Trantarius

For a while I just couldn’t play souls-likes. The enemy attacks were blatantly undodgeable. Like, even if you move at the maximum possible speed, in any direction, at the very start of an animation, you can’t get out of the way. Then I realized you’re not really supposed to get out of the way, you’re supposed to abuse the immunity frames from the roll to “dodge” straight through the attacks. Basically the opposite of what I had been doing.

I love that they keep saying stuff like "introducing Ubuntu to the Christian community", as if they couldn't already use it.

When you hit the windows key (aka meta-key or super-key) it brings up the app launcher. You get a dock at the bottom with pinned or running apps (like a taskbar), and all of your open windows are presented in a sort of mini-version that lets you switch between them or move them between workspaces. There is a search bar that you can immediately type into to open any app with a .desktop file. There is also a button to bring up the app grid which shows your apps kind of like a mobile device's home screen.

Not having a dock is one of my favorite things about gnome. I actually use an extension to hide the top bar too. There's just something so satisfying about having 100% usable space on screen. I get all the info back in the win-key overlay, so I don't really need that stuff on screen at all times.

Why would any milk fat be required for something to be defined as chocolate? Chocolate doesn't have to contain any milk at all. The only thing my brief research turned up was this, stating that they could only contain up to 5% non cocoa vegetable fats.

Edit: This claims there is a minimum milk fat for milk chocolate, but no requirement for chocolate in general.

What the hell are you talking about? Nowhere in the Constitution is a response to disease even mentioned. It sure doesn't mention anything about bombing cities. The Constitution has been interpreted very loosely to allow the government the powers it has now, but bombing US cities is beyond the scope of even that. The idea that they have a constitutional duty to do so is even more absurd.

The Constitution is an actual thing, you know. You could read it instead of just making stuff up.

If a person's life is not their own to take then they have no autonomy at all

That's just not right. Autonomy isn't some absolute, all or nothing thing. If it was, then everybody would have "no autonomy at all", because we're not allowed to commit crimes.

Of the full range of possible actions, killing yourself is a relatively small portion of those. Considering that death eliminates all possible future actions, I'd argue that preventing a suicide (of a person that's not dying anyway) actually preserves more autonomy than the alternative.

I have a metal cup on my desk. This cup used to be a rock. Humans took that rock, and placed it into an environment specifically tailored to remove just the molecules we want from it. It was melted, using temperatures far exceeding what a human could survive. It was formed into a sheet, then pressed into shape, using tools specifically crafted for that one purpose. It was painted with a compound not naturally found anywhere on earth, because someone thought it should be green. It was packaged in organic compounds carefully formulated and shaped through hundreds of processes to ensure it couldn't be damaged on its trip to the other side of the planet. All of this for a cup. Why? Because it's slightly more comfortable to drink out of. A problem that wouldn't even register with any other living thing, solved with efforts far beyond their capabilities. And that is our closest competitor.

Humanity has accomplished more in the last hundred years, hell even the last ten, than anything else on earth (or beyond, for all we know) ever has. Yeah, war, greed, and racism are a thing, but it hasn't stopped us before, and won't stop us now. You are comparing real people to some idealized fantasy. A fantasy that only seems attainable because of what we have already accomplished, not in spite of it.

We only aspire to do better because we know what we are capable of.

Every thing you code is binary. You may write '15', but the code your computer runs will use '00001111'. The base-10 source code is only like that for human readability. All mathematical operations are done in binary, and all numbers are stored in binary. The only time they are not is the exact moment they are converted to text to display to the user.

I find that much harder to read than a for loop. You are making a helper function to only use it once, which is kind of confusing when it is totally unnecessary. Also, distinguishing between two groups only inside the setter line is weird. Applying the modification to one group, then the other, is more obvious. Considering the alternative isn't really longer, and only using basic loop syntax, I would just use the loop. If you really want to add the "set dots visibility" explanation into it, just use a comment, that's what they're for.

I literally just now misunderstood your code and had to change my comment to correct for it.

Use:

items=[...]
for o in items:
    ...

This is the most direct way of doing what you want. The first option might allocate a new array each iteration, which is unnecessary. The match statement is both a pain in the ass to write and less direct, which at best compiles to the same thing and at worst has you doing a bunch of totally unneeded comparisons.

If this 'i' variable you used isn't just an incrementing counter, use the last option. If it is though, it's an extra counter you don't actually need.

The performance difference here would be so small I doubt you could even observe it. So, you really shouldn't worry about this particular pattern. Compiler optimizations are more likely to trigger on simple, direct code, so writing it as directly as possible is probably the fastest option anyway.

Tests would be a pretty bad idea. It is easy to imagine the ways that someone could use that to attack their political opponents. Similar things were used to disenfranchise voters in the past. Also, it is too easy to corrupt the legitimacy of such a test. All a person would need to do is get a heads up of how the test works and practice for it. Or, have the test designed to be too easy to pass. It's easy to say "make it impartial, scientific, and dignified", but that doesn't mean it will be. I seriously doubt any governmental body ever has or will be that trustworthy. An actual age limit would be objective and clear though, making it much more practical.

What? Nautilus (ubuntu default file browser) finds drives wherever they are mounted and lists as their own location, as if it was windows. That includes the default mount point. Even if it wasn’t detected, it can still get to the mount point by browsing through the file system normally.

Installing software can be done via a software manager (included in ubuntu and most other distros). Software not in the manager is usually distributed as a portable binary (also common on windows) or an app image (even easier to use than an installer). Once installed, that software is the same as on windows.

Besides basic file manipulation, installing/running software, and web browsing, what else does the average user even do? All of it can be done on linux, with or without CLI.

I think the relationship threshold for the sex stuff needs to be higher. In my playthrough, I was propositioned by at least 3 different characters, and I was literally roleplaying a serial killer. I made no attempt at all to get them to like me. I think that stuff should only happen if the player has been seeking it out. And I don’t just mean the sex scenes themselves, horny dialogue and thinly veiled suggestions should happen less often and later in the story (like at least halfway through, certainly not in act 1). It especially stands out since the rest of the writing is pretty good, so an obvious “hey Player, wanna see a sex scene” moment is very out of place.

It should be noted that games that arent verified with proton won’t work until you change a steam setting that enables using compatibility tools on all games. You can also set this per game.