I’m curious what query you used.

It’s people having their battery die while they wait for an open charger.

Which is why the German bubble is popping.

I don’t think housing will ever be cheap again. It’s been too over-consolidated and the game of corporate monopoly has already started. Unless we get strong regulations about how much housing property a person or company can own, we are stuck high housing prices.

Oh absolutely. I still go back for the occasional check-in with my favorite small communities. But I basically never browse /r/all or any of the top subreddits that used to keep me coming back multiple times per day.

To be fair, both sites are pretty much gaping shit holes at this point.

This is a good tool for visualizing your raid needs from your capacity and total number of drives.

https://www.seagate.com/products/nas-drives/raid-calculator/

I’ll preface that I’m no raid expert, just a nerd that uses it occasionally.

The main benefit of most raid configurations is the redundancy they provide. If you lose one drive, you do not lose any data. It’s kinda obvious how you can have 1:1 redundancy, you just have an exact copy of the drive. But there are ways to split data into three chunks so that you can rebuild the data from any two chunks, and 5 chunks so that you can loose and two chunks. Truly understand how raid does this could easily be an entire college course.

Raid 0 is the exception. All it does is “join together” a bunch of drives into one disk. And if you lose an individual disk you likely will lose most of your data.

Another big difference is read/write speed. From my understanding, every raid configuration is slower to read and write than if you were using a single drive. Each raid configuration is varying levels of slower than the “base speed”

I typically use raid 5 or 6, since that gives some redundancy, but I can keep most of my total storage space.

The main thing in all of this is to keep an eye on drive health. If you lose more drives than your array can handle, all of your data is gone. From my understanding, there is no easy way to get the data off a broken raid array.

If you cook 300 meals per year, you’re not the primary demographic of McDonald’s, at least for my local one. Most people I know who eat there, eat there very regularly… Like multiple times per week.

I personally think it’s that people lack the time, motivation, and/or knowledge to cook themselves. I can make a cheeseburger and fries at home for about $3-5 in about thirty minutes, including cleanup. Compared to a $15 meal, it’s roughly the equivalent of saving $20/h.

Another issue could be home size is way down. If you live alone, you can’t buy one hamburger bun, you have to buy 8. You can’t buy a quarter pound of ground beef, minimum package size is usually 1 lb. If you buy the material to cook one meal, you’re committing to cook three to seven more within the next 10 days. So you’ve signed up for leftovers or up to four hours of cooking.

A start could be reducing the crazy subsidies cattle farming gets. We could reduce carbon emissions and have money to fund green projects.

I would imagine them being chunks of sulfur, which could probably be used dyes, explosives, or fertilizer. So they could be quite valuable.

I started writing an “here’s why I disagree” reply, but I slowly realized that I kinda agree. Sword Art Online was a pretty bad anime, but SAO Abridged used the same characters and plot points to tell a different type of story and was absolutely terrific

I think the main problem I have is with the scale. If you’re remaking something, and you’re expecting more people to see the new thing than saw the original, then you should stay faithful to the original (not shot for shot remake, but keep things as close as reasonable) I think I feel this way because if I were an author, I’d be crushed if more people saw the bastardized version of my life’s work than saw my original.

There is also the issue with a large majority of recent remakes being quick cash grabs. These do nothing but tarnish the original work by driving away people who may have eventually seen the original.

I think a large part of people’s issues with the recent trend of adapting/recreating existing media is how the director changed the intent or “soul” of the work.

A story is more than its plot points. It’s how The Lion King and Hamlet have the same story bones, but have wildly different morals and audiences. So when a work is adapted for a different medium, stripping it down to its plot points kinda kills the soul of the work. The Avatar animated series and the movie (that doesn’t exist) share a lot of plot points, but the movie is clearly soulless because they didn’t understand what made the show great, and just retold the story with a slight spin.

The Last of Us worked so well because they understood why it was good, and only made changes “in the spirit” of the original work. They didn’t try to put a spin on the story, they just adapted it for the new medium.

That’s why understanding the work is so important when you are adapting it to a different medium. If you just transplant the plot points without understanding what makes it good, it’s going to be soulless. If you try to just use the characters and setting to tell a different story, it’s also going to be soulless because those characters aren’t made to tell that story. Make your own characters and tell your own story if you don’t want to stick to the spirit of the original work.

Before anyone gets their “um actually” comment in…

Yes, he would be eligible for retirement, but your average retirement eligible american isn’t expecting to retire until 65-70.

The dude is 61, not even retirement age in the US. You don’t need to be dramatic just yet.

That’s definitely a strawman or just a straight up misrepresentation of what cookie clicker is. You only actually “manually click a picture of a cookie” for about one to five minutes, then you basically never click it again. It’s described as an idle game where you play by not playing, and the core mechanic is “number get bigger faster”. The game described in this thread is mindlessly clicking a button, no depth, no automation or acceleration. Just click a billion times to win.

Playing devil’s advocate, I can understand the point because I already think in terms of value per hour.

That’s why I can justify buying a less critically acclaimed game with more replayability than I can justify one that you realistically can only play once (starfield vs latest COD). And why I generally don’t play mmo’s because I can get a new game each month for $10, or play a $60 for a year straight. The total number of hours I have in a game like Red Dead Redemption 2 or GTA 5 is crazy compared to how many hours I had in the last battlefield.

But it’s not just about total hours. My first playthrough of Outer Wilds, Subnautica, and BioShock, were each more “valuable” than the time I spent in GTA, even though I’ve spent 10-100x the time in GTA. Then you’ve got games like Prey and Minecraft that have high replayability that is consistently high “value” time.

Games currently have an insane value/cost ratio. When compared to a theatre movie that costs ~$10/h, you’d have to have a phenomenal time. Especially compared with the cost per hour of a game like Skyrim or Baldur’s Gate where you have to spend like a thousand hours just to get the whole story of the game.

Ehh really depends on your boss. And honestly it depends on you also. If either of you can’t separate work from personal time then you really shouldn’t be hanging out. But for most of the bosses I’ve had, some lighthearted social time outside of work was perfectly fine.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator