I was thinking the same thing. It must have a whole raft of licensing fees on it. If the price keeps enough people out of the market for it then these will turn out to be some of the most valuable minifigs of all time. I wonder what it costs if you buy the same pieces (less the figures) via parts orders.
"Roblox is a shit hole of creeps and wannabe child rapists. My teen has been on it for years"
Awesome self own there
I think one valid complaint is the use of DRMs.
I am in every way anti-DRM, but it's ubiquitous. A lot of publishers won't publish on GOG for this reason. I agree that Epic is arguing in bad faith. The enemy of my enemy is convenient, nothing more, so I am not delusional about Epic but I still enjoy their actions.
They are basically throwing money to become relevant enough that they can be profitable without having to throw money. If that ever happens, you can be sure that there will be no more free games.
TBH I usually forget to go look at the free games they are typically so underwhelming, though there have been some legitimate greats too.
Meanwhile Steam is sustainable and superior on features.
There are only two features of Steam beyond buying installing games which I care about, and one of them sucks. I like that it handles updates for me, but that is also the bad one, because practically none of the updates are differential. I want them to make that easier so that publishers actually do it. I know that it requires significant support from publishers when they use packed data files, but even that is something that could be addressed. (If the files are compressed individually instead of using compressed archives, then binary patches are feasible.) The other feature is Proton. Anything else including friends, achievements, and even reviews is all optional to me. I enjoy some of those features, but I would still use Steam without them.
Even as someone who votes left more than any other way, I'd be entirely okay with killing the AMT. It is a huge pain to deal with.
The real problem, IMO, is that Congress needs to get off its a** and pass laws requiring brokerages and retirement plans to provide all of the tax data in a fully computed form so that you can fill in the boxes on your tax worksheet and be done, rather than having to look through every single line and figure out which ones were short-term, which were long-term, which had foreign tax, etc. Even with TurboTax, even with basically everything coming from Edward Jones, it *still* takes me two or three hours every year to fill in the information correctly for my taxes. I can't imagine trying to do that by hand on paper.
I love to hate on macs but this isn't terrible at all. The old and new icons are both quite clear and their purpose is most always understandable 'except for the two window icons replaced by an right-pointing arrow, I have no clear idea what either that could be doing), supported by shape and colours (though a more intense contrast could be desirable). These are icons I would enjoy using instead of the current "flat design" trend that exists elsewhere, for example the Breeze style in KDE which is what I would call terrible.
The real problem with requiring icons to be a specific shape is that it makes apps harder to recognize. Just look at how much confusion Google's icon rebranding has been, with every icon looking a lot like a multicolored square, and you'll understand what I mean. Now imagine every app icon on an entire operating system being a rounded square.
I see I'm still living rent-free in some heads.
U MAD [I'm alive] BRO?
And ammo. Yeah some people have thousands of rounds of ammo. The military has millions of rounds, and enough men to go with them to effectively utilize suppressive fire. If you do get in an old-fashioned firefight with soldiers they can simply outbullet you if for some reason they don't have an armed backpack drone. Which by the way they totally do.
most cars are more efficient at 55 to 60 MPH than at 40 MPH
I think the studies show 50 mph is the sweet spot for the same distance on highways. But you are right it varies by both vehicle and driving style. But the difference between 50 and the current 70-80 mph people drive on freeways is substantial for any vehicle.
Certainly true for highways, yes. There's also next to no good alternative to individual cars for highway driving, though. Amtrak is very, very limited, Greyhound is slow *and* very limited, airplanes are grossly fuel inefficient and are generally limited to relatively long distances, and that's about it.
The other part of the equation is how many miles someone drives. Lower speeds mean people drive fewer miles because the real cost of a trip is the time it takes. If you drive 8 hours at average 50 mph you only go 400 miles. You drive at average 60 miles per hour you go 480. If you use 5 gallons to go 100 miles then you use an extra gallon of gas.
Not sure why you think people would drive fewer miles. Most people in cars are trying to get to a specific place, not driving just to drive. Would people plan shorter trips? Maybe for some small percentage of leisure driving, but leisure driving is already a small percentage of driving, so that's a small reduction in fuel use for a small percentage of a small percentage of trips. That's hardly worth the negative impact on everything else.
What pushes some demographics to participate in street take overs
What demographic? Poor and disadvantaged? You know events like these are held by white people where there's only white people, right?
twerking on police cars
You completely lost me right here, bro. OH THE BOOTYANITY TWERKING ON COP CARS
It is basically impossible for Tesla to ever be a profitable company now. It is madness to be investing in it. But so many people have put so much money in it and they are so afraid of losing out that we all just have to pretend.
That's not how stock grants work. That trillion dollars doesn't come from Tesla. It comes from the stock market through share dilution. The company can absolutely still be profitable no matter how much equity it chooses to give out.
You get that the unemployment rate is literally designed to be a falsehood because it stops counting people when they have been unemployed for a while, right? The methodology used for it has no concept of who is looking for work at all, it's based on a fundamentally bogus assumption that people who haven't found any for long enough aren't looking.
Who has ever tried UBI? Make sure your answer is about UBI and not just BI for a test group.
Most of those guns are irrelevant, as guns don't kill people by themselves, and a person can only realistically use two at a time, and can only use one at a time well.
Plus, you know, the government has thermal vision, guided munitions, satellite overwatch...
Infinitely more would be removing yourself from the equation in a carbon negative way. I suggest swallowing seeds and falling into an early grave.
Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing. -- Roy L. Ash, ex-president, Litton Industries
