• 0 Posts
  • 45 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle









  • Science is also for artificers.

    Also people aren’t necessarily able to monetize their interest in science. Maybe if there were no barriers like people needing to pay for education, food, shelter, transportation, medical care, and the air they breathe then maybe a larger portion of those people would be the mage they want to be or at least closer to it. As it stands you are right, but things can be different than they are right now


  • They aren’t concerned primarily with employing people or crop yields, agribusiness is a business.

    Your sentiment holds entirely if agriculture was entirely dependant on staple crops.

    The plateau didn’t come out of nowhere. Staple crops are being pushed aside in favor of high margin crops for biofuel and luxury goods. Large agriculture still focuses on short term gains.

    Profit per acre is going up. Businesses don’t care about increasing yield past a certain extent. If the business is set to profit and is currently profitable then all of these issues are non issues to the business.


  • I think you might be missing something. If food yields were soaring that would decrease the market value of food. The current agriculture system is designed with profit as the goal and feeding people as a secondary result.

    Is a supply chain inefficient? In the current system that’s alright, it lets a company charge more to make up for losses and gives them something tangible to justify price hikes.

    There’s also massive surplus waste and other problems that are prevalent in the current system. Growing to feed local populations rather than growing for export would drastically shift the situation alone and is currently entirely possible, but not nearly as profitable.

    Can we get enough food for everyone? Yes. Can we do it while maintaining record high margins? Probably not



  • It’s really inefficient. A stove has all of the heat being concentrated to one spot while a car has a whole cooling system spreading out and dissipating the heat, and cars are more efficient at that than in the 70s. Having enough heat to cook with is generally bad for an engine so by design you would want it to cool before it’s that hot.

    I have had a few coworkers who put their lunch containers in their engine bay so that it would heat up for lunch though, that was for a job that had us driving around to 3-7 jobs in a day.


  • I think you hit the nail on the head with those points.

    I’ve seen 5+ clones of Papers Please. I doubt that if you surveyed people describing the mechanics that they would be interested especially if Papers Please never came out.

    For the original Halo they surveyed people who played who pretty much universally described the AI on the harder difficulties as being significantly “smarter”. In actuality the only thing changed was enemies health pools and damage output and it was identical AI.

    Gamers usually have a holistic experience with the games they are playing. There’s definitely a place for user feedback to work, but devs don’t look at a game the same way that people playing them do. Asking people who don’t know how something works for feedback will give you perspective, but it doesn’t necessarily lead to informed design decisions.


  • That’s your takeaway with somebody asking if something is exaggerated or not?

    So far all you’ve done is respond to someone who is basically asking about sources and tell them that they are wrong for asking and then respond to me with a false equivalency. What exactly are you contributing here? You haven’t added anything other than saying everyone is wrong not providing any information and then acting combative.

    You could have said why they are wrong, but you don’t want to. You want to misrepresent what I said entirely so I don’t know apparently you don’t want to read either