213374U

Haha, if you think curvature is a "simple" math problem you've got another thing coming!

Drums? Drums.

No need to be so dramatic. It's not like a plant President would do anything too crazy like ordering the army to shell a Capitol trying to impeach him or anything.

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand sardonic political remarks. The humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical physics most of the jokes will go over a typical reader's head. There's also Bill Maher's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Thomas Friedman literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these jokes, to realise that they're not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike sardonic references truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in Charlie Kirk's existential catchphrase "gimme free stuffz," which itself is a cryptic reference to Lenin's Russian epic Sovnarkom Gosplan decree. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Stephen Colbert's genius wit unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools.. how I pity them. And yes, by the way, I DO have an I'm With Her tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.

Hello, Hurlshot. Welcome to Internet. Here, there's no middle ground between pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps 100-hour weeks FREEDOM without social benefits and FULL COMMUNISM where the state gives you boatloads of free stuff and lines you against the wall*. Better even, this thinking seems to be becoming more and more widespread as people are more interested in scoring points than get anywhere in a conversation. There comes a point where you're more likely to get through to the person in front of you with your fists than with words. I think we reached that point cca 2016. Enjoy your stay! *not necessarily in that order

lel dO yOu GuYs NoT hAvE pHoNeS?

Nice, I'm stealing that. -What's your roleplaying style? -Bethesda

Yep. 100% munchkin approach where in-game concerns trump roleplaying. I will protect you from great evils and so on and so forth, but will also take all of your valuables and possibly murder you later if the game allows and there's anything to be gained. Need to explore ALL the possibilities!

Ha, I'm the complete opposite. I pocket everything that isn't nailed down, generally kill everyone that's remotely killable and behave like a schizo at the best of times in my interactions with NPCs. I also play a paladin archetype (or literal paladin if the system allows) in first playthroughs too. I really only roleplay as LittleArmadillo0 and Amentep described in second and subsequent playthroughs. The reason is that as I'm first diving into a game, I'm constrained by the writer's ideas about my character and their role within the plot so I cannot know if I will be able to play the character I've imagined. More than once I've found that I couldn't after a few hours, and being constantly overriden by the writing has been immersion-breaking enough to lead me to abandon the game.

I'm not sure what you think the "reset" accomplished or was meant to accomplish beyond selling domestically the idea that Obama was a fantastic statesman. You don't get to wipe the slate clean in international relations by just saying so. Especially when you keep doing exactly the same things you have been doing that led to strained relations in the first place. As for Russia invading Crimea, yeah, terrible. I think the US could learn a thing or two, though.

I'll bite. I have no doubt Clinton would have been worse than Trump -- for NATO member countries, and short-term at least. Trump has launched no new wars, which considering the record of his predecessors is kind of a big deal. Now consider Clinton's track record as Secretary of State, her statements about Russia. Her boss essentially restarted the Cold War. It's anyone's guess if we would be on the brink of WWIII if Hillary had won, but I'd rather have an incompetent, lying, narcissistic but largely isolationist buffoon in power in the US than the latest in a long line of hawks ready to gamble with the possibility of another war in Europe. Just in case. edit: also accelerationism, as KP explained.

Did anything change or are you finding about this just now? I'm fairly certain I saw the different editions back when the game was first made available for preorder. Season passes are fundamentally no different from preorders, unless you believe that they are cutting content from the base game to resell later as DLC. That hasn't been PDX's MO... but then I haven't played their latest games, and what I've read about Imperator isn't good. Not that waiting for a goty/ultimate edition isn't a wise choice twelve times out of ten, but I don't think PDX does that either. I'd expect, at best, that expacs and DLCs will be on sale individually at some point.

Who are you talking about? Lily? Again, it's a systems problem rather than a deliberate tone setting. In PnP, a starving vampire is not a joke because if they frenzy, they are going to make a mess and possibly **** you up if you are in their way. Vampires going on a frenzy in game aren't much of an issue because, well... nothing is? I'm not even sure NPC vampires can frenzy.

I guess. I wanted to check if they have made any advances in reducing jank derived from the pops rework and all that. If not, it won't matter if they make the most comprehensive diplomacy-focused DLC because the game will be a micromanagement hell to play, and one that slows down to a crawl once things start getting interesting too.

Started a new game of Stellaris after keeping it on ice since 2.2 dropped almost one year ago. Mainly I want to see if the performance is still dismal, but also exactly how bad the AI still is. Roleplaying race creation is still fun, we'll see if playing the actual game is anywhere near as entertaining.

Cynical me can't help but think that what she'll get is a retrial on appeal after the DA violated the gag order and all the media attention the case received.

Yeah, but I'm fairly confident it won't have glistening sweaty Sting in winged briefs, so it'll be DOA.

She can't seem to answer that.

Personal horror is a central thematic element of VtM. Andrei's comments in his mansion are the most direct in-game references to this, but not the only ones. That doesn't necessarily exclude the odd pop culture reference or instances of dark humor, but I wouldn't go as far as calling Bloodlines "caricaturized". Of course it was exceedingly easy to go through the game as a 10-humanity saint, but that was more a design shortcoming than a result of the game's tone. So I'm hoping they double down on the "you're a monster" thing this time around, because that's what sets the VtM setting apart. Otherwise it's just your average urban power fantasy with a side order of over the top "machiavellian" politics.

Well, she "feared for her life".

Not quite. Poor choice of words, sorry. "They" worked on Divinity and AoD, but are not necessarily the makers. I couldn't find info on exactly who did precisely what, though. Could be QA people or an artist and it would still be technically true. And yeah, I agree with you guys about EA. I barely have time to play finished games. Then again, they are at least upfront about the game being unfinished, instead of just dropping it to hit the quarterly sales target or whatever and then finish it later... maybe. Steam info page says they expect the game to be in EA for nine (!) months. So at least a year.

Apparently Encased RPG released to early access. Post-apoc iso RPG by makers of DOS/2 and Age of Decadence. Or so they say. Looks good but... I've been hurt before. So this isn't as much me posting news as asking for infos or opinions on this, as I had no idea this was being made until five minutes ago.

From what I gathered from the study, they only considered abstracts. If the abstract made no explicit or implicit reference to AGW, then it was cataloged as "no position", according to the following criteria: Explicit endorsement with quantification — Explicitly states that humans are the primary cause of recent global warming Explicit endorsement without quantification — Explicitly states humans are causing global warming or refers to anthropogenic global warming/climate change as a known fact Implicit endorsement — Implies humans are causing global warming. E.g., research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause Article bodies weren't considered for the study. The second part of the study, where they e-mailed a subset of authors so they could self-rate the papers brought the AGW endorsement up to ~63%. Still a far cry from the 97% headline, and it's important to note that this was with only a 14% reply rate from authors. Don't get me wrong, I'd still agree that this constitutes "broad" consensus. But playing fast and loose with figures is a hard no for someone who 1) portrays themselves as a scientist, and 2) is purportedly trying to fight scientific misinformation.

That's a think-tank with ties to Koch-funded advocacy groups, "free market" UK organizations manned by past and current BoJo staffers, the Cato institute, etc. I mean, it may be technically true that the group comprises "500 prominent climate scientists and professionals" if there's at least one astrophysicist who published an error‑laden paper and the rest are former Shell employees like the founder of the group, but in general I wouldn't trust them to know enough science to change a lightbulb.