Christmas song covers,
turning “Jingle Bells” into Aretha Franklin’s “Dr. Feelgood”.
The only particular song I can come up with, is Michael Bublé’s “cry me a river”
and whoever plays the instruments during his version,
so this is not just a mostly female phenomena.

[edit] I’m pretty sure it’s Ariane Grande now.
Great singer but not very adaptable.
And probably missing the point of Mariah Carey’s christmas song popularity,
the original one as I’ve just seen newer Hallmark music video
where the video theme no longer matches the song.

To me my physical attraction to women is:
face > weight > length > waist/hip ratio > Breast shape > nipple shape > size of nipples/boobs > jiggle.

I’m not attracted to a woman that has the body of a regular rock,
lamppost or dishwasher or I’d be physically attracted to those things.
So the way your body looks is very important for physical male attraction,
but I would say that the bar currently is low for male attraction in general.

I don’t think breast shape is ever a deal breaker for the vast majority of men, at least not for me, but it does bring in attention.
They’re at chest level and can take up a good portion of the body,
so they’re quite difficult to ignore, especially if they’re large.

The right size is only a small bonus and the bigger they are, the more attention it brings.
Jiggle also brings more attention to them, but size is more important as it (falsely?) implies easier arousal.

They’re also soft, thus very kissable and there’s nipples on them that can indicate and entice arousal.

A high-resolution picture made on nearby “neutron stars” or nearby “stellar black holes”.
Like dark matter and the big bang they don’t exist and
so whatever they’re looking at will never conform to their theories.
Both of these type of objects are stars larger than jupiter with the latter being the largest class of supergiants.

H0w ppl usd 2 r8 in da 2000s

And the extremely crass culture that came with it.

Did you start makin’ trouble in your neighborhood?

I say it’s getting less radical when 20 years ago a country got invaded, a million killed, based on nothing but lies and no one bat an eye on any forum.