Neither happened. The restaurant isn't owned by Disney, it is just listed on their website as a recommended place for allergy free dining, and they while own the property, it isn't a part of the actual park, springs, etc. The family signed up for D+, and therefore "read" the terms, including the arbitration, and then used their D+ account to sign up for the trip, and had to "read" the terms again. The whole D+ argument wasn't that they had to go to arbitration because they used the streaming, it was to show they had to go through the same terms multiple times and should be familiar with them. And basically, this is an issue with the labeling on the website, so would be covered by those rules. Who they really should be going after is the restaurant, if they made the same allergy free claims there. Agreements requiring arbitration are indeed bullshit and should be more limited, but this is proper enforcement of a shitty system, not the batshit insane enforcement it has been memed into.
Gift is by far the most commonly used word that is comparable, and it is a very close comparison, it makes sense people would base it off that. I'm a soft g person myself, but the one letter change doesn't hold up very well here. All your examples have an additional letter specifically to change how another letter is pronounced using well established rules. That is not the case here at all.
We should all just go skuh-bah diving with the sharks with lass-ear beams on their heads. Acronyms don't always inherent their original letters' pronunciation, as seen in skoo-buh and lay-zer.
IMHO, there has to be more incentive for the player. That's a thing you can do, in Arkham, but it's a thing you're supposed to do in DMC. There's the combo tracker pushing you, lot's of flashy moves designed to help push the combo, and some moves that aren't as good but exist to look cool while rotating through moves. It's a matter of intent, not just if it is possible.
Yeah, a subgenre emerged with a set of identifiable attributes. Some of those attributes have been dropped from the definition, but there still isn't a better term for a game where you start the run in a generally weak state and quickly power up with only one life (with maybe extras from items) Sure, we could come up with a snappy name for the genre/mechanic, but why when we already have a perfectly serviceable one?
There is a long range tazer design that uses this principle. It uses a tiny burst laser to plasmify the air, which then becomes the conductor for the electrical payload to the target.
Just vague memories from a random on the web. But IIRC, they were not welcome in part because of corruption of the previous leader's administration, and one of the first things Zalensky did was crack down on that.
The cost is less from the design and more from the safety regulations. Best case scenario the state just starts making nuclear power plants, it's just not a good idea to mix profit incentive with nuclear.
I think I see the direction they wanted to go. Show that she's still obsessed and starting to fray at the edges, but then give her a redemption when she realizes she doesn't need a biological child when she has Ciri right there as a daughter. It's just that every show like this seeks to have to be CW'ed these days. It's a big reason why I had to drop Supernatural too. It worked really well for 5 seasons. But after that, the 3rd time the brothers fought about X and the 6th time they kept Y secret, I realized there was never going to be any development past this and had to step away. It's exhausting.
Exactly, it was (very relatively) cheap and quick. And they figured when, not if, it breaks, it will be again quick to repair. And it is interesting tech that could be useful down the line that they may figure is worth the cost in training alone.
Neither happened. The restaurant isn't owned by Disney, it is just listed on their website as a recommended place for allergy free dining, and they while own the property, it isn't a part of the actual park, springs, etc. The family signed up for D+, and therefore "read" the terms, including the arbitration, and then used their D+ account to sign up for the trip, and had to "read" the terms again. The whole D+ argument wasn't that they had to go to arbitration because they used the streaming, it was to show they had to go through the same terms multiple times and should be familiar with them. And basically, this is an issue with the labeling on the website, so would be covered by those rules. Who they really should be going after is the restaurant, if they made the same allergy free claims there. Agreements requiring arbitration are indeed bullshit and should be more limited, but this is proper enforcement of a shitty system, not the batshit insane enforcement it has been memed into.