Lurker > adjl

If it's a low-paying temp job for Disney, I expect most of their applicants are at least a little obsessed with Disney.

Mensis posted...

I am just of the opinion that if we have these resources right under our noses then we shouldnt allow these oil corporations to bend us over like this.

But that's not how it works. Domestic production does not have to satisfy domestic demand before being exported. Domestic buyers still have to be willing to pay more than foreign buyers for domestic producers to be willing to sell locally. Domestic buyers do have an advantage in that transporting oil/gas is not free, so they can offer a bit less than foreign buyers and still remain competitive, but that advantage is fairly small in the grand scheme of things and remains pretty constant.

Quite simply, if the rest of the world is buying oil at prices that translate to $5/gal gas prices, no amount of production on American soil is going to let you gas up for $2/gal because that American production is going to be sold to higher bidders. The domestic oil market is insulated from the global market only by shipping costs, and they're a relatively small piece of the puzzle.

I believe Samus is canonically 6'2", but I don't remember how her height compares to Ganondorf's.

Ozmose posted...

Temporary spike? It's been on a steady climb since he took office.

I mean, your graph shows a large spike immediately after Putin invaded, so yes, that is indeed a spike on top of the gradual climb. Care to bring in the previous 18 months so you're comparing a longer time scale than one that entirely encapsulates the gradual recovery from the early Covid price crash?

Ozmose posted...

People were traveling plenty before then. Contrary to what the news would like you to think, most people didn't just lock themselves inside the whole time.

People were travelling, but very much not at pre-Covid rates, and that rate has been increasing pretty consistently since crashing in March 2020 (sort of like gas prices). Bear in mind that Biden was sworn in at roughly the same time as vaccines started becoming readily available to the general public, which was a major milestone for resuming travel, returning to in-person work as the standard, and many other aspects of "returning to normal." Biden being sworn in was also the catalyst for a lot of right-leaning areas to start abandoning Covid restrictions, which would further increase demand.

DeathMagnetic80 posted...

I was class of '99, so I'm probably extra nostalgic for the 90s, just because I had such a short window of my young adulthood where things seemed normal. 9/11 happened a little after I turned 21 and the world has kind of sucked since then.

I think that's mostly just an age thing. Generally speaking, depending on how socially adept one is as a teenager, either high school or college are going to be the high point of many people's lives, since that's a period where they have relatively few responsibilities and can mostly ignore how much the world sucks. Really, the world has always sucked and is always going to suck. The only thing that changes is how it sucks, so if we're fondly remembering a period because we don't remember it sucking, that's purely because that was a time when we had the privilege to ignore the suckitude, but because it actually didn't suck.

Cotton_Eye_Joe posted...

How do I follow up?

"No worries, maybe another time."

*2-3 days later*

"Hey, would you be up for *date idea*?"

JixHedgehog posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/0/2/AALiV_AADBNq.jpg
Boom, stats

Bush and Trump had Barry beat

And if you add Joe into the mix...

The actual takeaway message from the graph that you keep ignoring is that fluctuations in oil prices are largely independent of who's president. You'll see the occasional change that lines up with major events/policy decisions, but those effects are rarely felt immediately and often extend into the next president's term. Throw in that Trump's average takes advantage of several months of a profound Covid-induced drop in demand (and therefore price), which is relatively significant on the scale of a single term, and that Biden inherited the steady climb that started as the world started back up and had to contend with supply issues caused by Covid, and suggesting that Biden is to blame for this current high is pretty clear evidence that you understand pretty much nothing about the situation and are just looking for a scapegoat that aligns with your pre-established political views.

We should also probably point out that Bush's average is nearly double Clinton's, so that whole "don't vote Democrat if you don't like high gas prices" thing falls apart immediately. Four presidents are hardly enough to establish meaningful averages (and, again, distilling it down to who's president at the time indicates very little about why gas prices are fluctuating), but the figures you provided yield an average of $2.12 for Democratic presidents and $2.31 for Republicans (even giving Bush double the weight in that average because he served two terms; the comparison would be even less favourable if they were weighted equally, but that would be poor statistical analysis). Usually, "boom, stats" is something you say when you find statistics that support your claim, not disprove it.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

1. you don't need to shout
2. people don't stand two feet behind you when you are at the teller

There's still a pretty considerable risk of somebody overhearing that you're walking out with $13k in cash, and given the danger that knowledge can pose (both financially and in terms of personal safety), that's not a risk that's worth taking when you can just avoid it entirely by giving the instructions silently.

Ozmose posted...

. . . The same reason ours are.
They're dependent on foreign oil.

You do realize that every country in the world can't be dependent on foreign oil, right?

Straughan posted...

And every once in a while if I sat on the chair for a minute before pulling, one of the observers would card an adjacent carosel seat and fake speed play. Always wondered why they did that.

Social pressure: If you're on the fence about whether or not to pull, seeing somebody else nearby doing so can help you feel more comfortable with the decision, making you less likely to walk away without spending anything.

Grass density and shadows are two settings that are apparently pretty impactful, according to an article I read that was going over the matter in detail (looking at actual hardware requirements and what could be tweaked to improve performance).

darkknight109 posted...

Odd, then, how gas prices are skyrocketing around the world. It's almost like this isn't anything to do with the US and is, in fact, a global problem.

I swear there are some Americans who are completely oblivious to the fact that countries outside of their own actually exist...

But you don't understand! If Biden weren't in charge, the US could totally ignore skyrocketing oil prices everywhere else in the world and just use domestic production because domestic producers certainly wouldn't want to sell their products at those nice, inflated prices.

Revelation34 posted...

Damn that's one old meme.

Now we just need to slap it into a demotivational poster template with the caption "My Pokemans - Let me show you them."

15ish years.

I enjoyed Octopath well enough. It was nothing particularly amazing or groundbreaking, but most games aren't, and that's not a bad thing.

Mensis posted...

He did close the pipeline. What are you smoking?

Are you talking specifically about the jobs that were lost because that one pipeline was cancelled (which can indeed be blamed on Biden, but given how routine it is for construction projects to be cancelled and the associated workers to be laid off, there's little reason to single this example out over any others), or the financial hardship being faced by people who can't afford current gas prices (which have almost nothing to do with Keystone)? The latter would be more applicable to this topic, so that's what I assumed.

While not entirely inaccurate, calling Keystone's cancellation "the loss of thousands of jobs" is more than a little misleading. Yes, in the immediate sense, everyone working on the project was laid off, but there's no shortage of construction projects happening around the country, including (in theory) significant infrastructure repairs the Biden administration looking to make (though I'll believe that when I see it). One job falling through is rarely a death sentence for the associated construction firms because they generally have several other jobs lined up at any given time.

Wanded posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/6/8/6/AAQ2WmAADAy2.jpg

To be fair, Zeb has a habit of blocking anyone that disagrees with him. I can't even see that post outside of quotes, and I'm definitely not alone in that regard.

That aside, it's not exactly a valid point. If the rest of the world's oil prices skyrocket, local prices are going to follow suit, simply because domestic buyers are doing to be competing with foreign ones. It lowers them a little across the board, since transportation costs mean it's generally going to be cheaper to sell locally than to sell abroad, but gas prices are always going to respond to global crises like this. That's just the nature of supply and demand. The only way to avoid that would be to make it illegal for domestic producers to export oil before domestic needs are met, and that's a fantastic way to convince would-be investors to take their business elsewhere (to say nothing of being flagrantly hypocritical for those that insist government should stop meddling with the oil industry).

The morality is debatable, but there's a pretty strong case for calling it irresponsible. <10-year-olds still need quite a bit of parenting, so if you know you're not going to be there for it, you're taking on that responsibility fully expecting that you won't be fulfilling it and somebody else will have to pick up your slack. If you organize that yourself ahead of time by finding somebody willing to take over, I'd say that makes it okay, but otherwise you're just dumping a kid on somebody else.

Mensis posted...

Tell that to the hundreds of people who are struggling to feed their families because of this decision.

Why would that affect how true the information in question is? It doesn't matter how much one is struggling, blaming the wrong person is still going to be blaming the wrong person.

kind9 posted...

Have you tried running Cyberpunk?

I haven't, but I also don't really plan to. The way that release went kind of turned me off of supporting the game at all, especially where I was only ever mildly interested in it to begin with. By the sounds of things, I'd also struggle there.

kind9 posted...

I can actually run Elden Ring pretty well despite not meeting the minimum requirements. I saw a video of the game running on my GPU and there was practically no difference in frame rate between all the graphical presets. That does kind of seem like a sign of poor optimization.

It might be worth a shot, if I make sure I can refund it, but I've got a stock 2500K in here, which benchmarks way below the minimum, and an R9 280X isn't exactly up to date either, nor are my 8 GB of RAM. It looks like some people have been able to get it running on my GPU with some tweaks, but I don't think the rest will be up to the task.

Squenix is very much not without its problems, but when you've got Ubisoft and Actiblizz actively covering up systemic sexual abuse and several companies openly exploiting children and mentally ill people for profit to a far greater degree than Squenix does, calling them "the worst company in gaming" is pretty silly. Even then, the majority of the genuine criticism that can and should be levied against them has to do with their manipulative marketing and predatory monetization strategies, not merely making games you don't like. Get over yourself.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

That's completely untrue, the whole reason tensor cores and all that jazz came in to being is because classical GPUs couldn't keep up with ray tracing, and no system today can run AAA games at true 4K 144hz that monitors can now do.

Fortunately, 4K 144hz is pretty difficult to justify as the standard for "looks good enough that I don't feel like I need to spend more improving it," and far lower resolutions still look perfectly fine.

darkknight109 posted...

The number of games that actually require modern tech to run well is very small, because very few studios have the budget to make a game that demanding (and those who do understand that it's usually more cost-effective to make a game that's less technologically demanding but still designed well from a gameplay perspective).

Eh, that's kind of debatable. Making games that genuinely cannot run without top-end PC hardware is indeed very expensive and rarely worthwhile, but making games that could run on a toaster but end up needing higher-end hardware to compensate for how poorly optimized their PC ports are is much cheaper and not at all uncommon, especially in the AAA space.

darkknight109 posted...

Hell, I have what was once a high-end gaming PC that is now eight years old and I've yet to run into a game it cannot play (I'm sure there are some out there - particularly if you get into VR, which I'm not really interested in - but all of the ones I've wanted to play have run fine on this machine).

I'm in more or less the same boat. Built something mid-range in 2011, upgraded the GPU to upper-mid in 2015, and I've pretty rarely found myself hardware constrained. I cannot, however, run Elden Ring. I don't come anywhere close to the minimum requirements there (though that's likely From sucking at PC optimization more than the game being genuinely that demanding), so I'm going to need to upgrade to play it, and that's just not in the cards right now (not that upgrading for one game is a particularly good idea in the first place).

Lokarin posted...

Think outside the box

What are some things a high end PC can do that aren't GPU related?

Specifically high end? Not much, honestly, presuming you aren't talking about the rare CPU-bottlenecked game when you say that. But a high end PC can do what any other PC can do, which is pretty extensive. The premium you're paying to hit "high-end" just goes toward making games look prettier (or actually run, in some cases).

Yes, but it got buried in a pile of my mom's mail and I didn't find it until a week after I was supposed to attend selection. They were pretty understanding about it, but then I moved to a different province for two years, so they couldn't summon me again right away. Still haven't had another call.

Mostly, the meme got old and died, so people stopped enjoying saying that. Spikes in GPU and other component costs have also thrown a bit of a wrench into the cost-effectiveness equation (which used to unquestionably favour PC's, but that's no longer the case) and made first-time building a harder sell, plus being more powerful than consoles is largely meaningless these days because there's barely anything on the market that uses the full potential of a PS4/Xbone, let alone a PS5/Series X or an even better computer. PC's are still the better system, since near-unlimited backwards compatibility, all the other utility they offer, and better game prices justify the front-end cost, but I don't feel the need to proclaim that.

shadowsword87 posted...

my point still stands that computers give wild errors that take an expert to handle most of the time.

Not really. In the decade since I built this thing, I've never run into a problem that I couldn't solve with a bit of googling/asking other amateurs. It's true that I haven't had the option of having somebody else repair it for me, but it's also true that I haven't needed to have somebody else repair it when something minor goes wrong, which is the issue with closed systems.

IronBornCorps posted...

So TC is writing satire right?? >_> This has to be trolling.

That was my thought, but Poe's Law is a powerful force these days.

Unbridled9 posted...

I seem to recall pointing this out to you before.

It is NOT easy to eradicate a disease at all. Only two human diseases have been wiped out, smallpox and rindopest. While several others (like polio) are on their back legs, it's VERY hard even with diseases that are not particularly infectious and easily vaccinated. It took us decades to wipe out smallpox, until 1977, and that was relatively easy to stop once a workable vaccine was discovered. Covid 19 is highly infectious and has multiple strains already. Pretty much the only way it could have been stopped is if patient 0 had been identified immediately and the whole place quarantined. We still have no clue who patient 0 is or even if this virus came from a bat or a Chinese lab (let's not get into that). Even then the vaccine is NOT 100% effective especially if you're going with, say, the Chinese version. Even if it was and everyone was on board with it, it would likely take DECADES to actually finally wipe out and that's assuming no new strains immune to the vaccine popped up.

So no, there was never any realistic hope of 'wiping out COVID'. That's why the goal was to 'flatten the curve'. I.E. make it so that it spread slower so the hospitals could handle it; not wipe it out. Cause there was no way it was going to be wiped out from day 1.

While truly eradicating diseases is indeed far, far more difficult than many people realize, and the term gets thrown around a lot because it's a dramatic word that feels exciting to use (which is fair, honestly) even though it's not entirely accurate, there's a ton of middle ground between true eradication and reducing case rates to levels that can be easily managed long-term. That's what we've done with measles and polio and all those other diseases that kids get vaccinated for, and there's really no reason Covid couldn't have joined that list.

Instead, because people pushed back against control measures, herd immunity doesn't look like it's going to be attainable. We've got decent vaccination rates in many areas, but they're still way too low in many others, and even those areas that do have good vaccination rates are treating that as a reason to give up on the other precautions that lower the herd immunity threshold instead of waiting until case rates get low enough to justify that (which is not nearly as impossible as people want to think it is to justify resisting countermeasures). The end result of that has been Delta, Omicron, and whatever other variants we'll see in the future that will keep messing with the vaccines' ability to manage the disease.

In effect, the vision many countries seem to be accepting is to have Covid become what Polio was in the 50's: A persistent public health threat that will see periodic regional outbreaks that maim/kill a bunch of people until some new miracle treatment comes along that is enough to turn the tide (which, in Covid's case, will probably be a vaccine that's flexible enough to pre-empt future variants and/or vaccinate against all possible dangerous strains). There's no reason Covid couldn't have ended up stabilizing where Polio is today, but people were a little too attached to the idea of pretending that we're not at war.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

That's not personal responsibility though.

It very much is. If you don't think it is, it's either because you don't understand the concept, or because you don't understand what "it" is referring to in this case (that is, blaming the existence of public health guidelines for the decision to ignore sound public healthy advice instead of taking personal responsibility for that decision).

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

That's not the role of government.

Enacting laws to ensure the safety of the public is very much part of the role of government.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

This could easily be in reference to the politicians who didn't follow their own mandates. Whether you agree with the mandates or not, the way to respond appropriately is to be consistent and not a hypocrite.

While you're not wrong, and a great many public figures are indeed being hypocritical about mask usage, that's entirely ancillary to anything we're talking about.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

It's because people don't consider it a success by any measure.

And that is objectively incorrect. Anyone who thinks that infection, hospitalization, and death rates are not measures of how successful interventions have been for dealing with a public health crisis can be safely ignored because they very obviously have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...
You were vague about details. You were talking about a predictable outcome. I added details to make it clear that the outcome should be predicable to the person they were happening to as well.

Also known as a strawman argument: Fabricating a position nobody actually holds because you find that easier to defeat, then defeating it and acting like you've made a point anyone should care about.

I didn't say any of that. You chose to make up me saying that because it was easier to argue against "me" that way. Don't do that.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...
It's also fundamental range safety to stay out of the firing range.

It is, but when lives are on the line, everybody has a responsibility to behave safely. If you make a habit of shooting when somebody's down range, you'll be kicked out of any well-managed firing range faster than you can say "oops," and may even face criminal charges depending on how egregious the details of the offense are. That is emphatically not responsible firearm usage.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...
What has the mainstream media been saying about lately? They get things wrong so often. If they're still saying there is one I would take that to mean there isn't.

That's stupid. There's really nothing more to say about that.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...
That's not what we're talking about though. The subject was personal responsibility. That means taking responsibility for ones own health. Without any reliance on others to do it for you.

And as has been covered exhaustively, personal responsibility includes taking responsibility for the consequences of one's own actions. Those who spread disease can and should be held accountable for doing so, and they are responsible for that decision and its consequences.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...
Why do I still get the impression that you think personal responsibility means forcing other people to do what you want them to?

Because you decided that's what everyone that disagrees with you is saying and have been doing whatever mental gymnastics you can - including blatant strawman fallacies - to maintain that belief regardless of what anyone is saying.

Personal responsibility does not entail forcing others to do anything. It does, however, mean that those who - through deliberate action or inaction - cause harm to others can be held accountable for that harm, as they are personally responsible for the decisions they made. Personal responsibility doesn't entail forcing people to do anything, but responding to decisions for which they are personally responsible can.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...
If the room is instead society at large, well you're not keeping those people out, they already were part of society to begin with.

And you can't lock out rats that are already been living in the room you would prefer to be rat-free? Nonsense. We employ all manner of exterminators and other pest control specialists to accomplish exactly that. Sure, the rats will complain, but they're rats. Who cares what they have to say?

MagicalPrincess posted...

Ebola seems to be wiped out. You never hear about it.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ebola-virus-disease (there's a list of outbreak data near the bottom)

It's about as common now as it was prior to the 2014-16 outbreak, maybe a bit less (that outbreak led to an effective vaccine and quite a few other advances in treating and controlling it, which help a lot). It was never a particularly common disease, nor one that's particularly relevant outside of Africa; the 2014 outbreak was quite exceptional (hence it got so much media coverage). It's to be expected that it wouldn't get much attention now.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

how is this deadlier than ebola?

Ebola's CFR is much, much higher, but Ebola is orders of magnitude less transmissible. As such, the 2014 Ebola outbreak killed ~14,000 people globally in two years. Covid has killed 6 million in the same time frame, which means it's 428 times more deadly.

Lokarin posted...

Ya, what number is bigger - 30% of Europe... or 2% of EARTH

I think you're confusing Ebola with Bubonic Plague. In terms of per capita mortality, while I don't have data immediately to hand, I could believe that the Black Death was worse than Covid. Obviously, Covid hasn't killed 30% of Europe, so it doesn't really measure up. It's also still not as bad as the 1918 flu pandemic, whether we're talking raw or per capita numbers. This is why I make a habit of calling it the "worst public health crisis in a century": It's very definitely not the worst in history, it's just worse than anything since that 1918 flu.

I'm in the same boat. I work for the Canadian federal government, and my branch is in the process of transitioning from our traditional office space (which has been mostly empty since March 2020) into a touch-down space with non-assigned workstations and other design elements that aim to accommodate people coming into the office occasionally instead of every day. Personally, I'm a big fan of the whole thing. I'm still going in more frequently than most of my colleagues, given the nature of my work, but I'm really appreciating being able to skip the commute most days and the extra flexibility in my schedule (to say nothing of being able to swap to my personal computer if things are slow). Further streamlining my occasional visit and cutting down on the amount of office space we rent will be great.

Of course, I very rarely drove to work even before the pandemic and the shift to remote work (it's within easy biking distance, reasonable walking distance, and on a couple major bus routes that I can access easily), simply because parking downtown sucks, so my commute wouldn't be appreciably affected by gas prices going up anyway. But that's just me.

chandlermbing posted...

I'm Lysanderoth!

No wonder your machinations lay undetected for so long.

Unbridled9 posted...

Think 'work from home' might stick around simply because people can't afford to drive to work?

It should stick around so people don't have to make that consideration, but a whole lot of companies don't trust their employees to get work done without somebody hovering over them, so they resist the idea. Having fewer people commuting everyday would be overwhelmingly a good thing in pretty much every way, but corporate America isn't exactly big on changing to benefit others.

The_Viscount posted...

Peaceful protestors blocking roads are apparently terrorists

Do you honestly think anyone doesn't recognize how disingenuous this characterization is?

The_Viscount posted...

terrorists while people burning down buildings are apparently peaceful posters in adjl's crazy f***ing book.

I have asked you before to provide examples of me saying this. You have failed every single time. Stop making up lies to discredit me. If you aren't intelligent enough to argue legitimately, just keep your mouth shut. There's no value in injecting yourself into a discussion where you have to pretend to be valuable.

The_Viscount posted...

Granted, this was after adjl threw his unfettered support behind far-leftists blocking roads,

Because I know you won't actually clue in to the underlying meaning of the first point I made, I'll spell it out for you: All roads are not equal. All traffic obstructions are not equal. Obstructing traffic on a handful of major roads for a few hours at a time while a protest marches through is not in any way equivalent to completely blockading a border crossing for a month in a deliberate effort to coerce political change by causing economic damage. That's not to say that obstructing traffic is categorically okay (obstructing ambulances, for instance, is bad), but the two concepts are very much not comparable, such that criticizing an example of one while being okay with an example of the other is not in any way inconsistent.

I know you're hopelessly addicted to whataboutism, but you should really try arguing positions more directly. You'll spend a lot less time falling into false equivalencies if you stop relying entirely on equivalencies to make your points for you.
.
The_Viscount posted...

Among other things, if Biden wasn't in office, Russia wouldn't have invaded Ukraine. That feels like a pretty direct impact.

By definition, that would be an indirect impact, even if the premise weren't obviously nonsense. Trump has openly praised Putin's invasion. There's absolutely no reason to believe he would have prevented it. He'd be less likely to sanction them over it, so that might change things, but that's hardly the only factor at work here.

Ozmose posted...

Yeah, we bought oil when it was super cheap. The point is, we didn't NEED to buy it. Now we do since we killed domestic production.

Do you actually believe that domestic oil producers care about domestic demand? Oil is exported when producers feel it's going to be more profitable to export it than sell it locally. There's no consideration of "we'll make sure everything local is supplied before selling it elsewhere" beyond the fact that transporting it next door is cheaper than transporting it anywhere else, and even then that doesn't change as much as you might think. If anything, you've got it backwards: Oil being super cheap doesn't make importing more attractive, it makes exporting less attractive, so you'd see a greater push to sell locally.

The_Viscount posted...

I'm also against hypocritical sentencing policies.

Which apparently means complaining about sentences being too short whenever you want them to be longer and complaining about long sentences being the status quo whenever you want them to be shorter.

The_Viscount posted...

And, honestly, for a literal terrorist attack resulting in major destruction, five years is f***ing NOTHING.

You've championed/defended shorter sentences for crimes that actually did cause injury (lest we forget your fervent defense of the slap on the wrist received by a certain swimmer with a taste for inflicting "penetrative trauma" on unconscious women behind dumpsters). This was indeed a terrorist attack (by the definition of terrorism) and did cause a considerable amount of property damage, but let's not get carried away by ignoring that she didn't actually hurt anyone. Terrorism or no, this is just vandalism.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

I wanted to discuss the poll and followed the link.

This, back in 2010ish. Prior to this I was hanging around the WoW board, but given that I'd quit in mid-2009, moving to a proper social board instead of trying to socialize there didn't take much convincing.

Tutoria posted...

dont have this

This is really the easiest way to solve the issue. You can come up with all the fancy ideas you want to making it humane, but it all becomes a moot point if you just don't do it at all.

Judgmenl posted...

Maracroni and Cheese is disgusting.

There's a time and a place for KD, but it is indeed not the most appetizing most of the time.

Proper mac and cheese, however, is fantastic.

I question that they keep specifically calling it a "causal link" but don't actually explain the causal relationship. It's certainly possible to reasonably infer causality without formally identifying the causal mechanism, but the general vibe I'm getting from their word choice is "it's a really strong correlation so we're calling it causal," which isn't altogether correct.

Nevertheless, an interesting development, but it doesn't sound like it's significant enough to warrant any more precautionary measures than I've already taken, so I don't think it'll change much for me.

Died Again posted...

Early in covid everything was shut down and no one was buying gas. Suddenly, there was a massive supply and no demand. The price plummeted.

Now there is a high demand and low supply. The price has gone up rapidly. Basic supply and demand. We learned this in 8th grade.

Eeyup. Early Covid introduced similar supply issues, but with near-zero demand, so the remaining supply was more than enough and prices dropped. I gassed up in March 2020 for $0.75/litre, and a few days later it was down to $0.70. That tank lasted me over three months, by which point it was back up to the more typical $1.20, and it's been around that pretty much ever since aside from this most recent spike (and usually we see prices go down in the winter, but they seem to have stayed roughly stable, presumably because of Omicron). Prices jumped to $1.50ish with the convoy nonsense and are now up to $1.75.

I'm not sure why you think that the president is somehow to blame for OPEC's price changes, but it's a whole lot more complicated than that. Gas prices being high means supply is struggling to keep up with demand, and there are many factors contributing to that which have nothing to do with anything Biden or Trump have done.

HelIWithoutSin posted...

Shell didn't get the memo.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60638255
But at least their gas will be significantly cheaper, right? ...right?

Naturally. I'm sure there's no way they'll keep charging the same rates that everyone else is after buying their supply at such a discounted rate. Everyone knows that oil companies always pass on discounts to their customers.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

That might be misleading, though. That was right around the era of the oil crisis, when prices soared and took a while to come back down. Prices dropped afterwards.

I mean, Russia just declared war and the world is sanctioning them and their oil, we just recently finished dealing with a bunch of terrorists blockading multiple US/Canada border crossings, and all of that is happening amid some of the worst case rates of the entire pandemic (which was already creating widespread supply issues). I would also call this era an oil crisis.

Looking into him more, dodge cancelling his grounded C2 or C3 at the right time is an easy way to get back into the air, so I'm guessing I just need to get a handle on alternating between his aerial C5/6 (which ground you, and C6 forces a WPG) and those moves to keep a smooth flow of damage coming, but I still just find him awkward to work with. In theory, having so many ranged moves should make it relatively easy to avoid getting knocked out of the air, but so many of his strong attacks take him into melee range and his turning radius is so awkwardly wide that I still struggle with it.

Pikazard1 posted...

ravioli is making me think of revali

I'm finally playing through AoC, and I'm pretty comfortable saying that Revali is my least favourite character so far (just unlocked the four future champions). The concept's nifty, but his combos are just so awkward to land, especially where the strongest ones take him out of the air and I need to take off again if I want to use them. Maybe unlocking his C6 will change things, but I have my doubts.

BEERandWEED posted...

An stp. Get educated.

Either works, depending on whether you're mentally saying it as "a same-time post" or "an ess-tee-pee." I believe the former is officially the correct way to do it, but in colloquial speech you'll see them used near-interchangeably as personal preference dictates.

BUMPED2002 posted...

For me, it's seven and I'm the last one but my other sibs are like 10 plus years older than me so it's safe to say I wasn't expected LOL

One of my coworkers is 54 and has an 18-year-old brother. I'm... not quite sure how that happened.

Revelation34 posted...

Jesus wouldn't block anybody.

Arguably, that's the forum equivalent of turning the other cheek: Just accepting that you've been wronged and moving on from dealing with the person instead of trying to fight back.

Presumably, it got closed because you were openly threatening people with violence. That's not very zen of you.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

BlackScythe0 posted...

Depends on their contractual responsibilities to others.

These. Even if there aren't specific laws dictating how they have to shut down, large companies can't exist without intertwining themselves with other entities, and those connections have to be tied up before the company can disappear.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

It always feels slightly weird to complain about gas prices when you realize that Europeans have been paying closer to $8-10 a gallon for decades. Or that $4 a gallon is still cheaper than milk or soda.

Also that, if you adjust for inflation, gas prices really haven't changed by all that much since the 50's (aside from short-term fluctuations like we're seeing now).