An armed society is a society where people are looking for someone to shoot.
An armed society is a society where people are looking for someone to shoot.
While it’s sad to see all these games begin to die a slow death, in reality, many of these titles are incredibly old and on last-gen platforms such as Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3.
Yet much older games are still playable without functionality loss.
You don’t need upgrades to online services. You need to stop locking down games.
Regulated capitalism. Prosecuting corruption.
If we’re not already on track to end fossil fuel consumption within the time it takes to build a nuclear reactor, then the nuclear reactor will help get there faster. And the current goals are 2050 or much later in some countries, we can and should move that closer in time by 10 years, and would still be able to use nuclear power to help with that.
And we’ll still need power after getting rid of fossil fuels, too.
Not easily. There are bottlenecks when everyone wants to do the same thing, and distributed solar and wind require more infrastructure to fully utilize it than something like nuclear. If we built nuclear in addition to renewables, the transition would go faster.
And every now and then they’d go on a rampage destroying other people’s and eras’ art.
Reroll at what point? “Hey, kids, today you’ll learn about resurrection, and what that booth is for”. There could be billions of people with no clue about the rules, let alone trust in how it would work.
And it’s just that much messier if non-humans are part of the cycle. Hundreds of billions of farm animals and semi-domestic species like rats, and all the rest of nature. They don’t get opt-outs.
Ideally it would mean everyone’s united in improving society for everyone and especially raising minimum standards, when you could end up as anyone.
Oil companies will default to doing anything that makes them money. Governments need to make climate forcing cost them more than their revenue.
People shouldn’t be paying to opt out of ads, websites should be paying their users for what they’re exploiting them for.
“More competition” meaning less access, people having to pay for multiple different services instead of having it in one place.
The competition should be about having the best platform, not exclusive content. There’s no reason why the same show couldn’t be on two different platforms. And available globally. Practically, all you really need is more local servers for where there’s more traffic.
For personal use, but corporations trying to profit off of it could be fined 100% of their assets if need be.
I have inside pockets added so that I can deal with the wire issue. Makes for a better place to carry the phone anyway.
And they only ever made one.
AI’s going to kill us off by doing what we do better than us. Consuming resources and producing waste. And we’re already pretty good at it.
Or make some more Zunes.
It is just a tool, if a writer can use it, why not? But without the writers and the involvement of humans to verify and edit the work, might as well just have the public use their own AI units instead of paying a studio for something they didn’t put any hours into.
In 2003, the World Wide Web was still in its infancy. Dial-up connections were still the default and YouTube, Facebook, and Gmail had yet to be invented.
I’d argue it had reached its prime. Websites were just websites then, not data harvesting machines.
Trees replace themselves. So yes, forests store carbon, rather than specific trees. Also, dead trees don’t just evaporate into the atmosphere. Other species eat them, etc. Over time, more and more carbon will be stored somewhere, if it’s left alone.
The biggest state, bigger than many countries. How different can it be from other parts of the same country?