Ah, the ’90s and the ’00s—a time of dial-up internet, chunky cellphones, and the undeniable charm of simpler times. As we journey further into the 21st century, it’s remarkable how rapidly our perception of “normal” has shifted. Everyday things we took for granted back then now seem like relics of a bygone era, replaced by sleeker, more advanced alternatives. In this age of constant technological advancement, it’s not uncommon to find ourselves reminiscing about the luxuries we once enjoyed without a second thought. In this recent r/AskReddit post, a user asked people to share things that were normal in the ’90s and ’00s, but are considered a luxury today. Here are some of the best answers. 1. “New furniture made out of real wood.” – u/Juls7243 2.  “Owning the software you purchased.” – u/FinnofLocke 3. “Paying no more than 30% of your income in rent.” – u/newsaggregateftw 4. “Not being expected to be reachable 24/7.” – u/Siukslinis_acc 5. “Concert ticket prices.” – u/Quality_Street_1 6. “Single-income families buying a home.” – u/THESSIS 7. “Good-quality fabric in clothing. I have clothes from the ’90s (and ’80s from my mother) that still hold up today. These days, I’m lucky if my shirt isn’t saggy and misshapen within a year.” – u/TheMadLaboratorian 8. “Being able to afford going out every Friday after work.” – u/M-the-music-guy 9. “Items not requiring a subscription each month.” – u/few29er 10. “Household products that don’t break within the first few years of use. My grandma had the same fridge from 1993 before deciding to switch to a newer, bigger one two years ago. My mom’s wedding cookware is still going strong 25 years later, but whenever she needs new pans, they start flaking Teflon into the food within a few months.” – u/parangolecomuna 11. “Legroom on an airplane.” – u/anachronistika 12.  “Family vacations. I remember going on road trips regularly as a kid and even flying once or twice. Now that I have kids, I cannot afford a weeklong trip to the Badlands, Grand Canyon, Disney/Universal Studios, etc. The best I can do is a day trip to the Wisconsin Dells maybe once a year.” – u/M5606 13. “Free driver’s education classes taught in all high schools.” – u/Working-Finger3500 14. “Apartments. I could get a one-bedroom apartment in Wisconsin back in 1997 for under $500. Now that same apartment is at least $2,000.” – u/Icy-Supermarket-6932 15.  “Meals on domestic flights.” – u/Acceptable_Stop2361 16. “Affordable healthcare.” – u/RNGezzus 17. “People making friends with one another purely because they enjoy their companionship and not because of networking.” —u/butthenhor 18. “Drinking water from the tap without filters and softeners.” – u/Kuzkuladaemon 19. “Clothing and shoes that last more than a year with regular wear.” – u/SpacePirateFromEarth 20. “Being able to dance and have a good time without having the risk that it will end up being recorded and put on social media.” – u/allbright1111 The post People Are Sharing Things That Were Normal In The ’90s And ’00s But Are Considered A Luxury Now appeared first on Pleated Jeans.

As artificial intelligence advances, scientists are raising alarms about its potential to manipulate elections. A recent report highlights growing concerns that AI-generated content could sway voters, erode trust in democratic processes, and amplify misinformation at unprecedented scales. Experts from institutions like MIT and Stanford point to AI tools creating hyper-realistic deepfakes, synthetic audio, and tailored […]

In an era of economic disparity, a surprising trend is reshaping retail: wealthy shoppers are flocking to discount chains. Dollar Tree recently revealed that 60% of its 3 million new households in Q3 2025 earned over $100,000 annually. This influx underscores a “K-shaped” recovery, where the affluent leverage gains while others scramble for savings. Cumulative […]

The post Jury Clears Black Stabber Because Victim Said N-Word AFTER Attack appeared first on SALTY.

Many people experience social awkwardness from time to time, but for some, it happens much more often.They accidentally say the wrong thing, miss social cues, or are simply overly shy at parties, in meetings, or around people in general. It can make you wonder how social awkwardness still exists as a trait in humans, given that we’ve evolved into such a highly social species—starting with small tribes built for survival and eventually growing into the thriving societies we have today.Well, one psychologist has a theory about how socially awkward people not only survived evolution but actually thrived."There’s this curious and strong correlation between social awkwardness and what researchers call 'extraordinary achievement' or 'striking talent,'" said psychologist Ty Tashiro on the A Bit of Optimism podcast. "People who achieve amazing things in this world, things that are kind of the tail end of the bell curve, they're actually more likely to be more awkward." @simonsinek What if being socially awkward is actually a superpower? Ty Tashiro, an incredible psychologist and author, joined me on A Bit of Optimism this week for a deep dive on why awkward is awesome. It's an episode filled with laughs, 'aha' moments, and maybe a bit of self-recognition. ? Check it out wherever you listen to podcasts and find out why your next awkward moment could be the start of something amazing. Tashiro explained that socially awkward individuals often have an "obsessive interest in things," zeroing in on details and minutiae, sometimes at the cost of engaging with others or following social norms. However, he argues that this obsessiveness can translate into persistence during hard times and resilience in the face of challenges, ultimately helping them achieve great things. This could explain why many people perceive brilliant scientists as smart but poor communicators, and why so many highly successful people who are often considered geniuses or leaders in their fields are also introverts."Socially awkward individuals often spend a lot of time alone," therapist Lesley Lesker told Upworthy. "This provides the opportunity for them to process information thoroughly, look at all different angles and analyze situations in a more depth manner than non-socially awkward individuals." - YouTube youtu.be Support systems are necessary for successBut can being socially awkward or neurodivergent really lead to greater resilience in the face of struggles and more persistence when confronting challenges? The experts who spoke to Upworthy believe it's possible, especially when socially awkward individuals have a strong support system around them."Resilience is built when we go through difficult situations and come out on the other side, realizing that we are okay," said Lesker. "For socially awkward people, these challenging situations often happen several times a day, every day of the week. The difference between someone who is able to build resilience and someone who is not often comes down to whether or not they live within a supportive environment.""The key factor in whether these 'super powers' lead to resilience really depends on support systems—family, education, social, and psychological support make all the difference," said therapist Karissa Provost. "Social awkwardness is a blessing and a curse. The reason that many people are socially awkward is because their brain is so unique and sees the world in such different ways that they naturally don't conform to social norms," said Tyana Tavakol, a licensed trauma therapist in California and Florida, and virtual private practice owner of Uncovering You. "This uniqueness can build resilience when their awkwardness is more consistently than not taken as quirky, funny, or some other type of endearing way. This can happen when they grew up in a very attuned and accepting home or family, or happened to find friends or community that also have their own unique brains and can really appreciate that in others.""For those who struggle to build resilience, it is likely they experienced the exact opposite: being bullied, shamed, criticized, or going through other types of negative responses to their social awkwardness more often than they got support for it," Tavakol added."There's also a biological component," said Provost. "Resilience is linked to brain structure, particularly how the frontal cortex regulates emotional responses from the amygdala. People with better-regulated fear responses recover more quickly from social stress, and the good news is this can be developed through coping skills and emotional regulation strategies over time."What if social awkwardness still hurts?Lesker told Upworthy that social awkwardness can still feel emotionally overwhelming, and that breathing techniques, grounding exercises, and other strategies can help regulate that stress. She also recommends that socially awkward people "create scripts" for common social situations to rely on in order to make them more comfortable and confident. This can include small talk like, "Hi, how was your day?" or "How do you know the host?" Overall, self-compassion is the key to working through socially awkward feelings and building resilience. @kolourmemisfit_24 Be my friend ? #sociallyawkward #awkward #awkwardmoments #momsoftiktok #momfriends #locs #girlswithtattoos "Developing self compassion can help a socially awkward person to build resilience," Lesker concluded. "It is common for a socially awkward individual to blame themselves excessively, but when you speak to yourself compassionately in the same way that you would speak to a friend, resilience will grow."

Too much dirty laundry. The post The singer Paul Simon said would regret recording his hits: “It’s a mistake you make early on” first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

In an ambush near the White House, West Virginia National Guard soldier Sarah Beckstrom was killed, and Andrew Wolfe wounded. Charged is 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal, an Afghan who worked with CIA-backed units during the war in Afghanistan. Lakanwal came to the U.S. in 2021 thanks to Operation Allies Welcome and was granted asylum in April.  Last week, Lakanwal, one of our so-called friends, drove from Washington state to kill Americans, proving that no good deed goes unpunished. Biden’s chaotic Afghanistan surrender stands as yet another failure with lasting consequences. Did any of the army of bureaucrats throughout the State Department actually believe that we could turn any Islamic theocracy into a Western-style democracy? When we abruptly departed from the Afghanis, the plan was contingent upon the Taliban developing a government that honored and protected civil liberties for all. Did any of the army of bureaucrats throughout the State Department actually believe that we could turn any Islamic theocracy into a Western-style democracy? (RELATED: Thank You For Your Service) Cue the laugh track. Once again, history schools those who adhere to its message that no one ever wins after being involved with Afghanistan. After defeating the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and the United States, Afghanistan just moved ahead of Ohio State in the polls based on the strength of schedule. Import the Third World, get the Third World. Lakanwal is not the cause but a symptom of the disease that seemingly metastasizes throughout presidential administrations ever since the conclusion of World War II: Nation-building. (RELATED: When Honor Walks Into a Liberal Democracy) Nation-building is too often sold as a noble pursuit by a benevolent people to deliver democracy, stability, and prosperity to the most unstable of nations. History spares no one; it humbles the powerful and insists on teaching the lessons we resist. Its lessons often seem inevitable: Bygone decisions appear inescapable, and the viability of alternate pathways easily discounted. Time and again, foreign interventions cloaked in the language of “nation building” have produced splintered societies, endless upheavals, and governments propped up by imported interests rather than the will of their own people. While plans may look rational and even practical on paper, in practice, even the best of intentions often collapse under the weight of misguided and unrealistic altruism. Too often, democracy’s blueprint has no regard for the longstanding culture, religion, history, and traditions that have existed for centuries within a civilization. Afghanistan is the most glaring example. After two decades and trillions spent, the Afghan government fell in a matter of days once foreign troops withdrew. The Afghan army, painstakingly trained and funded by the West, disintegrated overnight. By the end of 2003, U.S. special forces had fulfilled much of their objective in Afghanistan, targeting senior figures and high‑value assets within al‑Qaeda and the Taliban. Rather than sheathing our swords and returning home, we embarked on nation-building, trying to craft democracy from a fractured tribal society filled with centuries of strife into a Western democracy. What is seemingly forgotten is how American democracy was nurtured after a bloody four-year civil war and generations of internal struggle. Iraq tells a similar tale. The 2003 invasion toppled Saddam Hussein, but what followed was not stability but sectarian violence, corruption, and the rise of ISIS. The attempt to impose a new political order created a vacuum that Islamic extremists eagerly filled, plunging the country into years of turmoil. In 2011, Libya was acknowledged as a humanitarian intervention. Instead, Libya became a failed state, splintered by militias and rival governments. The hope of any democratic rule dissolved into civil war, mass displacement, and a breeding ground for human trafficking and jihadi extremism. Nation-building does not reconcile or empower — it destabilizes. Instead of creating thriving democracies, it leaves behind fractured institutions, cultural upheaval, and widespread suffering. These efforts produce fragile states reliant on foreign aid and are vulnerable to insurgency, which leads to resentment of those who intervened. Rather than sowing prosperity and civic harmony, such projects breed dependency, resentment, and chaos. From Vietnam to Afghanistan, the pattern is unmistakable: nation-building is nothing short of political hubris. The belief that we can waltz into a society and engineer change from the top down as if nations were Lego blocks to assemble. We call it nation-building when the task is about changing a civilization. Such goodwill never stood a chance and, in its wake, comes murderous zealots like Lakanwal. READ MORE from Greg Maresca: When Sanctuary Policies Hit the Highway Penny for Your Thoughts The $40 Million Mulligan

In many ways, Trump is outperforming the expectations many of us had for his second term. Things are going reasonably well. The world is a better and safer place since he’s been in the White House — or rather, since someone is in the White House. But there is one task he’s leaving unfinished. And it’s worrying. The culture war will never be won if he doesn’t keep his promise to reconquer Hollywood and the major streaming platforms. There are plenty of producers working hard to ideologically corrupt their audiences, and no one has stood up to them yet. (RELATED: Why Is Trump Protecting Hollywood?) I’ve written this more than once: unfortunately, Netflix is an enemy of Western civilization. It’s a garbage factory. You might argue that every now and then it produces something decent, but in between, it pours tons of ideological poison into the moral bloodstream not only of Americans, but of the entire West and beyond. It is far more than an entertainment company; it is a company with a mission — and that mission is nauseating. (RELATED: The Spectacle Ep. 300: Why Movies Suck: Screenwriter Lou Aguilar Tells the Story) Many large corporations abandoned the whole “woke” movement. Netflix didn’t. Disney backtracked and reversed course. Many large corporations abandoned the whole “woke” movement. Netflix didn’t. In fact, it doubled down. Identity politics and gender politics are more ubiquitous than ever. Its insistence on promoting transsexualism among young people — even children — is a direct attack on our way of life, on our values, and, more seriously, is helping create a generation of frustrated individuals who will carry serious psychological problems for decades. Amid all this, Netflix has now announced a deal to acquire Warner Bros. and the HBO platform. Trump could block it through an antitrust action that would be entirely justified. Reports suggest he prefers the Paramount option. I’m in favor of any option that reduces Netflix’s power, because although I am deeply committed to free markets, I also believe that the celebrated streaming giant is a threat to the nation and has done more than any other outlet to promote anti-Americanism and anti-Western sentiment. Rewarding it would be a mistake. (RELATED: They’re Still Coming After the Kids) Aside from this operation — about which we will soon hear more — I continue to wait for the reconquest of Hollywood that Trump promised us at the beginning of his term. In these confusing times, with the battle of ideas erupting on every corner, and often led by idiots and villains, we need America once again to produce films and series that reflect the values upon which the nation was founded. (RELATED: The Fall and Rise of American Culture) We also need to return to speaking about honor and truth, the value of family and the blessing of parenthood, sincere love, the age-old meaning of friendship, the pride of being a soldier, principled politics, classical art, philosophy, and the importance of thought — the fostering of a critical spirit in the face of the postmodern world’s anti-values. You can win every political and geopolitical war, but if you lose the cultural battle, it is only a matter of time before the left — with all its woke lies — regains power and tears down the structures the Trump administration is now so painstakingly building. By contrast, a victory in the cultural battle — from schools to the movie industry — lays the groundwork for once again forming free and equal citizens, with a critical and well-informed public opinion, not an unhealthy mass of sheep ashamed of their history, their identity, and their nation’s traditional values. There are naive politicians, even on the right, who still believe that film or music are trivial forms of entertainment. That is precisely the kind of politician who should be kept as far away as possible from where the major decisions are made. Ideally, they would be shipped off to a deserted island with a survival kit — and a damn Netflix subscription. I’m sure they’d change their minds within two weeks. READ MORE from Itxu Díaz: Sánchez’s Spain Is a Caricature of Political Corruption Truly, Spectacularly Stupid Purchases This Black Friday Maduro Is a Mustachioed Turkey With Bird Flu (and Deserves No Pardon)

President Trump appeared to say that Americans are going to be allowed — isn’t it great? — to buy small, inexpensive vehicles that are not currently available for sale in America, because it is illegal to sell them in America. Models such as the little pickup made by Toyota — the HiLux — being one of them. Also, the so-called “Kei” cars, which are abundant in Japan but unavailable here. “You’re not allowed to build them,” the president said, which isn’t exactly true. The manufacturers — Toyota, for instance — could build them here. There’s nothing illegal about that. The illegality occurs when a manufacturer of a non-compliant vehicle — i.e., a vehicle that does not meet every single Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) and federal “emissions” requirement (which these days means chiefly the “emissions” of carbon dioxide, which has nothing to do with pollution) — offers it for sale. Specifically, offers it for sale for use on what are styled “public” — meaning government-owned — roads. (RELATED: Longing for the Era of Economy Cars and Real Fuel Efficiency) It is legal to buy vehicles like the Roxor, which looks like the original WWII-era Willys Jeep. And what are called side-by-sides, such as the Can Ams you can find at motorcycle stores. But they are only legal for off-road use. (RELATED: Less Is Still Too Much) “I have authorized the secretary (of transportation) to immediately approve the production of these cars,” Trump said on Wednesday. Italics added. “Approving the production” is not the same thing as allowing the sale. “Approving the production” is not the same thing as allowing the sale. As explained above, there is no law precluding any vehicle manufacturer from producing vehicles in America that aren’t legal for use in America — on “public” roads, at least. The reason that vehicles such as the HiLux Champ are not produced in America is that it makes no economic sense to produce them here, for two ought-to-be-obvious reasons. The first being it would be absurd to produce a vehicle meant for use on public roads that cannot be used on public roads, because it couldn’t be sold in numbers high enough to make it worth trying to sell them. It’s fine to buy a Roxor or side-by-side if you have a farm or enough land to knock around on — and enough money to buy a fun toy to play with in the field. Most people have neither. They need a vehicle they can drive on the government’s — whoops, “public” — roads. But the government does not allow it. So most would never even consider buying a For Off Road Use Only Toyota HiLux Champ or any other such vehicle. The second thing is that producing vehicles here is more expensive than it is to produce them elsewhere. The HiLux that Toyota can offer for sale in other places for $16,000 would probably cost $25,000 if it were made in the USA, on account of the much higher manufacturing costs in the USA. More finely, the much higher regulatory compliance costs imposed on manufacturing anything in this country. Trump has yet to meaningfully address this elephant in the room. (RELATED: ‘Defrauding’ the United States) There’s another elephant that needs addressing. Low-cost vehicles such as the HiLux Champ pickup (and the little EV I recently wrote about — the Micro Microlina — that costs half as much as the last expensive EV Americans are allowed to buy) are not-compliant. Some of them have no airbags at all, and most have too few to be compliant with federal “safety” standards. It is doubtful any of them could pass federal side-impact/rear-impact and other such “standards.” Making them compliant would make them just as expensive as the cars we’re “allowed” to buy. And while none of them pollute, their “emissions’ (of CO2) are a problem, as regards regulatory compliance. They have engines that run all the time — unlike the hybrids being shoved down our throats, which achieve compliance by cycling the engine off as often as possible. When they are off, they “emit” no CO2 and are thus compliant. These hybrids — the ones we’re allowed to buy — naturally cost more because adding hybrid equipment — 48 volt electrical systems, an additional battery pack, and electric motors, etc. — costs money. Un-hybridized models cost less, but they are not compliant. Catch meet 22. So, in order for Toyota or any other vehicle manufacturer to be legally able to offer for sale vehicles like the HiLux Champ in this country, the federal regs mandating such things as multiple airbags and many other such things would have to be set aside. But they have not been set aside. More finely, the apparats that emit them have not been set aside. Until they are, any talk about such vehicles being “allowed” is wishful thinking at best and disingenuous at worst. Trump could just decree the “safety” and “emissions” regs null and void. That would change everything — in a good way, if you support the notion that other people ought to be free to decide for themselves whether they’re willing to “risk” driving a vehicle without airbags because it would enable them to buy a new vehicle they can afford to own. That this is controversial in America says a lot about what America isn’t anymore — which Americans intuitively know. When was the last time you heard an American say, It’s a free country? Well, Trump could make it a lot freer — at least insofar as the vehicles we’re allowed to buy. Note — because it is important — that no one would be forced to buy an airbag-free vehicle. They would merely be available, so that people who prefer not to buy a vehicle with airbags (and so on) would be free to buy them. The problem is that Trump is up against multiple federal regulatory apparatchiks, including the Department of Transportation (which encompasses the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration), as well as the EPA. He can “authorize” Sean Duffy to “allow” the production of noncompliant vehicles in this country. But that is a very different thing from authorizing their lawful sale to Americans. The apparats are not going to go quietly into that goodnight. But at least it is being talked about — and perhaps the fact that the president is talking about it may gin up the needed public/political support to get the federal apparat out of our business as regards the kinds of vehicles we’re “allowed” to buy. Americans have gotten used to the federal government deciding that. It is long past time to end that. Here, at last, is a real chance to make America something more along the lines of what America used to be. Wouldn’t it be great? READ MORE from Eric Peters: ‘SCORE’-ing a Win Celebrating the End of EVs An Automotive Atrocity