Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)EP
Posts
0
Comments
52
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I'm so very confused by this situation. For those who are against supporting Israel. Can you explain to me rationally why you think Hamas doesn't deserve to be wiped out after Oct 7th? I'm not denying the civilian casualties I agree it is unacceptably high But that doesn't caragotize what's happening as a genocide. But Hamas has said they want a high casualty rate they are using their civilians as human shields. Would you really suggest Hamas should just be able to get away with Oct 7th because they are hiding behind their people. Like what is your answer if you were the one making the choice here? Please I know this is an inflammatory topic but I promise I'm only trying to understand your opinion on the matter.

  • It should be sure. But that's not our reality. Even if you take away monetary value things still hold more practical value. Try collecting and making food for 20 people. Go outside and find all that or grow it or whatever you have to do to get it tell me how long it's you and how difficult it was to do. Now multiply that effort to 8 billion people.

  • That's an entirely different argument. I agree with you on that topic. Reframing capitalism to fit human well being is what we should do. But feeding everyone for free with zero work from anyone just isn't possible. Saying there are starving people because capitalism is just straight up wrong. There have always been starving people and probably will always be. Feeding everyone is logistically crazy difficult. If it ever did happen it would take a ridiculous amount of work and money from a lot of people.

  • I really don't think you understand how many people are in this world. Sure grocery stores donating food instead of throwing it away would help some. But providing good quality food to 8 billion people is not possible. Imo.

  • We can provide shitty cheap unhealthy food to everyone sure. It wouldn't be easy but yeah we could probably do that. But we absolutely would not be able to give people the kind of food they actually need.

  • You need to consume to live. This means you need to manipulate your surroundings in order to survive. So you need to work to have your basic needs meet. You don't just get to live with zero effort.

  • I've always said that it's bullshit that those meals were so cheap in the first place. Their lobbyists paid off a bunch of politicians to make it so cheap. It shouldn't have ever been as cheap as it was. That food is terrible for you in every way. It'll probably be good for a lot of people to stop eating it so much. So i see this as a win win.

  • Starfield. People played for 700 hours then wrote a bad review then play for another 300 hours . Bro if you put 1000 hours into a game there was obviously something you liked about it.

  • Since this entire thread is just people shitting on the first game i figured id be a little different and say something good about the game. I very much liked the first one. Super weird but intriguing story super well acted awesome visuals and stunning graphics. If you like weird unique sifi stories you'll enjoy it. Its a slow relaxing game with some pretty intense stealth. I can't wait for the second one. Tho i do wish kojima would move on and make something more akin to metal gear plus death standing. His recent announcement the other day seems to confirm he will be doing that game after ds 2.

  • Disagree. People are still clamoring for such a game hence the crazy popularity of the day after. There has yet been a game that had done it better than dayz stand alone. Which took nearly a decade to actually get good. If a triple a studio actually did a zombie mmo right it would be hella popular. Shit if the day after devs could pivot their game to be what they said it would be people would come flocking back.