indeed
I exist or something probably
indeed
could you expand on that?
Nazis are literally just less common here. There's not much reason to constantly talk about them in a meta sub fashion when they are already so rare I haven't seen one in weeks and are routinely and swiftly banned.
Tankies on the other hand, are not.
Your protest just looks silly and obviously ridiculous. Not talking about the problem of Nazis in online discourse 24/7 isn't an endorsement of them, different spaces have different problems.
You just don't digest as much nor store as much calories. So your feces and urine, as well as exhalation.
It's not cheating basic physics, there's just a lot of misunderstanding about how weight works in biology. Cico is not what many people believe it to be.
Oppenheimer, the bio pic about the scientist who rejected their own creation and associated happily with communists, and showed the actions of various people to specifically target someone for that? That non woke Oppenheimer?
normally claims to be leftist, the main tankie things are being in support of authoritarians, as long as they wear red (claim to be communist) and often uncritically support any actions taken against "the west", which often aligns them with authoritarian governments like the ccp, kremlin. Tankies get their name from support of various events where tanks were used to oppress, like tianmen square, prague spring, etc.
That's what it always was. Many people view. "Politics" as simply being anything they don't like or disagree with.
As long as you're keeping it to your own life not trying to encourage genocide via antinatalist policy then you do you.
So your understanding of something like racism is that it can only be racism if it involves a live real human? What about racist fiction? I don't think your idea of sexism or racism holds up...
Trilium for a database and therefore faster method that is actually foss.
Obsidian is reaching market criticality so I'm expecting enshitification any time now.
Ah, genocidal eugenics, there you are. How I didn't miss you.
Im going to correct and elaborate here.
Just taken at face value this claim is wrong. What you're thinking of is that you can often get military hardware in media, as in tanks, soldiers as extras, uniforms, 3d models of vehicles, etc. Directly from the military/dod. These are things which often cost millions of dollars, you can occasionally get them for free in your movie. The caveat is generally that then the dod is allowed to vet and veto scenes and uses, the expectation being that they can kick out anything that depicts the military in a bad lens, more or less.
Sometimes relaxing regulatory measures leads to people following them better, as they better match the intent of the regulation rather than being seen as absurd. It also lowers the 'benefit' of deviancy from that regulation.
Sometimes you're right, you regulate more extremely than the intent because people will follow it better, or it makes it easier to enforce.
The point is there's not a one size fits all.
"I know nothing about Thing In Video but I will choose to vehemently insist this can't be Thing It Obviously Is, also it's fine they shot at a civilian with no regard for rules of engagement anyway."
Bruh
Ooooh another supercomputer claiming to surpass or approach a human brain. Cute! The simulations it'll run will probably be pretty neat though.
But see they're made up. If the characters aren't real, who could possibly suffer the effects of media intentionally objectifying women or otherwise reducing a group of people into caricatured stereotypes- ohhhhhhhhhhhhh
A recall is a bit more severe than am update. Common, but not simply pushing out a software update they couldve done wirelessly.
It means they have been regulated for a severe safety defect and are being forced to do this.
The details are literally women being objectified, and blackface. You have intentionally chosen to not read words to... What exactly are you trying to achieve here? Actually read the post and the comment you have responded to and think deeply about your rhetoric and the meaning and time you chose to dedicate.
im sorry do you not have veggies of any kind at your bbqs to make this dichotomy make sense? you're missing out
This isn't how it works at all. I can, and should, and do, read and consume all sorts of media with the intention of stealing from it for my own works. If you ask for writing advice, this is actually probably one of the first things you'll hear: read how other people do it.
So this does not work as an argument, "the intent of the reading" because if so humans could never generate any new media either.
People should really read the article. It feels like I'm reading broken records in these discussions because people take a headline, refuse to read what the article has to say, and then say "but what about x?" When the article has a section literally dedicated to say, how social media can contribute to rising violence in the presence of easy gun access. Like that's literally a component of the thesis here.
would you join an instance
If I could read those languages yes probably.
Fiber composites are complex. Carbon fibers can be made to withstand compressive loads in that you make composites with the CF and other materials. Even so carbon fibers are about half as strong in compression as tension. Even so, carbon fiber might have a specific strength of around 3000 kN-m/kg, steels might be around 63 kN-m/kg. So it's not as simple as "carbon fiber isn't as good in compression as tension, never use it in compression." A lot of current research in aerospace is to produce better manufacturing methods and resins for carbon fibers to phase out aluminum and steel parts. Mostly in tension yes, but compression too, all parts without preloading generally are some degree in compression during their stress lives.
Should he have bought expired carbon fiber for a submarine? No. Is carbon fiber completely absurd in submarine usage? I don't imagine so. Though steel is plenty fine for a submarine, normally the hard part is the sinking by design, not the floating, so weight savings aren't super important.
Those things are not enshittification, enshittification is the process where a service becomes worse as a means to extract more value from users and then shareholders, where user does not just mean the classic consumer but ad sellers, data buyers, etc.
Not all annoying features are enshittification, but enshittification is not just misfeatures.
You may know all this but I felt your comment was not clear enough about the distinction.
Was it a bear sex scene in that a player character has sex with a non sophont bear, or was it a bear sex scene where a player character has sex with a sophont druid in the shape of a bear. These are so incredibly different things that it needs to be stated before I can form an opinion.
"Why, we aren't at fault people are using the tool we are selling for the thing we marketed it for, we put a disclaimer!"
But this is literally people trying to strengthen copyright and its scope. The corporation is, out of pure convenience, using copyright as it exists currently with the current freedoms applied to artists.
The cat part is also almost entirely irrelevant to the game. Neither the story nor the mechanics really care that you're a cat. Sure you do more climbing than walking, but you do that in uncharted too. Linear combing sections are not what I imagine when I think "cat movement."
316L is perfectly capable of rusting especially under pitting corrosion. I don't know who told you it is physically incapable. It is just unlikely under normal food conditions.
Do you have any sources for this fairly common naturally occurring biologically important, and in human uses bioinert metal causing "light metal poisoning" from either natural background doses or incidental from human pollution?
I don't want acute poisoning, specifically sources on chronic background doses.
To be honest, half the stuff people claim they lied about was always entirely speculation hype that never had any backing.
Otherwise, for some people the game worked just fine. For others the game was nearly or entirely unplayable, and everything in between. Cdpr certainly lied and should have delayed their game's release, probably upwards of a couple years, but the situation is rarely portrayed accurately.
This is genuinely great content for demonstrating that ai search engines and chat bots are not in a place where you can trust them implicitly, though many do
This is interesting, since my perspective on be tragedy has always been from the perspective of game theory. Often the optimal outcome isn't a stable one because in many circumstances a totally altruistic system can be taken advantage of.
Humans of course beat the game theory predicted stability points quite often, because humans are not rational actors and that is an adaptive advantage that lets us beat gave theory often unintentionally, compared to most other animals which do behave rationally.
So the important takeaway I think is that models don't describe everything, all perspectives have limitations. Humans beat the tragedy of the Commons regularly and often there are ways to. But it is a genuine problem that exists in many situations and does need to be solved.
Fascists with red and gold aesthetic.
Known for their unshakable support of Russia and China.
"Social problems can't possibly be exacerbated by socially manipulative systems because I demand that every article discussing anything must be a whole systems view of every possible system contributing to every possible problem."
That's what your comment reads like to me. Let's be a little more nuanced shall we? Maybe the world has many possible inter dependent variables and when someone writes an essay they might focus on just one possible factor.
In fairness to most people, it's actually brazen to assume one knows with certainty that a giraffe must always have spots, especially as a relatively newborn giraffe.
Without looking it up, do you know for certain that cheetahs always have spots? Robins a red breast? That no kangaroos have spots? It's just best practices to be curious and intellectually humble in the face of unknowns.
For anyone else spotting this ...incredibly long rant, I'll counter by simply pointing out that multicellular organisms are altruistic collectives of individual cells which survive best when all constituent parts cooperate. There is no central authority in any biological system. All parts simply communicate and process in extremely complex ways which defy hierarchal categorization.
Cancer on the other hand is a breaking of that altruism and excessive hoarding of resources to the point where it self destructs the hosting system that was letting it survive at all.
This individual's unique understanding of "four brains" isn't accurate nor detailed with how biological systems work, humans or otherwise, and fails to address the simple counter example of "what about plants though" or any other myriad of other counter examples.
Even non multicellular organisms often benefit from and perform rather incredible acts of altruism, and do so all on their own accord, nobody "above" organizing the process.
Cheers folks.
Improving human efficiency is essentially the purpose of technology after all. Any new invention will generally have this effect.
Nah plenty of encryption services switched to quantum resistant encryption half a decade ago.
maybe, but logging trucks are second only to hay trucks in rate and lethality of dropped load. It's a really good and basic safety practice, the movie didnt come up with the idea of logging truck accidents.