Lurker > nemu

Smug ladder witch

God, that is so gross. You can just tell that he thinks of her as some kind of property.

It's like people who shouldn't have kids. There's really nothing that can be done about it without getting into very uncomfortable territory.

Nothing wrong with ending a relationship that's just causing pain, but she's clearly otherwise a horrible attention whore of a person who is making it all about her.

At the moment, no. In the future, most certainly yes.

Id say only real issue with it is that shows that they lacked the conviction to put it in the main story.

Even if you play devil's advocate on the first shot, there is no circumstance in this world that would justify the second shot. That is arguably the most important part of this whole thing, and of course they're not even mentioning it within the first minute.

Can that debt be erased through bankruptcy, or is that one of the kinds that sticks with you no matter what?

I'm confused how that's such a big problem with that income. Seems like a year of prioritizing the highest interest accounts would take care of pretty much everything weighing down on them and make the rest manageable. Probably too stupid to stop spending on a social lifestyle they cannot afford, I guess.

Depending on the wording, seems like the kind of law that could be stupidly enforced. As long as there's no overly harsh enforcement of it, I imagine it functions fine.

As a normal civilized person, I'd try my best to help clean any major mess I'm responsible for, but that's definitely 100% on the airline to take care of. Feels like there's a good chance it's complete made up nonsense, though.

I hope AI filters can help cover up all the CGI jank in animation. I thought it was primarily an anime thing, but seeing it in some western stuff is really disheartening as well.

Even if there ends up being more context about the first shot (doesn't seem like there will be from current details), I don't think any context in the world would justify shooting someone already down in the head. For that alone, the guy needs to be arrested.

I really don't understand why YouTube cannot implement tiers of ads instead of forcing everyone (other than major celebrities and organizations who can break all their rules at any time) onto the same dumb playing field. Just have "I want my ads to play on all videos" and "I only want my ads to play on family friendly videos." Most would probably pick the former because all this nonsense is just the result of mass media fucking around in the background anyway.

Tenlaar posted...

There is no solution to the current problem that is going to be even remotely close to an instant fix. The decades long solution is the solution, but it has to actually start at some point.

In that case, it has started, and it is currently in progress. There will be no major ground found in the next number of years. You need the current couple generations being most affected by gun violence to reach voting age, and you need the older generations to die off. This will not happen without a major cultural shift that sees guns as unnecessary. Though it's still going to have a lot of pushbacks.

Kloe_Rinz posted...

keep denying statistics. you people will do literally anything about the mass shooting crisis except actually resolve it

You actually need a workable plan of action to make that a reality. Culturally, we are entrenched in guns. You need at least two generations of people to die off before it's even a possibility that we'd ever begin any kind of major restrictions. Physically, we are entrenched in guns. There are just too many to remove in any kind of short timeframe. We're talking decades at least.

I don't think such campaigning is bad or worthless, but it's not a solution to this current problem. It's a possible endpoint way down the line, spurred on by this current problem. There's also the reality that we're going to be dealing with high quality 3D printed guns at some point in the coming years as well, so any deranged person will be able to assemble one on their own anyway.

I assume 99% of comments in places like that are just bots at this point.

Does anyone actually think that or is it just a talking point the dumb game journalists make people think they want?

In the context of a smarmy fictional villain, it's usually vapid nonsense. I cannot imagine a real life scenario where someone would actually utter that unironically, but they'd likely be a piece of shit.

How many parts are there supposed to be? 4?

For shitposting online banter, my guess would be the majority of it is just edgy shit for the sake of being edgy, but some minor percentage either outright believes it or falls into it after years of spouting it.

They/them has been used in a singular context forever. The only real problem with it is that it gets extraordinarily clunky in long writing. The author/translator has to go out of the way to write around it without confusing the reader, which isn't the easiest thing to do for amateur translators.

By the letter of the law, that scenario would definitely be beyond self-defense, but there are a number of circumstances that could keep someone from being charged, or get them otherwise acquitted or a lower sentence.

Sounds like absolute bullshit unless theres important context missing. CPS wont take kids away from crackheads, yet a child with a normal condition necessitates such heavy action?

Bodily waste.

Willingness to help probably correlates to the general safety/sanity of the area. There are some areas where the average person could see shit like this happen multiple times per day, so I wouldnt be overly surprised if people were scared or desensitized to crazy nonsense that may or may not be actually real.

Pretty sure I've gotten all of them in 64 before. Never played either Banjo, but did do DK64.

Oda better not offscreen Garp's probably one and only real fight.

You'd definitely be completely lost on the workings of the world and what is happening. I ended up watching 2 > 3 > 4 > 1 and I don't feel like I missed out on too much context, given the start of JW2 basically sums up his character.

I'd leave it on as background noise if I happened upon it, but I'd never go out of my way to watch it. Him being a vile human being doesn't really make me think differently about his works.

Only for family.

I only finished one normal cycle and ended up save scumming the final boss just to save myself some time after a couple runs where I died too quickly to even comprehend his attacks. It was pretty fun, but you have to really love the roguelike cycle to get deeper than that.

It's probably that the bond between trainer and Pokemon greatly speeds up the natural process that takes many more steps in the wild, assuming that those ones are able to be found in the wild. Humans and Pokemon have literal magical bond energy, so makes sense.

Fictional porn is fictional porn. Gore, kids, digesting people, bodily waste, animals, etc are all the same kind of bleh, but going crazy over it ultimately the same exact argument used in the violence in video game debates.

I wouldn't think so. There are only a few things that are inherently illegal to pretend to be, like cops and distinguished military awards.

The only way they would work is if we had an existing VR world with a virtual economy where scarcity actually made sense in some capacity. Introducing scarcity to fully digital items that each exist in their own ecosystem and have no cross interaction makes no sense at all and is just a giant scam. Physical items have scarcity because production and desire is not unlimited. Digital items have no such limitations.

I kind of do expect them just to end up doing Smash Ultimate EX Ultra Turbo. There's really no topping it, so releasing it on the Switch 2 with all DLC included + more in a few years would probably make the most sense. Rebooting it would just be a shitshow. There's no way they'd make it from the ground up with all existing characters. So milking it for as long as they can is probably the best option. The real question would be if they'd want to do it without Sakurai, guilt him into it again, or not even bother.

That article has to be AI-generated. It reads like gibberish.

I think I remember seeing that Twitter thread. I enjoy fictional lesbian romance and couldn't care less about fictional gay romance, but it seems bizarre to comment on it in that way.

For places where it's convenient, sure, but I assume such places already have systems in place. Spending money to improve those systems makes sense, but there are vast areas where it'd be largely useless.

Only things that would weird me out would be someone getting actual enjoyment in watching a show literally made for toddlers (not something that is just all ages, but one of those really basic early ages programs) and people who make their hobby into a personality point.

Not really. There's so much shit going on in the world on a regular basis that feeling real emotion about it all would be impossible.

It looks interesting, but not 5 years interesting. Probably not going to be a day one buy, but I'll probably pick it up eventually.

I don't really think I can really quantify male looks beyond sorting them into above average/average/ugly. I don't really see what makes someone like Hugh Jackman so desirable compared to some other above average dude.

I dont think Ive ever actually rewatched anything from start to finish more than 2 times.