In addition to what @Pons_Aelius replied, it is also used as a benchmark/flex for computers, as to who can build a beefy enough machine or good enough card to calculate more digits of pi.

The answer to your question is as simple as it is unsatisfying. Additional degrees of precision in construction are only as useful as your means to use them.

If you using your saw can only cut to an accuracy of 1/8 of an inch, than any precision beyond that point is lost as you are unable to actualize it

However if you are using a saw and you’re now at the point of your personal skill that you’re measuring to the inside or outside of the mark on a ruler, then it is likely time for you to graduate between more precise form of measurement.

https://youtu.be/qE7dYhpI_bI?si=HCtTbklCA18ZieCh

This video covers a lot of the interesting points around measurement and how we can never truly be perfectly accurate with any measurement of any non-discreet metric.

To give a real world example if you are off by a millimeter diameter when building a car engine cylinder it will likely fail.

What word your looking for is a shibboleth, which of course is itself a shibboleth.

You could argue that these two are very closely related things.

I’d call it Monday personally

Ehh, does this post really add anything? They just said a thing is better than another thing but specified no reason why, how, or by what criteria. It’s just a simple rage bait.

How is dairy milk, which 65% of the human population is unable to drink easily due to lactose intolerance, better than almond milk which only about 10% of people are allergic to?

Or is what you’re saying here “I like the taste of dairy milk more than nut or soy milks” and your being overly dramatic?

This question is less interesting when in context of how we normally think about loved ones, being that they are around for most of your life.

When you immortal that’s no longer the case, you’ll eventually have a relationship with loved ones similar to a person who has had countless pets over the course of their life. The love a person holds for their pet is real, but it isn’t exactly the same as “the love of your life”.

Forever is a long time yo.

The real interesting question is after a century or two, when you start treating your lovers like an old man on his tenth dog.

Don’t be so dramatic, the moderators are divinely inspired forming an absolute monarchy.

The only proper political model to implement is a tychacracy where all decisions are governed by pure random chance. Every single post shall have the following.

20% the is removed

20% the post is untouched

20% the post is pinned. If the pin count is limited, pins are organized by first in first out.

20% the user is banned for life with no chance for appeal

20% the user is made a moderator

May the odds be in your favor!

deleted by creator

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually ceased or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance

Wikipedia

You don’t need to see someone who’s incredibly disrespectful in order to know what someone who is respectful is. Similarly, you don’t need to know hate to know love. This post was framed as saying without hate and malice people could not know respect and compassion. That entire premise is fundamentally flawed as people can know good things and bad things without having experienced the other.

You can know the color red without having ever seen the color blue. This is a false dichotomy

Do they? Have they ever? Have you ever even worked any service position?

If you had I doubt you would find them good for anything but shitty tips, racial slurs, outrageous demands, and the whole heard belief that the entire world revolves around themselves.

I’ve left better things over lesser issues.

Elvis Presley.

I’m going to go on a different angle on this one and say that we are much tougher on sexual harassment. I feel like a lot of people from the 1950s who have grown up on pulp sci-fi like Flash Gordon could accept a lot of modern technology and the internet as basically just magic. To be fair is how a lot of modern people also accept it. But I don’t think they would be able to process the move towards egalitarianism that we have taken.

That is not to say that modern society is egalitarian only that we have made good strides in achieving that aim.

Edit: Turns out Gordon is from the '70s, but other pulp sci-fi exist so my statement stands.