Many of whom seem straight up worse. Trump is awful, but at least he’s mostly incompetent at even achieving his own goals. The idea of having someone like Trump but competent is utterly horrifying. DeSantis, in particular.

I think they’re trying to get Israel to act in such a way that they finally lose the American support. Israel currently gets to do whatever it wants without consequence because the US will seemingly back them unconditionally. Also, many countries, people, and organizations are afraid to criticize Israel because they get called anti-Semitic. But I think that only works while Israel can manage to convince people it’s the “good one”.

It’s weird that Obama is being nuanced here, yet the US has been unwavering in supporting Israel, including during Obama’s term. Maybe his stance has changed. Or maybe it’s easy for him to say things when he doesn’t have to act on it at all. Talk is cheap, after all.

I completely agree. I think the point of the commenter you’re replying to is that this is the kind of game that will fix these eventually. It’s still disappointing for a launch, but eventually it will probably become better than CS1.

The “somehow” is because IRC is extremely bare bones. It doesn’t stand up to modern expectations of what chat software does. Plus accounts aren’t all a bad thing. Anti-spam is vital for the internet today, as is rigid ways of preventing impersonation. IRC is a relic of a simpler era.

Fuck Ea-nāṣir and his low grade copper.

You definitely still want locks because most people have no idea how to pick a lock and a lot of crime is crimes of opportunity. But I don’t think there’s that much of a difference in most locks. A slightly better lock might dissuade a thief who learned how to pick cheap masterlocks, but someone who truly wants to get in doesn’t even need to pick a lock. I’d hazard a guess that break-ins happen far more often by breaking the window than picking locks.

Many games I play automatically determine pretty reasonable settings. And worst case, you can always lean towards lower settings.

It adds value by helping convince clueless investors to give you money. I’m entirely serious. There’s a significant number of investors that think blockchain technology is a good thing. Doesn’t matter that it’s a terrible solution to practically every problem. The goal isn’t to be a good solution. The goal is to make money. They only need to convince a few clueless people to give them that.

They said emissions.

Meat accounts for nearly 60% of all greenhouse gases from food production, study finds

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/13/meat-greenhouses-gases-food-production-study

As for the rest of what they said:

The entire system of food production, such as the use of farming machinery, spraying of fertilizer and transportation of products, causes 17.3bn metric tonnes of greenhouse gases a year, according to the research. This enormous release of gases that fuel the climate crisis is more than double the entire emissions of the US and represents 35% of all global emissions, researchers said.

In case you’re curious about plants, they’re actually only 29%:

The use of cows, pigs and other animals for food, as well as livestock feed, is responsible for 57% of all food production emissions, the research found, with 29% coming from the cultivation of plant-based foods. The rest comes from other uses of land, such as for cotton or rubber. Beef alone accounts for a quarter of emissions produced by raising and growing food.

I gotta be honest, this comes across more like excuses to not make changes or even admit your part. I’m not a vegetarian myself, but I’m under no delusions that my meal preferences aren’t bad for the environment and have ethical concerns. I eat meat anyway because honestly, I just like the taste and struggle to give that up. But I fully support those who can give it up and want to see lab grown meat be a viable replacement.

Like your roommate, nobody is saying literally everyone has to stop eating meat full stop. If you have a medical need, obviously keep eating meat. Similarly, reducing how much meat you eat is still an improvement. You don’t have to go 100% vegetarian.

Similarly, if indigenous folks can sustainably eat meat, cool. But most people simply aren’t doing that. And are you aware of why meat is so bad for the environment? I mean this 100% seriously: cow farts. Raising livestock ethically only addresses the moral problems with animal husbandry. This thread is about environmental problems. Land intensiveness doesn’t actually matter that much. The amount of land used isn’t the problem.

The avocados thing isn’t related to environment. Again, I gotta be honest here, this feels like an attempt at a “gotcha”. I get it. I struggled with the idea that my own consumption (which again, I still do) is bad for the environment. Plus I could never kill an animal myself. I can only eat meat because I emotionally separate myself from it. It’s a hard reality to face and I’m still not really comfortable with it. But we can’t act like “oh, you eat a bad thing, so I’m okay to do different bad things” is a good reasoning.

Don’t take things literally when someone says “we should all do X”. That’s not a personal attack on you if you don’t. That’s just how we talk. We say “everyone should watch the new Barbie movie because it’s really great” but I don’t actually mean literally every single human needs to watch it.

Especially when they’re kids. People should be able to wear whatever they want. But kids don’t often get to choose what they want. They’re often at the mercy of what their parents want and that’s it.

There’s also something to be said about pressure from family members. Even if the kid chose to wear something, did they really do so out of their own free will? Or because their parents said they’ll burn in hell for all eternity if they don’t?

And it’s not like we’re talking about something like simple taste in clothing or mild culture differences. We’re talking about clothes that are drenched in misogyny. It’s not about literal clothing in a vacuum, but rather what those clothes imply about women as a whole.

K3s? What did you do to the other 5 letters??

The difference is popular conception. Laws aren’t set based on science. They’re set based on what enough people believe. People believe energy drinks are worse and thus they get regulated whether or not it’s true.

Advertising, audience, and stereotypes play a part in this too. Coffee is stereotypically consumed by older people, whereas energy drinks are often younger people (who older people find annoying). Coffee also has a much greater social acceptance that would make it controversial to regulate. End result is that it’s popular to limit energy drinks but unpopular to point out that coffee has far more caffeine.

I was confused at first because 61 - 24 isn’t 18, but then realized he did have a length of time out on parole before he was sent back for violating parole.

Fortunately for everyone, they had to define “woke” during a court case.

DeSantis’ general counsel, Ryan Newman, responded that the term means “the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them.”

So there we have it. Recognizing the flaws in the justice system is woke.

Going in blind is the best. Unfortunately, it’s probably pretty difficult to do, since spoilers are extremely rampant. I don’t even know how I managed to do it. But it really is magical if you go in blind.

I agree with you on those special weapons. I dunno why the heck they made those so rare or expensive while also not being that durable. I don’t find it an issue for most normal weapons, though, especially with the fuse mechanic in TotK. I like how it forces me to vary things up and allows for regular treasure chests or drops to actually give you something you can use (even if it’s basically like a short lasting consumable).

I’m with you when it’s generic, way too numerous items like those damned feathers.

I’m all for collectibles when they’re interesting, meaningful, and not too numerous. But I think most games and especially open world games really just want to pad the completionist time.

Horizon is a game that did collectibles much better, with the exception perhaps of data points (which aren’t marked on the map for some reason). The collectibles in Horizon are unique, have story, and are usually actually interesting to get to. I noticed often in Horizon, they were just so interesting to either get to (the case for ornaments) or had fascinating story (like the ones that unlock images of the past).

I usually dislike weapon durability (eg, in Fallout), but Zelda is the one game where I actually liked it. Perhaps because in Zelda, it was a central mechanic that the game was designed and balanced around.

For most games, durability is something that the game isn’t really designed around and feels more forced in. When you can repair your gear (as you usually can), durability just means every now and then you gotta deal with the annoyance of repairing.