Punitive reprisals to... The open declaration of war Hamas made today?

Who in their right mind expects a country to supply power to the country that literally just attacked them?

OK, then why fucking make them? Aren't games supposed to be fun?

This whole genre really bugs me, and I'm someone who LOVES space games. The best game in the genre IMO is elite dangerous, because their ship to ship combat is so damn fun to play that I can hop in for a bit and have a blast without having to engage with the other systems that are often painfully boring.

The problem here is that people what the feeling of being explorers and finding new things, but video games inherently can't provide that. There aren't computers strong enough to produce thousands or millions of planets that all have genuinely interesting features on them that are worth exploring for. "Exploration" in current space Sims is basically "stick your name on something someone else hasn't already stuck their name on, maybe grab some resources from it, and leave." That gets dull very fast.

Developers COULD choose instead to make a couple of good, big planets that are interesting and full of actually good content. They could give you a reason to explore beyond "look other planets cool."

If you made 1000 planets and only 10 of them are at all interesting, and your game is centered on exploring other planets and not really focussed on much else, you've made a boring game.

We desperately need laws to regulate these kinds of privacy policies/user agreements. The VAST majority are way too long and complicated for a normal person to actually understand, let alone read. We need to limit what companies can/can't do with them instead of letting them do whatever they want to.

We also need a law that prevents them from changing the terms of service on a product someone has been using, then locking them out of it if they don't agree to the new terms.

Appendices to LOTR*

They legally cannot use the silmarillion

Hard disagree here. I'm a rabid wheel of time fan who has read the books at least 6 times.

Ir would be downright impossible to "stick to the source" for book one (or really, any if them) and have it be good on film. It just wouldn't work on film, there is too much going on. The story would feel like it drags and is being forcefully stretched out, because the book is rather repetitive. That repetition works in a book because you are getting to read the characters inner thoughts, and in paper it adds tension that, for example, Rand and Mat are unsure whether the next place they stay will be full of dark friends.

But after the third time they get chased out by dark friends a TV audience would be like "OK they did this already get on with it." Repetition on TV gets boring FAST.

And the magic system is all kinds of messy in the books. They're diving into it a bit more now, but it's still got Tobe simplified for screen. You can't convey characters thoughts on screen, which basically neuters the whole system. The book is VERY exposition heavy, and that gets boring real quick on screen. Look at the LOTR theatrical VS extended editions. There is a reason that Bilbo talking about Hobbits at the beginning got cut. I like that scene, but it also is too much exposition to drop on the viewer right after the intro, which is also exposition. EOTW is like half exposition, and most of the books are at least a third exposition. That all has to get cut or reworked to be actually fun to watch without being super preachy. It's

Listen to Brandon Sanderson talking about the adaptation of Mistborm he has been working in for ages now. He has said that he had to make big, fundamental changes to the characters and story to make it work on film. He said his first draft was closest to the book, and that it was quite bad.

The biggest fuckup season 1 of the show did was not including the prologue. Idk why they cut it, it's such a good intro. Besides that, I thought they did alright. Season two has been much better so far, and has shown that they really do understand the core of this story and all of the characters in it.

Also I'd argue that none of this really matters because language doesn't follow an absolute set of rules. Language is how people use it. If people start using a word to mean so thing it take son that meaning, it doesn't matter if the word makes sense in relation to other words.

A word for something isn't a 100% accurate description of that thing and it never has been. It doesn't matter that a peanut isn't technically a nut, we call it a peanut. Everyone understands that it's a peanut. If you walk up to someone on the street and say "do you know where I can buy some peanuts" they will understand what you are saying with no problems at all.

We spend way too much time arguing over the "right" and "wrong" uses of words. There is no such thing really. Words don't determine their own meaning, people determine that meaning, and if enough people can regocnize a words meaning immediately when they hear it then it is a word with a valid definition. It doesn't matter if the word is contradictory to the way other similar words work, because language isn't defined like that.

Ironically this whole stupid "homophobic peoe aren't scared of gay people" actually proves that the person making that claim does acknoedge that the word homophobia is linguistically valid, because they are acknowledging that it's understood definition differs from what you would expect if you strictly read the word literally

Adobe Acrobat. I have tried at least 5 other PDF readers and editors for windows, and none of them are remotely close. Either they don't have any document editing at all and are just PDF readers, or their editing capabilities are VERY clunky, not feature rich, or just don't work.

I haven't ever found another program that let's me directly edit text in a PDF that already exists.

I don't need to edit PDFs much but when I do it's usually quite important, and Adobe is by far the easiest and quickest to do it in.

I hate that that's the case, because I really don't like Adobe as a company and would rather not have to use their software, but there it is.

This man got to go on JOE FUCKING ROGANS PODCAST and say whatever he wanted.

I'm so sick of major outlets giving antisemites so much airtime to say whatever the fuck they feel like. It's terrifying to watch this shit as a Jew.

I think they're just brainwashed by our capitalist system which says that if a person is wealthy it's because they worked for it and we're successful. We are indoctrinated from very young ages to believe that capitalism is a strict meritocracy where only the best, most intelligent, most deserving people become wealthy.

In reality most wealthy people inherited some or most of their wealth, and used that inherited wealth to create more wealth- because it turns out that once you are wealthy it's really easy to get more wealthy. They aren't wealthy because they are skillful or intelligent or good at business. Most of them are good at precisely one thing: giving some of their money to a professional who knows how to grow it so that they will never run out.

Then they throw money at whatever catches their eye, and when you have billions to throw around you can cast a very wide net that will almost certainly catch something.

I've always like the idea that the Olympic events should have one "normal" person do them, at least for ones where that is plausible and makes sense (like racing events, maybe not stuff like the giant slalom or the ski jump)

Like, if you had a 9th swim lane and put a guy who swims 3 days a week in there for fitness, I guarantee he'd get completely smashed in a way that would really illustrate how much faster the Olympians are.

Why the fuck did it take 3 years forthis to happen? That just a ridiculously slow process after someone aided a coup attempt in broad daylight and lied on national TV about an election being stolen.

Did they accidentally nuke the entire database again?