Just a small but very important correction: the article says 6 grams per serving. Giving them two extra teaspoons with the small amount that babies take is much more significant.
EDIT: A quick search said that one serving of baby food tends to be around 75g? That means that that’s 8% of it being pure sugar.
I love both jackfruit and durian, but they are very different flavours.
People don’t really like to read the articles before commenting, huh.
Knowing Stardew was such a beloved game, I knew I had to get context before judging the author because it could be read both ways.
People who assume games not changing = criticism are telling us more about their own uncharitable view of others than anything else.
EDIT: That said, if I were to offer criticism, I feel like the author gives too much credit to Stardew as though it invented or pioneered the tight gameplay loop: perhaps at least some mention could have been made to Harvest Moon, the game from which Stardew borrows - and perfects - most of its major systems.
Also to be fair, it doesn’t go anywhere with that thought that Stardew hasn’t changed. Felt a little low-effort, like a retrospective on Stardew that just basically listed what people liked about it.
Excuse me? Who are the original people in your book and which year is the baseline?
I’m someone who doesn’t have a huge stake in either side and still this take astounds me.
I think it’s an anti-riddle, or a joke, more than anything else.
Seems like it would be exactly what you’d expect, i.e. not ironic at all.
It’s weird cos you’re the only person bringing up pirating first (others are bringing it up as a talking point you’ve raised), and that’s not the dichotomy - it’s not dubious reselling sites or pirating, it’s Humble Choice, the topic of your post, where the games are already discounted, the developers have decided to opt in, and some money is actually going to charity.
Even if you bring up your original post as providing “options for everyone”, it was written in the spirit of advertising grey market sites as an alternative to Humble Choice, and therefore it’s entirely fair that others are bringing up the harms of grey market sites so that everyone knows what the risks are between them. I used to use those grey market sites as a kid more than a decade ago before I understood that they were a tool by scammers to make their money, and now I no longer use them. It would only be honest for you to have talked about that in your original post rather than ignoring it because the only alternative to you is piracy.
Yeah I was going to say: D&D is a lot more geared towards numbers and combat encounters than many other TTRPG systems. My main issue is actually finding players who want to engage in the co-creation of story rather than combat optimisation (not that they preclude each other, but oftentimes if you’ve built your character as a hammer, everything can start to look like a nail).
I saw this and immediately thought about Nicky Case’s game on The Evolution of Trust. I was really glad to see it was referenced in the video as the main inspiration for it!
(https://ncase.me/trust) - Link because I think everyone should try it for themselves as well.
Wait, if you’re a Republican and you’re admitting that Republican politicians don’t have critical thinking ability, then why are you still voting for having them run a country and affecting the livelihoods of millions (billions) of people?
If the only Republican policies you’re supporting are benign ones (as a non-American, I don’t know which those are), are they worth all the ones that oppress and take away the rights of others?
And if you’re a Republican but not a fan or voter of the Republican party as it stands, then maybe you need to reconsider what your definition of a Republican is, because Republicans themselves today are defining themselves in ever-bolder terms.
In case anyone is wondering, this is a sculpture called The Resurrection in the Vatican.
The sad thing to me is that I don’t think either government genuinely cares about the 195 deaths except as political leverage on Hamas’s side and 195 fewer problems in Netanyahu’s way.
I think the criticism is that they’re repeatedly publishing these and claiming they’re outliers without attempting to show how they got their results, from what I’m reading.
It’s a burn and also true. If a genetic mutation becomes prevalent enough, it’s no longer really considered to be a “mutation”.
The scary thing to me is that humans are predictable, or at least, predictable in their unpredictableness.
With AI, it’s a black box I don’t understand. When it suddenly crashes, I literally will have no idea why.
I guess the difference is we expect humans to fuck up, but autonomous driving is meant to eventually be the thing that replaces that and stops us fucking up.
There’s a reason people evolved altruistic reactions and tendencies, and that’s because on some level, altruism and trust in a community is good. How could anyone trust anyone else in a society where backstabbing is essentially the norm? Building giant projects like power plants could not exist without humongous inefficiencies if everyone were to constantly be trying to insure themselves from everyone else’s manipulation and making sure that they have a slice of the power pie and are not beholden to anyone else. If a society of Good people are all able to trust each other beyond any doubt (because Good people are inherently trustable), they can actually do insanely long-term plans knowing that those following them will continue to meet their obligations. Resources will be split more evenly ensuring maximisation and therefore a larger force.
Your example is also incredibly simplistic because nobody wins in a nuclear scenario, and that’s why Good would be opposed to it. It doesn’t mean they’re against other means of stopping the issue that don’t contravene international laws (which, by the way, would be 100% made by Good people because Evil people would have no reason to be a party to any of these treaties).
If nuclear war happens, everyone loses.
With conventional war, it’s a wash, but I’d give it to Good, with one side having harsher tactics (but also a chance of internal conflicts and opportunistic coups) while the other side has more resources but may only fight defensive wars.
With no war, Good wins - seems like a win for Good to me overall. The only problem is in real life it’s much harder to separate the Good from the Evil, and most people (myself included, probably) are somewhere in between.
I don’t think OP is guilty of this, but a lot of people think that current AI-generated content is going to sound like something that doesn’t know how to be human or what humour is. That’s a fundamental misunderstanding, I believe, that thinks that the LLMs that are popular now have any kind of actual sentience, and simply lack experience or understanding.
Fundamentally, they’ll instead sound like exactly the most average or boring (but informed) person, except maybe a bit more repetitive, because they’re trained on data and not coming up with independent thoughts. Someone who writes in a unique way and has a unique sense of humour is far less likely to be an AI than the average (yet somehow more accepted) everypost.
I don’t have any skin in the game, as I don’t use the app nor any other, but the userbase for the Fediverse is like a hundred times smaller than Reddit at least. The same work on Reddit that could earn $200 is only going to earn $2 here.
I don’t know what the price should be, but it makes sense that it goes up.
I didn’t think it was misleading, but when I read it I automatically thought the article was talking about the extent of pollution in the ocean, not what everyone else seems to be interpreting it as…