amio

Whatever works, of course. I’m not trying to go all hipster, I just think it’s sort of pleasant work with the whetstone, and having crazy sharp knives is weirdly satisfying.

All you need is a bulldozer and a cement truck.

Small set of whetstones so I can keep my kitchen knives absurdly sharp. Sharp vs “meh” vs dull knives make a huge difference in speed, comfort and safety. I’ve scuffed my knives a bit getting into things, but at least they’re sharp as hell and touching them up only takes a few minutes.

Also it’s hardly unconventional, but a quick read thermometer (fold-out type) is almost a must.

Acoustic?

Black, no flavoring aside from the tea, brewed strong with a small splash of milk and 1-2 tsp of sugar for a large mug.

The potential existence of sentient life out there? Sure. Space is big.

Anything that’s ever interacted with us or is likely in a position to ever be able to do so? No. Space is big.

It emphatically does not mean that. Tankies tend to shill for Russia and China (CCP), neither of which is communist or socialist. I don’t even mean that in a “no true scotsman” way, they are literally market economies with astronomical wealth inequality.

Because when you simply ask for donations, the vast majority of people don’t.

nothin personnel, kid

I just thought “hur hur, Nazeem” and save scumming skill checks, dice rolls and tricky input in mostly singleplayer games, without any nasty precedence or concurrency issues. Extending it to multiplayer and also being inside the game seems, uh, complicated. I’ll give it an undercaffeinated try:

Each player gets an individual “marker” they can place at their current time, and a function to restore the entire universe state to that point.
“Whose marker is when” seems like it needs to be part of that state. Otherwise, reverting and then having someone else reload a formerly earlier, now future/orphaned state… just sounds like a clusterfuck. Or it’s unproblematic and just weird, I’m not sure.

Keeping memories across reloads would at least not happen “naturally”, since everyone has their exact brain state reverted. You could just say it does for the purposes of the experiment, but it seems like it makes things more complicated.
At least, remembering stuff through someone else’s reload is right out: everyone on the planet quickly ends up with a bunch of memories that have no longer happened, and no way to tell what’s what. Psych horror time!

Whoever saves first does get to revert everything since then, but assuming no memory retention, you could still safely shit talk your boss all day long, at least. If their checkpoint reverts yours, they will forget the rant, you can still revert. It would be further back than you intended then, but you would be blissfully unaware of that fact. Of course, you also wouldn’t remember the rant, so it doesn’t sound very cathartic either.

But, if memories are retained, Boss could reload on you - they now remember the rant and you don’t, which sounds like a bad Christmas Party. While reloading would still be a win for you, you wouldn’t know to actually do it, and could risk saving at a position where you’ve screwed yourself. Common risk of save scumming.

Saves, especially save states/quicksave. Some kind of way to tell you what is actually the correct answer, not just what someone thinks is, or wants to be, the correct answer. Enough predictability to give you a reasonable shot at things.

I’m seeing a lot of uncited claims. If these are just conjecture or opinion you could be clearer on it. If they’re not, citing sources is probably a good idea.

This is an outrage.

I have absolutely no idea. “So how have you been doing since ruining my life? IV drug abuse? That’s awesome, man, heard about that one through the grapevine and it gave me some… well, not joy, of course, but definitely a bit of grim satisfaction. Maybe there’s something to this karma thing after all, eh?”

Which inaccurate doomer myths? Because every time I hear this, it’s “well, I’m sure that’ll be ni-aaaaaaand it’s climate denialism”

GIIINOOOOO!

I’m not sure it’s a specifically named one, but then again there are dozens, and they’re hard to keep straight. In general it is (attempted) rationalization, hand-waving, and kinda… just a bad argument. It does not actually explain why that specific murder was “necessary” - only that it could’ve been.

The intent is to rationalize, but it might not get close enough to a real argument to pin down to a specific (in)formal fallacy.

Seems like a way to foist off the responsibility for shitty communication on the supernaturally-supposed-to-be-recipient, in my opinion.

I think the idea of having instances own communities is fundamentally flawed. Discoverability is one of many ways that fucks things up.

Absolutely - and not even just terminally ill. We typically recognize when pets are past their meaningful life - once things start getting difficult or painful enough, we let them off. Meanwhile if you have bone cancer and live an eternity of agony every second, “tough shit lol” I guess.

Sometimes you just can’t fix things. Then it gets to be about harm reduction. Flogging someone whose continued existence will only bring them and everyone else pain… seems pretty horrific to me.