This... everyone who didn't vote against Trump is responsible.

You were told exactly what would happen.

The US is... the reason is big, orange and wears a nappy.

Elect a clown, become a laughing stock.

Yep, not to mention the lax FDA meaning they can release lower quality products or things with major side effects and advertise them with a fast speaking voice at the end that it might cause anal bleeding, heart arrhythmia, stomach ulcers, delusions, support for the GOP, severe retardation, blindness, baldness and diabetes. TALK TO YOUR GP ABOUT KILLOVEX TODAY (smiling face).

Besides, most of the work is done at public institutions to begin with, private companies swoop in when it's 99% complete and buy the patents.

Whilst it may appear I'm doing nothing, I assure you on the cellular level, I'm quite busy.

I think games (software, not the hardware) is one of the areas where there is room for growth, especially during a recession as people want circuses with their bread.

This isn't an industry issue, plenty of people doing well in it, it's a Ubisoft issue and to a lesser extent an issue shared by all legacy publishers.

Ubisoft are dependent on a few titles to have huge budgets (most of which goes on advertising) and these games are frankly, getting stale. I haven't even played the latest FarCry and that's been out for years. These games are getting old and stale because they're known quantities and the publishers are extremely risk adverse so they don't permit the formula to be changed, so they get older and more stale meaning people stop buying them. The lack of new thought that goes into them becomes pretty obvious and that harms sales as people have a lot of choice and can buy 2 or 3 Schedule 1's for the price of 1 Call of Snorefare 17: Rehashed for another year.

EA and others are suffering the same problem. The problem stems from the way they run their companies, they buy up smaller studios hoping that a half finished title will be gold... Strip out anything that might upset someone (especially white male incels) and then release it half finished (both in terms of bugs and content, so they can sell day 1 DLCs)... then they gut the studio of talent and make a sequel if the game sells with a less talented team.

Generic Sports Game 20xx is no longer selling like cocaine laced hotcakes so they are finding they don't have the money to make boring sequels or buy up smaller studios.

And charging £60 a game, this can fuck right off.

It might bother you in a few years when you go back to play one of your favourites and they've shut down the activation server.

Also the CPU cycles it eats up. I downloaded a pirate copy of JWE2 to compare with how it ran with the legit copy and the difference was night and day. Performance wasn't affected as I've a decent gaming rig (albeit a few years old now) but the CPU usage of the pirate copy without the DRM running was significantly lower.

I think twice about buying any game that has Denuvo... I will _NOT_ buy any game that has activation limits. I want to get JWE3 but I'm not even going to think about it until it drops below £30 because it's got Denuvo.

I'm in the UK and on Trulicity for type 2 diabetes and it costs me nothing as it's an essential medication on the NHS.

It costs the NHS £74 per month for the same dose that is £200 in a pharmacy in the UK off the NHS and nearly US$900 in the states. There's wholesale and then there's NHS wholesale folks.

For the NHS it's a no brainier to give this to diabetics for free as it's a long term cost saver in diabetic complications (expensive complications).

This.

GLP-1s are most beneficial for people who don't produce the hormones that normal people produce (or at least not enough of them). People with type 2 Diabetes are more often than not constantly hungry because their body literally doesn't produce the hormones that tell them they're not hungry. Hence one of the reaons GLP-1s are so effective at reducing HBA1C results (your long term blood sugar). They're the medications that are finally helping diabetics make and keep lifestyle changes.

There are a lot of reasons that you should get your medical advice from medical professionals rather than from holier-than-thou fucktards on the interwebs

Same goes for people thinking of using them for lifestyle use (I.E. just to lose weight). These medications are quite powerful and have powerful side effects (Pancreatitis, Cholecystitis, thyroid issues) ignoring the common ones like nausea and diarrhoea. People really should speak to a medical professional before starting any medication that might have a profound effect.

Also diabetes has a strong hereditary link... So Mr "I'm so smart I've avoided it" will get to their 50s and have it hit them like a Scannia, especially if they haven't been keeping an eye on their blood sugars.

I think he means first mainstream airline... as in ones running jets almost exclusively.

And I doubt it. For all the faults of Ryanair's boss Michael O'leary, maths is not one of them. In fact he's quite good at running the numbers and making good decisions based on them, that's the basis of the LCC business model. He knows that such a system would cost far more than it would raise in revenue... And I mean cost in operation, not lost business... One of the other things O'leary knows is that his passengers will suffer almost any indignity for that £15 flight to Magaluf (which usually ends up around £80 once you've added on a few things). He's famously quoted as saying "Our booking systems are full of people who swore they'd never fly Ryanair again".

You're wrong about that part... it's not logical.

That is a purely emotional response born out of ignorance thinking that you won't be affected and it's only the obvious fatties that will suffer (which pleases you).

First off, if you don't fit in the seat (with the seatbelt around you) you can legally be deplaned.

Secondly, it won't work that way. Airlines, particularly low cost airlines will just end up using it as an additional revenue stream by setting the baseline absurdly low, such as declaring the average human to be 40 KG. Also it's going to be fit people who will get hit by it (muscle weighs more than fat, so Mr I'm only 0.000000000000000000002% body fat will be heavy). The heavyweighht boxing class starts at 86KG and they're not exactly giants (speed is more important than strength or mass in boxing but that's going widely off topic).

Thirdly, performing and enforcing this isn't going to be free. As mentioned, the roided up body builder is not going to like being lumped in with the fatties you want to laugh at, let alone the powerfully built company director. Airlines will have to employ extra staff, pay for the facilities and the security due to people getting aggro at the fact they're heavier than they think and have to pay an extra fee. So it's a huge increase in costs which means it's going to cost way more than it saves. Which means for your moment of schadenfreude the price you'll pay for the ticket will go up.

So you think you'll be immune to it, but in reality it will be used as a cudgel to charge you more (well everybody, but I doubt you thought of or are concerned with that).

Erm no. this is not because they want to reduce passenger seating, it's because the planes they use for island hopping literally have a low weight limit. A DHC6 100 (popular for these kind of routes) has a seating capacity of 20 and a payload of 960 KG... That's 48 KG per person for 20 people. Airlines doing island hops are already having to lower seat counts because they literally can't carry that many people. Small planes have a small MTOW... the M stands for Maximum (Take Off Weight).

Oh dear, you can't carry on your massive oversized case and take up the overhead bin room meant for the entire row any more... Diddums.

This is one of the things that are likely to change in the near future. Too many people are abusing the carry on limits and it's costing airlines. Not in weight but in time, it's taking longer and longer to board a plane because too many people spend too much time trying to find places to store their 18 oversized carry on bags. Cabin crew are having to spend time moving bags around all of which which delays pushback. I see a few things happening.
1. More airlines will start offering a checked bag included with a standard ticket.
2. More enforcement of carry on limits.
3. Plastic/fabric dividers in overhead bins so that oversized bags literally don't fit any more.
4. Any bag you want to put into an overhead bin will have to be checked and tagged (with your name and PNR on it). Airlines tried doing it the other around by tagging bags to go underseat and found that the tags were being discarded before boarding.

And I know some of you, particularly those who abuse the carry on system because you don't want to check a bag will complain... you've only got yourselves to blame.

If I'm going for more than a few days (meaning more than I can fit in my 30L backpack) I'll get a checked bag because it's just not worth lugging half a ton around an airport when I can just drop it off at the first stop.

Even if you enforce anti-trust laws, you still end up in a situation where competition is being artificially stifled by artificially high prices. So local manufacturers are in a position where they don't need to offer a better product, they just need to offer a bad product at just below the artificially inflated prices for bad imported products. Cars are a good example. Australia used to make it's own cars, it made 3 models of terrible barges that couldn't be exported because they were too low tech and poorly spec'd for the Europeans and too expensive for Americans. Australia could have done better, competed with European manufacturers on quality and technology (this was held back because 2 of the 3 factories were owned by American companies) but really didn't. So they kept making the same terrible barges until the public money taps were finally turned off and they all decided to leave.

The only model that got exported was because it was a global model, the Toyota Camry (sold locally as the Avalon) and they were the first to shut down their factory before the subsidies were reduced as it wasn't profitable to make the model in Australia when it was also being made in Thailand (which is another good example, car import taxes are huge and their cars are also more expensive than neighbouring countries, let alone western ones).

But that is a vote loser... Blaming the "Yoof of today" for all societies ills is a vote winner... Of course every breeder assumes it's not their "yoof" that's the problem, it's everyone else's.

99 times out of 100 it doesn't do anything to help local industry. All it does is make everything more expensive (as it also removes the impetus to local industry to compete) and reduces consumer choice. Even if you're putting in tariffs and import restrictions to help a local industry, they almost never compensate for the amount that the subsidies are costing (I.E. the now dead Australian car industry). Subsidies only make sense on an economic level if you're a mass exporter, meaning you're making money by selling that product to other nations (I.E. the German car industry). Subsidies for other reasons like security and food which don't have a direct economic contribution but are still necessary and will cause negative economic consequences if they're lacking also can make sense... but protectionism never works, just makes the people of that nation suffer.

If it takes £5 to make a spanner in the UK but you can buy a Chinese made spanner for £2, adding a £5 tariff to the Chinese spanner will not result in them being made in the UK... it just means that a Chinese spanner is now £7

Yep, a future /. headline from early next year "Europe wisely bankrupting itself on failed AI bubble".

We don't have "mass migration" these days, not in western countries.

It's become a scary thing to shout at the hard of thinking who can't actually get their heads around numbers and statistics to keep them more scared of Johnny Foreigner than they are of the leaders they vote for who are actually the ones ruining their lives and opportunities for the future.

A country like Colombia has mass migration, literally 3 million Venezuelans are living in Colombia because Venezuela is falling apart (has been for years but it got really bad in the Pandemic), at one point the border at Cucuta was handling 10,000 people a day. All the Colombian government could do at that point was grant visas so they could be monitored, deported if they committed a crime and if they could earn enough money, taxed. This was easier than the other option which was punish Colombian businesses for hiring undocumented Vennies (and there was no way the Uribistas in power at the time were ever going to do that).

In 5 days the Colombians had to handle the worst year of the "migration crisis" the UK apparently "has" according to the far right and their masses of unthinking parrots.... and the UK takes in less than our European neighbours (another fact the Followers of Frogface Farage don't like to admit).

Hell, another uncomfortable truth is that the current Labour government (which according to the Daily Heil is the source of all bad and wrong) is doing a better job that the previous conservative government of dealing with it by *gasp* applying the law (both British and International) and processing the migrants rather than sticking them in hotels or trying to fly them to Rwanda (500 million quid splurged on that and not a single one went). Always surprises me about the people who complain about "government waste" have this massive blind spot when it comes to foreigners. Billions to make them feel good about spitting in the eye of Johnny Foreigner but a penny in foreign aid (which actually is what keeps them in their own countries) is too much.