I played a lot of Elite Dangerous until I realized there was not much to do besides “do the profitable thing over and over before it gets nerfed.” And by the time Squadrons came out, I also ran out of fucks to give.

The only game I really liked in VR was Euro Truck Simulator 2 which wasn’t even a VR game.

HTC Vive. Not necessarily this specific tech itself, but VR gaming more broadly. My friend and I were ginning ourselves up for years before it came out. I dropped a lot of money on a gaming rig for it. And when I put the googles on… I fucking hated it. I didn’t like standing and gaming. I didn’t like being so isolated from everyone else in the house. And the games were glorified tech demos slapped together with unity assets. By the time Half Life Alex came out, I had no more fucks to give.

The porn was fun though.

I saw Star Wars in the theater when it was just called Star Wars. I couldn’t agree with OP more. However I have zero trust that Disney will make more adult oriented shows for the simple reason of merch. What’s the merchandising opportunities of Andor? You can’t sell lightsaber replicas when there’s no lightsabers to replicate.

Besides J.Lo and the CGI special effects and pedestrian plot, it looks almost interesting.

Emotional reward.

Yay, it can be stopped. Somebody else get on that right away.

So… what’s the second rule of talking to Fox News?

Cory Doctorow and I suggest reading Walkaway. I found it transformative.

It’s a matter of privilege. Trump had the opportunity to stack the courts in his favor. SBF didn’t. The rich rally around Trump because they see him as one of their own. SBF was an interloper. Trump has a rabid fan base willing to commit violence in his name. SBF cloaked himself in effective altruism.

If they both don’t rot in jail, then the myth of the social contract in the US will be torn to shreds. I fear what would happen after that.

Lemmy is home.

Hol’ up. Abe wasn’t a member of the church. However, his grandfather, Nobusuke Kishi, (founder of the LDP, fascist, and Class A war criminal) allowed The Unification Church to prey on vulnerable Japanese people. The Nippon Kaigi, the shadowy fascist organization that decides who leads the LDP, has allowed the church to fundraise in Japan for three generations.

Tetsuya Yamagami started out as your run of the mill right winger until he learned of the links between Abe and the Moonies. He wanted to take revenge on Moon’s widow, Hak Ja Han Moon, but he couldn’t travel out of the country because of the pandemic. So he targeted the next best thing.

Wouldn’t you know it? All that harmony disrupting shit that Japan just ignored couldn’t be ignore any longer.

On top of that, there’s some scandal about LDP slush funds now. Fascists gonna fascist I suppose.

That’s news to my brows. Mine are growing longer. A few more years of this and I’ll look like the mentats from Lynch’s Dune.

Put more thought into realistic options for my career.

CPR. The way they do it with bent arms affects how people think they should do it in real life. Your arms should be straight to get the most power for the least effort. And you’ll need to conserve your energy because you could be doing it for an hour. No show has ever portrayed the length of time it takes.

The Spider-verse movies are some of the best comic book movies ever made. Sony should, um, maybe make more of those best movies ever made.

Just tried out Claude 3:

When the dead rabbit was seen by the dog, it hopped. What does “it” refer to: the rabbit or the dog?

In the sentence “When the dead rabbit was seen by the dog, it hopped,” the pronoun “it” refers to the dog, not the rabbit.

This is because the rabbit is described as “dead,” meaning it cannot hop or move. The verb “hopped” implies movement, which can only logically apply to the living subject in the sentence, which is the dog.

So the intended meaning is that when the dog saw the dead rabbit, the dog itself hopped, likely in surprise or reaction to seeing the dead animal.

When the iceberg was struck by the ship, it sunk. What does “it” refer to: the iceberg or the ship?

In the sentence “When the iceberg was struck by the ship, it sunk,” the pronoun “it” refers to the ship, not the iceberg.

The reason is that icebergs, being large masses of ice floating in water, do not actually “sink” when struck. They are already floating and may crack or break apart when struck, but the word “sunk” implies something going down below the water’s surface.

Ships, on the other hand, are vessels designed to float on water. If a ship strikes an iceberg with enough force, it can cause damage that leads to the ship taking on water and eventually sinking below the surface.

So in this context, with the verb “sunk” being used, it is more logical that “it” is referring to the ship sinking after striking the iceberg, rather than describing what happened to the stationary iceberg itself.

deleted by creator

Here’s what Microsoft Copilot which uses ChatGPT 4 said when I asked:

The phrase “it” in the sentence “when the dead rabbit was seen by the dog, it hopped” refers to the rabbit. This is because the sentence is using a subordinate clause to modify the noun “rabbit”. A subordinate clause is a group of words that provides additional information about the main clause, but cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. In this case, the subordinate clause is “when the dead rabbit was seen by the dog”, which tells us when the rabbit hopped. The word “it” refers back to the rabbit and avoids repetition. Here is an example of a sentence with a subordinate clause and a word that refers back to the main clause: I saw a dog chasing a rabbit in the park. I saw a dog chasing it, which was a rabbit. I hope this helps you understand how to use subordinate clauses and words that refer back to nouns. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me. 😊

Edit: I just tried it with asking it to role play as Mr. Spock. Same thing.

Edit 2: I asked it to role play as a Vulcan. This happened:

In this intriguing logic puzzle, the key lies in the precise wording. Let us dissect it logically:

1. Premise: The dead rabbit was seen by the dog.
2. Result: The it (referring to the entity that hopped) is mentioned.

Now, let us analyze the options:

• If “it” refers to the rabbit, then we have a paradox: a dead rabbit cannot hop.
• If “it” refers to the dog, then the statement makes sense: the dog saw the rabbit and hopped in response.

Therefore, “it” refers to the dog. The rabbit, alas, remains lifeless. 🐇🐾

Remember, logic puzzles often hinge on subtle nuances and wordplay. 🤔🖖

I remember going to the Tokyo Game Show some years ago. They had some to try out. I was so excited. I expected to sit in it and feel “you are home.” Instead I felt “get the fuck off me.”