I'd disagree, Kafka has a specific not-quite-nightmare but a very unpleasant dream air to many of his works, and that is what I perceive as Kafkaesque. Meaningless requirements, broken logic, ill-advised actors and some such.
If anything, I find The Trial to be better reflecting Kafka's style, and be less unpleasant than The Metamorphosis maybe because it doesn't depict family members that dream of getting rid of main character.
This looks like some kind of doom:
{"data":{"error":"Imgur is temporarily over capacity. Please try again later."},"success":false,"status":403}
"But what about others being insufferable?"
A bit of a missed point
"The hole ass is strong with this one"
"So, Timmy, do you want to be healthy as a horse?"
Saber toothed shit is a serious reason
I think the hate is a bit unwarranted, but be wary that it does sometimes fail anything
Why is It a video, though? I would happily read a post instead
Yeah, "nobody wants to work anymore", but "we're not willing to pay for 10+ years of experience, yet we're only looking for 10+ years of experience"
And after this guys are poking fun on Europeans for not caring about work out of work hours. Man I would prefer the European attitude more, if it's not an emergency response team (which also should only work during the work hours, it just has those at odd times)
You would look higher when sitting, I guess. Not sure if it counts as a social interaction
This is a conundrum I can't wrap my head around. One (country, usually) can have something of cultural significance, and decide what to do with that. They can make it a museum, make it generally available, forbid access at all, and even destroy it completely (e.g. see Palmyra under ISIS).
If the object in question is not protected by UNESCO (and really, even if it is) no one has a say in that. The only remotely correct argument that can be made is that destroying historical artifacts makes it hard or impossible to study history, but one can argue that we don't need to study history, it's not like this is an imperative. Another argument may be that things do not belong to those who have it, but instead to their people as inheritors of people who lived long ago, but I don't think that also helps.
And so, on one hand, I am for preserving artifacts and not destroying those, on the other hand, I don't quite see what moral ground is there for it.