Do NOT use battery electric busses when you could use trolleybusses. Or even better, just use trams
That being said, anything is better than diesel busses
Do NOT use battery electric busses when you could use trolleybusses. Or even better, just use trams
That being said, anything is better than diesel busses
We don’t call that gambling, no, no, we call that LOTTERY! In Georgia at least.
People bias their own experiences and wrongly assume that most people have similiar thoughts and feelings.
(Neuro)typical people and narcissists thinking everyone experiences life like them 🤝 people with an undiagnosed disability thinking typical people experience the same exact hardships they do and being self-deprecating over it
It worked for Turkey… until recently…
My opinion is that it sucked and I felt like I wasted my time watching it
Man Biden is really trying to lose the upcoming election isn’t he. A year ago I would not have predicted that he would fuck up such an easy reelection this badly, but here we are. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory I guess.
Apparently Biden has always been this shitty when it comes to Palestine. Some things children just never grow out of it seems.
can i be moderately strong and gay but probably slightly closer to weak than strong because i wanna get fucked senseless by a strong protective man be a twink
not that i want that or anything
I’m having a tough time trying to read that, the first part is obviously 「ミスター スパーコル!」 (“misutā supākoru!”/mister sparkle) but the second part is hard to read, I think it says 「ハワー ワリーソ!」(“hawā warīso!”) but it doesn’t make any sense to me. Maybe the ハ is just missing a handakuten and it’s supposed to say “pawā”/power? But idk what the second one is supposed to be. Maybe クリーン (“kurīn”/clean)? But that’s a stretch.
Idk man conservatives in recent history have a pretty consistent track record of assassinations and assassination attemps on liberal and leftist politicians in the US based on their politics. Tommy Burks was outright killed by his Republican opponent less than a month before the election (Burks was one of the most conservative Democrats at the time, but he was certainly killed by a lot more conservative Republican), Clementa Pinckney (targetted in a white supremacist shooting at a primarily black church that he was the pastor of), Gabby Giffords (shot in the head by an anti-government right-wing conspiracy theory consumer).
When Republican politicians are killed now, it’s pretty much only by personal enemies/drama that is unrelated to liberal or leftist politics, or by schizophrenic/criminally insane people who also weren’t doing it over politics. Like Linda Collins (her friend killed her after being confronted for stealing money), Mike McLelland (he was killed by a former lawyer who’s theft case he prosecuted). Hell, even Ronald Reagan was shot over an actress, not over the guy’s personal political views. Ironically, Republican John Roll was killed by the right-wing terrorist targetting Gabby Giffords, he was caught in the cross-fire. I don’t think there’s even an in-office conservative Republican politician that was assassinated by a Democratic rival this century, or even a single instance of a conservative Republican being assassinated by a liberal over politics recently.
I want you to think of how frequently you hear of terrorist attacks which were committed in the name of white supremacy, christian nationalism, dicrimination against LGBT, or some other far-right bullshit, and then think of how frequently you hear of terrorist attacks committed in the name of progressive beliefs like, oh idk universal healthcare and better public transport. it’s gotta be at least like a 20 to 1 ratio, and that’s me being conservative with the amount of conservative attacks.
So I take it you’re against the government subsidizing science research in general? “The government shouldn’t fund new technology” is a stupid and destructive position. We’d be living in the 1800s if it were up to solely the capitalistic market. I mean, the first broadly effective antibiotics that are responsible for saving probably hundreds of millions of lives at least only exist because of people working in government-funded labs, under government-funded universities, for the government. Why should the environment be treated like it doesn’t matter to our civilization?
What are you talking about, I didn’t imply anything I outright said what I meant
wiki.gg is where most of the wikis have transferred to, terraria for example
No, not at all. You can easily view the edit history of all Wiktionary pages – 2 years ago, someone put the definitions in the order they are now for a specific reason. This person thinks it should be the other way around, so if they want to change it it’d be best to make a discussion about it. That’s the best way to get a community consensus on it. Wiktionary is a collaborative effort, people have different opinions on the specifics of a page, that’s why discussions exist and are the go-to for settling differences in views.
Whether a term is characteristic of a certain dialect or region isn’t generally considered all that much when it comes to order on Wiktionary, unless it’s an “obscure” dialect. I contribute a lot to Wiktionary (mainly for languages other than Modern English though) and there are few rules on the specific the order of definitions, it’s mostly just common definitions above uncommon definitions (but this isn’t even a hard rule).
Editing it to change the order for your reason specifically might be considered vandalism, as it’s typical and allowed for entries to be like this and it’s common for little disputes like that to cause editing wars (although that’s admittedly far more common on Wikipedia, since many Wiktionary contributors are actually linguists and are less controversial).
That being said, someone actually did intentionally move the “gang member” definition above the other one, so there’s clearly some sort of difference in opinion.
If you want it changed, the course of action you should take is starting a discussion about it. It’s a good way to get a community consensus.
Investing in Godot probably has no sizable benfefit to Valve. But it does have a big benefit for gaming as a whole, specifically smaller or newer developers/studios. Meanwhile investing more in Source 2 may have a lot of benefit for Valve, depending a lot on their future plans.
Valve already has a game engine you can use – Source – although outside of their own games, it’s not really popular. Otherwise I think it’s moreso that making a good general gaming engine is hard. Like, really hard. If Valve tried to compete with, say, Unreal or Unity, (especially with their relatively small team) it’d more likely than not have no chance at all. They’d need a LOT more manpower, a massive budget, and to hope that they actually make something quality enough to actually be a viable alternative. Even then, though, it doesn’t have the 2 decades of content and design that Unreal and Unity have, which is pretty important. Although I suppose Source does have a lot of user-generated content.
It’d be a gargantuan investment, a massive risk that has a high likelihood of not turning out well, and even if it were successful it would likely take many years if not over a decade to actually see the benefit of it.
There’s a good reason most games use an extremely small amount of engines, either that or their own in-house engines. It’s a monumental task to make a great, easy-to-use, generic engine like the ones currently on the market.
IMO Valve trying to enter the game engine market would just end up being either Godot but worse, or Bevy but worse. It’d be far better if they just created a team to work on a pre-existing open-source engine, although I guess there’s not any money involved in that unless they for some reason used the engine.
How can you tell that they’re not a 2D slice of life anime character living in the real world with real world problems? You the NSA or somethin’?
Social jet lag? Wouldn’t that just be delayed circadian rhythm?
I mean ADHD, Autism, Dyspraxia, etc. have a specific set of symptoms and specific treatments, and a large part of the population has those (as well as other mental disabilities like MDD, Bipolar, etc.). Many psychology researchers tackling the subject find that ADHD is severely underdiagnosed in the population (despite popular uneducated belief being that ADHD is overdiagnosed due to misinformation being widely spread on TV shows in the 2000s), with around 20% of people likely meeting the criteria for an ADHD diagnosis (diagnosis rates are usually in between 3% and 10%).
It’s postulated that the high occurence of ADHD compared to other disorders comes from our days as hunter-gatherers – then, many of the behaviours of ADHD would have been extremely helpful, such as high alertness/awareness of changes in the environment such as sound cues and slight visual changes, and impulsiveness/drive to be active to seek out berries and prey and such, making a decent portion of members of a group having ADHD be a huge benefit and boost to survival rates. But most of those useful effects have become quite useless in modern society, and many of the symptoms (like dysfunctional working memory & inattentiveness) have become a massive detriment under industrialism. It is likely that in pre-industrial/medieval society ADHD was still a net benefit, at least according to what little we can ascertain from it there.
Genes contributing to Autism Spectrum Disorder have also been positively selected for even since before humans came about, since they also brought benefits throughout primate evolution.
You can really take a lot of common mental disorders and find some sort of evolutionary reason for it; even mood disorders, anxiety disorders, insomnia disorders, schizophrenia, etc. would have had some potential benefits to prehistorical human groups.
Fun fact, there was a study done on prison populations in Estonia and it was determined that 40% of prisoners had undiagnosed ADHD – the symptoms of ADHD are kind of contrary to the core principles of being a capitalist worker, often with it being mistaken for “laziness” or “lack of motivation” (qualities which bring shame and have, for most of modern history, gotten you shunned from society), so they have a much higher likelihood of falling behind in life without proper treatment.
Why would we have a PM? We already have the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader. And the PM wouldn’t be able to exercise any executive powers unless you burned the constitution, because separation of powers.
There’s not really a good reason to adopt a parliamentary system like the UK’s for example if we were to completely reform the government imo. Or to have a PM separate from the president at all.