Because storms want to be circles but any given gas giants atmosphere is basically a series of nothing but storms and when you tile circles you get a hexagonal grid due to the spaces in between them?

Idk I’m certain I’m at least smarter than the half of reddit users that are LLMs and thus cannot count the number of Rs in any given fruit.

I really find I can’t cheat on an ongoing save even when I think most people would consider it completely justified, an example being when the medusa enemy was first added to terraria it was pretty buggy and could turn you to stone from off screen and through walls (despite explicit patch notes saying it should not do this) so I ended up losing all my gear to an objective bug. Tried save editing it back in but it still ruined the feeling of the save to me.

The only time I can cheat and not ruin my own fun is for testing purposes in games without any kind of creative mode, particularly 4X games which tend to be pretty long and I don’t want to play a several hour game just to test a random theory about how 2 mechanics might interact in a lategame build.

To be fair there’s zero evidence for anything outside our own subjective experience of it, we’re just kind of running with the assumption that our subjective experience is an accurate representation of reality.

As if they’d try so hard, take it from someone with shitty internet, the box absoloutely appears in that spot after you click.

Don’t forget each worker also has to simultaniously spend $∞ on goods and services.

Its due to heavy adaptation specifically around snakes, when the first true snakes evolved they were basically meta (causing at least 1 extinction of an entire group and probably more we don’t know about) so whole ecosystems had to shift to basically not be fucked up by snakes.

The problem I find is even when I genuinely try to do this their reasoning is genuinely incomprehensible to me, these people don’t care about what they can see with their own eyes let alone scientific concensus, its a world view with more basis on how they feel inside their own heads than whats hitting them in the face in real life.

The UK already had its own epstein island moment with a child sex traficking scandal involving british parliment, it vanished inside a week.

Nah linux bullshit is more along the lines of, the install keeps failing and the error message tells you nothing but after a couple of hours of trying different solutions it turns out you needed to re-name one file in the setup to a slightly different name.

I suspect Mint would work fine on that same desktop at this point, since it was just very new at the time and support take a bit to come in, but now its all set up how I want. Perhaps when windows next shits itself and I need to re-format anyway.

To make a long post short, windows is shitty but its setup bullshit is very straight forward and clear to deal with, linux is great when it works but its setup bullshit is byzantine as all hell. I got Linux working with only light bullshit on a laptop but just gave up entierly after 3 days of trying to get different distros at different advice working on my desktop.

Even a genuinely perfect model would immediately skew to bias; the moment some statistical fluke gets incorporated into the training data that becomes self re-enforcing and it’ll create and then re-enforce that bias in a feedback loop.

The Unmentionables?

How about faces the same punishment someone that isn’t an incredibly rich corporation would face? If that’s insurance then sure, if thats jail time then yes someoen should be punished just like anyone else would.

At this point that picture should be multiple layers of precariously stacked tiny pillars making up the entire base.

It outright says:
“13% of non-winners switch to favour the right-wing. By contrast, nearly 18% of the winners who get more than 500 pounds switch to the right-wing party”
That is a description of induviduals, 18% of people become more right wing, not 100% of people become 18% more right wing.

So I read the study, first of all the paper aknowledges that there’s a several point swing in voting preference between non winners and people who won less than £500 which strongly implies people who play the lottery are more likely to vote right wing to begin with. Secondly even for large wins the swing was only around 18%. At worst money does not make everyone a bad person, more like 1/5 people.

I think you mean episode 2 expansion 1.

Or those were previously just assholes without money? Nice people who win the lottery likely don’t stay rich for long because they use that money to help people they know.