Also wasn't this one in some woke drama just before release?
This is the one that had the localization that made a character call some big NPC a “chud.”
But would you have to prove that? If you're the person licensing it out under whatever limited license, would it be enough to say "hey, you agreed not to redistribute this, but then you ran it through Adobe, who says they will peek at and use anything you run through their software"?
At least Will Smith’s kid felt more honest about what it was. “I wanna make a movie with my son, I’m a big enough star to make that happen, so here are some movies with me and my son. We’re even playing father and son, because this movie is really just an excuse for us to be in a movie together.”
It’s a shame the movies didn’t turn out good, but it didn’t feel quite the same as taking over a property like Star Wars to shove your relatives in. (Although given that Hollywood can’t do original stuff, those movies probably do represent a terrible adaptation of something, so maybe I shouldn’t be as forgiving as I am).
Wow, that was even worse than I was assuming. Very interesting, though. Thanks.
Sounds good in principle, although Brazil, specifically, would be a terrible choice.
With our glorious ruling class' expert leadership, one day, we WILL catch down to China!
Yes, but what I'm saying is that you could be temporarily below the 0.08 limit and heading above it by continuing to consume alcohol while you drive. I think that would avoid the breathalyzer, but is still a dangerous behavior that shouldn't be allowed.
Passenger with an open lite beer? Don't care.
I assume that one is more of a logistical thing, because otherwise you could drive while drinking and then pass the beer to the guy sitting next to you if you get pulled over.
I’m not the guy you replied to, but I would think that the idea that you can assess, using the often-vague details of a 911 call, what people are likely to be dangerous or escalate situations would be a poor assumption, given that the fundamental trait of all these cases is that they are operating on various kinds of crazy-person logic. The reason the call is coming in in the first place is because they’re unbalanced, acting weird, and communicating strangely, so how would anyone know if the guy who thinks he’s Jesus gets mad if you don’t immediately pray to him, or has some other issue you have no idea about?
Is that close to the mark? Whether I’m right or way off base, I’d be interested in hearing more.
I'm not bitching about personal problems. That's not a personal issue for me. The "I" was hypothetical, not literal. I'm warning you about the consequences of your policies. You're just a moron who doesn't understand incentives.
because we tried to give them technology that was thousands of years beyond their mud huts
The technology certainly didn't help, but looking at some of the stuff that existed there before colonization—and the fact that they were in mud huts at all—and I would say they would be fucked up even if we had never done anything. Maybe in a slightly different way, but fucked up. The French ending Dahomey, for example, was probably for the best.
Let's say I spend a bunch of time writing anything. A story, a history, a song, a news article, a scientific text, whatever. Hours and hours of research writing and such. When I spend my time on this, I don't have the use of that time to do a different job, so when I finish my product, I put it behind some sort of paywall because I need to make money somehow.
Now, I'm not saying "I did a thing for hours, people owe me money." If what I made is crap, it doesn't matter how long I spent doing it, no one will want to buy it. But, if some moron says "hey, this is great, everyone should have it for free!" and then circumvents my paywall, and I can't make any money off of it... it doesn't matter how nice and high-minded you tell yourself you're being, the bottom line is that I no longer have the ability to trade my time for something other than working a job that isn't creating that thing, so I'm not going to keep making it. Because it's true that no one is obligated to think my labor is worth paying for, but it is also true that I am not obligated to perform labor no one pays for—and that, in many cases, even if I want to, I cannot afford to.
You are conflating two different things in a way that doesn't work. All I'm saying is that if no one pays for everything you're writing off as some ephemeral bullshit, people will stop making that stuff.
That’s a nice-sounding platitude, but at a certain level it runs into the same issues Communism does: if someone doesn’t have a right to make a living off their work, they can’t or won’t spend time doing that work.
People often say “the right copes too much about taking the high road,” and while that’s true in some cases, they miss that the left by and large controls police and judicial apparatuses. Part of the right’s “refusal to fight back” is because of a not entirely unrealistic acknowledgement that leftist rioters and milkshakers and the like get dealt with far more leniently than rightist ones would.
Definitely. Some of the people here talking about home towns astound me. The most I’d do is allude to my home state, and even that’s only because it’s one of the larger ones.
It gets used a little on Twitch, which is definitely a leftist space, but I would say it's mostly a right-leaning word.
Probably a VPN. I use a VPN often and get a captcha every time I access an archive through it. They’re very annoying.
I still take the grueling 30 seconds to do them because I’m not a faggot who doesn’t get the value of making a backup.
Archive links are considered better practice due to their functionality as an archive (duh). I find the captchas annoying as well, but I have no sympathy for morons like the one you’re replying to that won’t take 30 seconds to go through captchas in exchange for the obvious advantages offered by creating a backup of information.
I think the problem is that if it messes up before, it becomes very out-of-character for Lelouch to make the error he does. He’s too meticulous for that to happen if he knows it’s a possibility.
One thing I was wondering, because arranged noble marriages for diplomatic purposes did come to mind—when a pair of very young (12-14, say) nobles "married" did they actually consummate the marriages immediately, or did they wait? Like how there are historical examples of extremely young "kings," but in practice those kings would have a regent ruling for them until they came of age.
In her case, I think it was "don't listen to the voices in your head."
That was one of my favorite memes to come out of the 2016 election cycle.
"Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to ignorance" is pure bullshit.
I’ll say what I always say: people always leave out the important part of the saying. It’s “never attribute to malice without evidence what could be explained by stupidity.” There’s evidence galore. (The jury’s still out on whether the heuristic itself has been mangled by malice or stupidity).
Why would he ever not?
If I was running a transportation rental service, I’d probably GPS tag all my stuff.