Lurker > Hinakuluiau

My problem isn't really with how easy it is for Thanos to collect if they're grouped up, it's my dislike for making humans special.

Time - humans have via sorcerers
Space - humans had via Odin, Red Skull, Howard Stark, and SHIELD
Mind - humans had via Loki, SHIELD, HYDRA
Reality - humans had via the convergence
Power - humans had via Star-Lord being able to touch it

Granted the last two aren't really the same as having it on Earth, and as said the mind stone was there because of Thanos/Loki so it gets a little pass, but for me this is already too much and I dislike it.
I get it because of plot convenience, but that's making the universe feel really small. Having the Soul stone be in Wakanda would be so lame. To say nothing of the implications of black people having soul.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Brainwashed to think a 250 year old document is all-knowing.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

The argument is more that is your fun worth more than saving lives?
Of course you have to prove that banning guns works, but their argument isn't wrong if you assume it's true.

For instance, I think we could assume those of who post on Gamefaqs do like video games. If banning FPS games meant that there'd be half as many mass shootings, is that not something we should be ok with?
They've just taken the jump from if to assuming it works.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Honestly? No.

Uncle Choad posted...

So you want to tax a constitutional right?

Let's make people pay to vote as well.

r4X0r posted...

You want to tax people for exercising their second amendment rights. Would you object to being taxed for proposing this, and being taxed on your first amendment rights?

So if in this hypothetical the 2nd amendment went away, you'd be ok with it?

CruorComa posted...

To what end? Where is that money going?

a42ozslushie posted...

That would literally do nothing to stop mass shootings. All you would be doing is taxing law abiding citizens.

I would imagine this would mean the money would go to mental health and the like.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Of those 225 deaths by extremists:
106 individuals were killed by far-right violent extremists in 62 separate incidents
119 individuals were killed by radical Islamist violent extremists in 23 separate incidents

So right wing terrorism is on the rise. There is more than twice as many right-wing terrorist acts as Islamic, but the Islamic ones have been more lethal.

http://www.newsweek.com/right-wing-extremism-islamist-terrorism-donald-trump-steve-bannon-628381

A joint project by the Investigative Fund at the Nation Institute, a nonprofit media center, and Reveal from the Center for Investigative Reporting has found that within the past nine years, right-wing extremists plotted or carried out nearly twice as many terrorist attacks as Islamist extremists. Of the 115 right-wing incidents, police only foiled 35 percent. Compare this to the 63 Islamist terrorism cases, where police foiled 76 percent of the planned attacks.

Right-wing extremists were not only more successful, they were often more deadly, too. From 2008 to 2016, a third of right-wing attacks involved fatalities, compared to 13 percent of Islamist attacks. It should be noted, however, that Islamist extremists killed more people overall, with a death toll of 90 people compared to 79.

also, see the chart in here: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/analysis-deadly-threat-far-right-extremists-overshadowed-fear-islamic-terrorism
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

You are correct.
After Newtown and nothing changed, we all knew that this was just going to keep on happening. There's too much money in play here and a bunch of people who think a ~250 year old piece of paper is the only right way.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

JustMyOpinion posted...

Kinda sad how CE's first thought when there's a mass shooting is to spin the narrative in a favorable way for their party and an unfavorable way for the other party. Stay classy, guys.

---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Asherlee10 posted...

I am not understanding the flaw in boiling down extremely violent behavior to mental illness and some cultural issues.

Sure, but other countries have people with mental illness.
That's the problem. Canada has quite a few guns and they don't have nearly as many shootings as we do.
Obviously there's something here, and you bring up cultural issues but we need to address what those are and how we can prevent gun crime.

As it stands right now, we're leading the western world in this and every time we have another massacre, nothing happens.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

It's a bit rich to hear a gun owner complain about paranoia when you literally have people in here arguing for owning guns because of paranoia.
The chances of someone breaking into your home and you being able to stop them with a gun is just as crazy as some random gun owner going nuts in a store and using their gun to kill people.

Both arguments sidestep the issue of violence and miss the mark on why the US has a problem other countries don't.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

I like how Trump supporters don't understand context and think that the part "they let you do it, you can do anything" means they consented.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

megamanfreakXD posted...

Resident doctors work over 80 hours for week for dirt on top of debt.

These people are a bunch of bitches.

A person should look at this and think, "maybe residents should get protections that allow them to sleep more and get higher pay with lower debt" and not "lets drag others down for our choices"
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Do most of you play on the continents map or nah?
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

No. In fact I've been reading comics for many years.
It's just the useless sort of thing to post since there's no way to know that any of us read comics. There's no point in having a discussion when someone makes that kind of baseless claim.

Again, Captain Marvel consistently is shown moving at super speed in combat. Thor is not. Thor has quite a few feats where he is moving fast, yes, but he's consistently at the level of non-speedsters.

I don't know why you're getting so worked up over this. I don't even like Captain Marvel but this is some weird thing to get into.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

KingCrabCake posted...

People who read wiki pages and not comics are literally the worst.

Okay I guess we're done here.

AlleyViper620 posted...

What's with all the "Captain America beats Batman" votes? If Batman can repeatedly beat a boy scout with Kryptonian strength, I think he can beat a boy scout with supersoldier serum strength. Now Batman vs Black Panther is a fight I'd pay to see.

Batman has never beaten Superman.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

KingCrabCake posted...

Thor's combat speed is consistent.

Consistently average, yes. He is regularly moving at the same speed as Iron Man, Captain America, Hulk, etc. except when he's flying.

KingCrabCake posted...

And the armbar thing is taken out of context. You should prolly actually read the comic if you're going to cite it.

Hinakuluiau posted...

And Black Panther has caught Silver Surfer in an armbar, but that isn't consistent with most showings for either character.

Hmmm.

KingCrabCake posted...

Thor handles him with ease

Thor fanboys are literally the worst.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

And Black Panther has caught Silver Surfer in an armbar, but that isn't consistent with most showings for either character. We could go on and point out various feats over and over.
But overall, as Thor and Captain Marvel have been represented over the years and in their current incarnations, the most consistent showings should give Captain Marvel an edge of winning about 6/10 fights against Thor. Speed is a huge advantage and Thor's speed is consistently below a speedster and more of a flight thing. Captain Marvel is able to fight and think at superspeed levels while packing a punch that while I'd believe that Thor could probably outslug him (especially with Mjolnir), he's just outmatched when he physically isn't capable of reacting to any amount of super fast punches.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

The only way Thor is going to beat Captain Marvel is if Thor's lightning turns him back human. Otherwise Captain Marvel is just so much faster than Thor it's not even funny. Captain Marvel is only slightly weaker than Superman and Superman could mop the floor with Thor. The idea that Hulk and Superman are a matchup is ridiculous too, but then again GameFAQs Hulk is still a thing (only outmatched by GameFAQs Flash, but at least everyone knows Flash is superior to Quicksilver).
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

No, it's more like those born in their early-to-mid '80s to mid-to-late '90s
So the absolute largest range is 1980-1999 (so 19 - 38) and the smallest is 1984-1996 (22 - 34)
People who are 13 are Generation Z
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

KingCrabCake posted...

Don't give a shit nor is it relevant.

If you had spent even the smallest amount of time thinking about it, you'd realize why I included it. I mentioned the gay thing because it's relevant to the conversation because two male earners with no children statistically will make more money than any other couple.
I don't need the benefits, in fact taxes will go up for me.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

KingCrabCake posted...

@Hinakuluiau its crazy how comfortable you are with taking shit that is not yours

Look, I'm a gay man with a boyfriend with both of us working in STEM fields, I don't need these things. I have healthcare, education, etc. and have plenty of money left over despite living in a major city.
I believe that it's better for society to give out benefits to all instead of individuals getting them. We all benefited from people getting a free education until they're 18, we benefit from roads, we benefit from police, etc. I'm just advocating we go further.
Other countries manage to pull it off and they don't have this mentality like Americans do. It's not even stealing because everyone gets benefits.

Uncle Choad posted...

So they will obviously be collecting a lot more than they need just to pay people $1,000 a month. Which means people will pay even more. Sounds like a gigantic waste of even more money, which is what we're trying to fight.

I imagine most of what you described is already handled. What kind of argument is that anyway? You might as well have no taxes because there's always going to be loss at different levels.

averagejoel posted...

proponents of UBI need to read this
https://www.opendemocracy.net/neweconomics/universal-basic-income-is-a-neoliberal-plot-to-make-you-poorer/

This article is arguing that UBI is used as a cover for gutting the rest of the social safety net. Sure, it will replace some of the net (unemployment, possibly disability), but it could also be a legitimate effort at redistributing the wealth generated by automation.
It can be a step in the right direction, we just need to guide it to fruition. I don't see any of it as mutually exclusive. We can have UBI and democratization of the means of production.

It is indeed originally a right-wing plan, but he says it doesn't have to be. There is a lot of left wing support for a UBI in addition to expanded social services.
There are many possible implementations of basic income.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Uncle Choad posted...

I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure a high school education is free for everyone in the USA.

I mean higher education.

Uncle Choad posted...

Do I get the free $12,000 a year too? What about rich people? It's a fact that many people are poor because they suck with money. That $1,000/mo will make no difference to many of them.

Everyone would get the UBI, yes.

And no, "sucking" with money isn't really a thing from research:

http://www.africafocus.org/docs10/pov1006.php

In "Just Give Money to the Poor: The Development Revolution from the South," Joseph Hanlon, Armando Barrientos and David Hulme look at the experience of recent cash transfer programs, in countries ranging from Mexico and Brazil to South Africa, Namibia, India, and Mongolia. The verdict: cash transfers work if they are both fair and assured. If poor people have even small amounts of regular ensured income, they are in general well-equipped to decide how to use it most productively. And the results not only alleviate immediate hardship, but also contribute to longer-term economic development and poverty reduction.

http://mondediplo.com/2013/05/04income
Dewalas team studied the effects of a minimum monthly income on 4,000 people in eight villages over 18 months. There were no conditions regarding wages, employment, caste, gender or age, and the recipients could use the money as they saw fit. Besides social security benefits, adults received 200 rupees ($3.65) a month, and mothers were given 100 rupees for each child. Four of the villages had had help from Sewa for some years, with the organisation of support groups, savings cooperatives (2), bank loans, training in financial management and support during visits to local officials. Twelve non-participant villages served as controls for comparative study. The initiative, modelled on an urban Sewa project in a district of Delhi, was Indias first applied research on unconditional income. The hypothesis was that direct financial payments would change behaviour and improve family living conditions, especially childrens nutrition and health.

Studies at the beginning, mid-point and end of the project confirmed that, in villages receiving payments, people spent more on eggs, meat and fish, and on healthcare. Childrens school marks improved in 68% of families, and the time they spent at school nearly tripled. Saving also tripled, and twice as many people were able to start a new business.

Uncle Choad posted...

I think you're "it's all about luck" claim is complete BS. None of those kids got "lucky" to land jobs where they work, especially because we graduated in 2010 in a terrible job market.

It's not that it's all about luck, it's that you can't say that successful people work any harder than unsuccessful people. People of all sorts work hard, many of which get shit pay.
At the same time there are people who are successful who don't work hard. I realize they're a minority, but the idea that working hard correlates to success doesn't really add up for me.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Uncle Choad posted...

So should the government just take the money from the rich people and deposit $10k-30k into people's checking accounts for them?

Possibly.
First, I would want there to be an increase in social benefits. Things such as healthcare, education, infrastructure, etc. should be funded by the public so everyone has them.
Second, I'd like for there to be a universal basic income of about a grand a month tied to inflation.

Both of these things are possible and have been proven to be effective.

Uncle Choad posted...

Or just give them less incentive to do better for themselves by giving them the bare minimum to survive?

Thing is, you're assuming successful people work harder and smarter than unsuccessful people. That's not true.
People of all sorts work hard, study hard, etc. and many are not rich. Sheer chance is the greatest influence on how successful you are.

So I don't believe there is much evidence for your claim that people would have less incentive to do better.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Uncle Choad posted...

You literally want to punish success.

No, I want the standard of living to be raised for as many people as possible. Raising taxes on wealthy individuals is a way to do that.
Rough example, but the difference in lifestyle between making $30k and $60k is huge. The difference between making $1 million and $2 million is not nearly as big.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

So your example of a single person making $100k would be in the 28% tax bracket, not 50% or whatever you said
And because it's a progressive tax system, only that last $10k or so would be at that level, with the bulk of the money being taxed at 25%

Anywho, I'd like to see more tax brackets at higher levels. We don't need to have a cap at $500k or so, let's have more brackets at higher levels. People who make $30k fighting against people who make $100k is small beans, both should be going after the people who make over a $1 million and more.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

So you're complaining you got banned for vote manipulation because somehow asking people to not vote doesn't count as manipulation?
This is a joke, right?
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

The thing is, it doesn't really matter if it's decided by genetics, experiences, or some combination of nature and nurture.
It's not a choice and even if it were, there's nothing wrong with it.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

weapon_d00d816 posted...

Now replace all instances of "black" and "Africa/African" with "white" and "Europe/European" and vice versa, and tell me if it sounds racist to you.

For many, White Cougar is more than just another blockbuster; it is a cultural moment. AryanLand could be a visualisation of that white utopia pan-Europeans have dreamed of. White Cougar is the beautiful aesthetic climax of just that ideology, says Boyd-Pates. That paradigm of white people that exceeds the expectations of black civilisation, that places white people in a place similar in their minds to what they always felt they were robbed of, and connects them back to the motherland in a way no colonial effort could ever undermine.

You're right in that the first part of it "white utopia" sounds racist, but the rest of it imagines a world where white people are not the majority.
Unfortunately white people and black people do not have an equal history.

It's a common misconception that acknowledging these differences means that you're racist. It's why some people struggle to understand why there's a black history month.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

I know it's a joke topic but in case anyone is curious dogs can thrive on a vegan diet.
Personally I'd consider it cruel to deny them meat, but they're not like cats who need meat.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Muffinz0rz posted...

TF is a deep state

The idea is that the FBI controls the country or is in league with Clinton and Obama to control it.
It's standard conspiracy theories 101 and appeals to many Trump supporters.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Republicans hype up the contents of the memo to prove there is a Deep State
Memo is released, basically confirms most of what media sources like the NYT and WashPost have already said
White House worries that the memo was underwhelming. Nunes says it was written by aides

Regardless of which side politically you are, the memo was a waste of time. It was more effective before it was released, much the same as a horror movie before we see the monster.
This is now worrying quite a few conservatives that the memo is going to backfire on them.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

darkjedilink posted...

The memo points out that Comey lied under oath during the Mueller investigation. Explain that.

Where?
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

HypnoCoosh posted...

This is the equivalent of a police office planting drugs in your car when he pulls you over and using that as reason to arrest you and evidence to convict you.
But for some reason liberals defend these treasonous actions by the dems.
It's the epitome of hypocrisy.

2/ Second, understand that it's common practice in the justice system for law enforcement to use informants who have conflicts of interest to secure a warrant. Here, the informant, former MI6 Russia desk chief Chris Steele, didn't know who his client was and had no such conflict.
4/ Fourth, understand that the FBI had information beyond the information in the Steele Dossier when it secured a FISA warrant on Carter Page, and that the warrant went through judicial review, and that it was renewed multiple times because it had yielded actionable intelligence.
5/ So the context for the Nunes memo is this: a fairly routine informant practice wasas part of a larger stock of informationused to meet the relatively low standard of proof required to get a FISA warrant from a federal judge.
16/ It says FISA warrant applications must meet the "highest standard" of proof in the justice system. Uh, no. The "highest standard" in the justice system is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," which is nowhere *close* to the legal standard required to secure a search warrant.
17/ The legal standard for securing a warrant is the *lowest* standard of proof in the law"probable cause." (Consider: *indictments* require probable cause, which is why they say "the average grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.") FISA warrants are granted in 99%+ of cases.
21/ The memo then makes *another* error of law on its first page: saying the law requires "all relevant and material facts" to be shown to a warrant-granting court. But that's not true. Many cases confirm that law enforcement can and does leave out key facts without repercussion.
24/ Because we have an adversarial system of justice, and because the standard of proof to secure a warrant is so low, judges *never* expect (and almost *never* find) that the government included "all information potentially favorable to the defendant" in its warrant application.
25/ Let me be blunt, law-and-order types: if our justice system worked the way the Nunes Memo says it doesthank god it doesn'tour crime rate would be ten times higher and our criminal justice system wouldn't have the resources to operate. Jail doors would have to be flung open.
26/ Page 2 is worse. It says Steele prepared the dossier "on behalf of" the DNC and Clintonsuggesting he knew he was working for them, or that he *was* working for them, which he wasn't. He was working for Fusion GPS as a sub-contractorand had no idea who Fusion's clients were.
27/ This is a critical pointas this lie is the one Nunes uses to argue that Steele both had a conflict of interest and was biased, when in fact neither was true. Steele was not getting paid to please the DNC and/or Clinton because he literally did not know his work was for them.
28/ Second lie: that Steele was paid by the DNC and/or Clinton. Totally false. Steele was paid by Fusion GPS and did not know who Fusion was working for. Fusion was paid by a law firm, which in turn was paid by the DNC. But Fusion had previously worked for GOP clients on Trump.
29/ Indeed, Fusion worked for GOP clientsdigging for info on Trumpfor *eight months*. Fusion had worked for a Democratic client for just 30 days when its sub-contractor (Steele) said, without knowing who Fusion's client was, that he wanted to go to the FBI with his information.
30/ In other words, this memo is written like a campaign adnot an official document, and *certainly* not a legal document. It gets every fact wrong and every point of law wrong and *wildly* so. This is an embarrassing piece of work, but I'll keep on analyzing it anyway. We must.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Nomadic View posted...

Its confirmation of widespread speculation.

True
There was a FISA surveillance on Page since 2013 - they had recordings from Russian spies that Carter was their agent
The counterintelligence investigation began before the FISA applications against Page, Papadopoulos was already under investigation

Really wouldn't be surprised if the memo is going to backfire on them. They think the memo says "the FBI used information from the Steele memos," but it ends up confirming a lot of the information reported by the "fake news."
Now we have government confirmation that Carter Page was under investigation since 2013, Papadopoulos was the reason the FBI started a counter-intelligence investigation into the Trump campaign, and that a Trump appointed member of the Justice Department thought the evidence against Page was strong enough to approve a renewal of a FISA warrant.
And what gets me is that the biggest paragraph is the last one. Basically confirmed the investigation started with Papadopoulus and the Australians, not Carter Page. So they inadvertently confirmed something (the NYT story) they claimed was fake news.

They're hoping that the Trump-faithful will completely over-look the fact that there are, in fact, many reasons why the FBI should be investigating Page's shady dealings and instead focus on the words "Clinton," "Democrats," "clear bias against Trump," etc.

This memo was set up for a single reason: give the right-wing propaganda machine enough faux-ammo to cry "BIAS" and hope it works well enough that this whole "Russia thing" goes away.
Guess what: it's not. And if you think it is, you're being played.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

There was a FISA surveillance on Page since 2013 - they had recordings from Russian spies that Carter was their agent
The counterintelligence investigation began before the FISA applications against Page, Papadopoulos was already under investigation

Really wouldn't be surprised if the memo is going to backfire on them. They think the memo says "the FBI used information from the Steele memos," but it ends up confirming a lot of the information reported by the "fake news."
Now we have government confirmation that Carter Page was under investigation since 2013, Papadopoulos was the reason the FBI started a counter-intelligence investigation into the Trump campaign, and that a Trump appointed member of the Justice Department thought the evidence against Page was strong enough to approve a renewal of a FISA warrant.
And what gets me is that the biggest paragraph is the last one. Basically confirmed the investigation started with Papadopoulus and the Australians, not Carter Page. So they inadvertently confirmed something (the NYT story) they claimed was fake news.

They're hoping that the Trump-faithful will completely over-look the fact that there are, in fact, many reasons why the FBI should be investigating Page's shady dealings and instead focus on the words "Clinton," "Democrats," "clear bias against Trump," etc.

This memo was set up for a single reason: give the right-wing propaganda machine enough faux-ammo to cry "BIAS" and hope it works well enough that this whole "Russia thing" goes away.
Guess what: it's not. And if you think it is, you're being played.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Nomadic View posted...

Then add context.

That seems to be the point of a rebuttal.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Nomadic View posted...

Anteaterking posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Its just a crap shoot about what I speculate, but if youre asking. I expect evidence of a witch hunt. A reliance on information that the FBI knows is false, but uses it anyway.

Thats not based on anything substantial though.

I just can't see Wray getting really defensive of it if it's something that solely lies on Comey and McCabe.

My assumption is that anyone that is defensive of it coming out is likely implicated in the corruption directly or indirectly.

Or the memo is taking certain elements of the testimony out of context and they're on the defensive because they're concerned that it could lead to kneejerk reactions based off false statements.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Zikten posted...

It just feels convenient to make the first marvel movie about a black guy filled with a rap.

Did you feel it was convenient to give Thor a metal song about vikings?

Zikten posted...

I apparently can't tell the complex subtleties of society because alot of times things I don't think are racist I am told are. and things I feel are racist, people say aren't

Without specific examples I say man.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

@Zikten, man, let me help -
Your first post in this topic is you saying that it's racist for them to go with rap.
Your next post is saying that rap is an American thing.
Your third post is you saying that rap is a divisive genre and niche.
Your fifth post is you saying that you've never met someone who didn't like rock or pop.
The rest of your posts are off-topic and just you complaining about feeling attacked, so we'll ignore them.

I'll just break it down tl;dr for ya
1. It's not racist. There's no definition of racism that this falls under. Please do explain why you think it's racist, I'm curious.
2. Rap is popular around the world, including in Africa. In addition, in the comics (so it may not be true to the movies) he went to America and the U.K. as a young adult, getting a PhD. at Oxford University. He undoubtedly encountered rap.
3. Rap is not divisive or niche. It was the most streamed genre of the year. I know you later respond to this in your fifth post, but that's just an opinion. Don't state a falsehood and then later say it's just your opinion. It's not. It was a false statement.
4. Sorta goes along with the above. Plenty of people like rock and pop, plenty of people don't. Like literally all music.

And what the hell is up with @weapon_d00d816 ? Why are your posts "standard white person with a persecution complex?"
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

The idea that we shouldn't respond to posters on here is a bad one. Yes there are trolls and yes even those who aren't won't be changing their minds.
The point here is to present an argument that other posters can read, not let them have a free platform to spout BS.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Going along with this topic, here are some notes from the EA conference -

Good News

SWBF II campaign was played by more than 70% of the people who bought the game.

Gamers played SWBFII twice as much as compared to the original SWBF during the first quarter of its launch.

Respawns Star Wars game is not expected to land until 2020.

A sequel to SWBFII has not been decided, however, it appears that EA is considering it. The earliest we will see such a game is not until 2021, right after Respawn launches their untitled Star Wars game.

EA was clear to note that SWBFII is going to be supported for a long time.

EA CEO Andrew Wilson mentioned that the SWBFII controversy didnt worsen their relationship with Disney. They continue to work very closely with Disney and have no doubt that SWBFIIs revamped model will be fully supported by them.

Bad News

EA missed its estimates on SWBFII sales. They originally predicted 10-12 million sales and the game sold 9 million instead. The company pointed out the public backlash over loot boxes as the root cause of their less-than-expected sales for the game.

EA mentioned that they didnt get the balance right on SWBFII and this is something that theyre currently working on. They would like to build a model thats based on player choice and having a level playing field. EA is doubling-down on getting the balance right for the game.

Remains-to-be-seen News

Microtransactions are set to return over the next couple of months. Were assuming that theyre going to follow closely behind the revamp of the progression system. EA reiterated that its important to have the right balance when implementing these in the game. If we were to venture a guess, then we would think that the cosmetic customization system might be features that tie to microtransactions. To be clear, this is just speculation on our part.

EA is very conservative in their budget for the game until they find the right model for the game. They want to ensure that when microtransactions are implemented, theyre well-received and give players the choice they seek.

---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

It is quite literally the most millenial thing ever to say you're not a millenial and invent your own little generation.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Zikten posted...

yes maybe a 20 week old baby won't survive out the womb. but i'm talking about the potential. it WILL grow, if left alone. that's the qualification. if something will grow into a human, then I consider it human

Your reasoning for not counting just sperm as something that will grow into a human but an egg is just arbitrary. Yes the sperm won't grow into a human without an egg, but a fetus requires outside factors as well to grow. It's not like it's self-sustaining.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Coffeebeanz posted...

You realize this psychotic obsession with race/gender/identity politics is why the Democrats lost an impossible-to-lose election, right?

That is not why. It was a combination of two unpopular candidates, Clinton failing to campaign in what she thought were safe states, and overconfidence on the Left which allowed people to decide "I can't vote for her" while people on the Right decided they'd suck it up.
You can see this because Trump received about as many votes that McCain and Romney got -- there was no massive backlash against "SJW"-ism or what have you, he just managed to run against the one candidate who would lose. I know it feels good to point to it as a scapegoat, but it doesn't add up.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

You can reach the American dream*

* as long as you were born into wealth, are white, are straight, and a male.


---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

metralo posted...

damn, that 166 is totally worth letting poor people die in the streets

Hinakuluiau posted...

When my premiums go up $200 / mo because everyone stops having insurance, I'll definitely appreciate the massive tax cuts the billionaires get

---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Spooking posted...

The Obamacare mandate had to go. That was a huge victory.

Oh yeah it's great. Like he said, average family who makes $75k sees an extra $2k. That's $166 / mo
When my premiums go up $200 / mo because everyone stops having insurance, I'll definitely appreciate the massive tax cuts the billionaires get
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Inferno Dive Dragoon posted...

Republican scumbagging and Democrat flip-flopping at its finest.

And people keep trying to tell me that either party is worth voting for, ayy lmao.

I was reading an article that explains this the other day.
The tl;dr of it is that throughout history, the different parties decide to focus on different policies at different times. They have things they care about (both for and against) and things they don't care about (and thus are either ignored or freely given as votes to get something they do care about done).
You likely feel this way because you have a set of issues that you care about that neither party focuses on. It's not that they're the same, but what you want done and what they want done aren't the same.
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

Never mind. I turned off indexing for my SSD and I've got a ton of space now
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

I've installed it like three time now, it just jumps straight into it. I mainly use Chrome so it was just a backup

Anybody know how to get this even smaller?
On my C drive currently have this

Program Files (x86) - 3.62 GB
Program Files - 5.5 GB
Windows - 31.2 GB
ProgramdData - 1.09 GB
Users - 6.39 GB
Recovery - 6.92 GB
Intel - 68.5 MB

Which is about 55 GB out of 128 GB. C drive says 28.3 GB free of 117 GB which doesn't add up so I assume there's something hidden taking up the 30+GB

Any ideas?
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD

My C drive is a small-ish SSD and I really only keep the must have apps on there, everything else goes to the HDD
---

There are some things where I just bypass critical thinking. - ROD