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/)GI
Posts
0
Comments
100
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Aren't libraries mostly funded by local taxes? Since OP is traveling around the country, they're probably not paying for the local library. Or at least a much smaller portion than the local kids' parents.

    It's unfortunate if a library cannot provide both a space for children and a quiet area for adults, but if they have to choose they should prioritize the local community's needs over the out-of-towner's.

    Edit: Anyone care to elaborate on the downvotes?

  • I found it to be the easiest. If you're having trouble with a boss, you can just go somewhere else and level up or upgrade your weapon before coming back. Unless you're at the very end and explored nearly everything, there should be plenty of other bosses you could be fighting instead. Other soulslike games tend not to have as many options and I would often end up stuck on a particular boss that I had to best because there were no other areas available.

    Also spirit ashes. I know a lot of people refuse to use them, but if the game gives you something that makes the game easier and you choose not to use it then that's on you.

  • If they're publishing reviews in a periodical that targets a vegetarian audience, it makes a ton of sense for them to point out which meat-heavy restaurants actually have decent vegetarian options and which don't.

    I don't have kids, so I don't really care if kids will like a movie. I want to know if I will like it. Reviews like this are useful for me. As a couple random examples off the top of my head, Zootopia and The Mitchells vs. the Machines are both movies I enjoyed that I would have dismissed as kids movies if it weren't for reviews saying that they're movies that adults will like too.

  • People seem to have this view that everyone in the '60s was a hippie but that's just not true. Time Magazine put the number around 300,000. In a country of 200 million, that's only 0.15% of the population. They were a counterculture not mainstream culture. The vast majority of kids did not become hippies, and many actively hated the hippies.

  • That's not why they're going after Sony though.

    She says the company abused its dominant position by requiring digital games and add-ons to be bought and sold only via the PlayStation Store, which charges a 30% commission to developers and publishers.

    Maybe Nintendo has a similar practice with their Nintendo shop that they could be sued over, but regardless they're still allowed to price their own games however they want.

  • You would rank them once.

    If we were taking the top 5 candidates in a FPTP election, once a candidate receives 16.66% of the vote they would be guaranteed to get a seat because it's impossible for 5 other candidates to also have at least 16.66% of the vote. So the election threshold in this election is 16.66%. In general when selecting n winners, it is 1 / (n+1).

    The scoring takes place in rounds and every round either a candidate will earn a seat or a candidate will be removed (votes can be reallocated to them in later rounds so they're not permanently out).

    When a candidate exceeds the election threshold they win a seat and their excess votes are then redistributed to the other candidates. Suppose Rep1 wins the first round by 1 million votes over the election threshold. Their excess votes are redistributed based on what the voters' next preferred candidate is. E.g. Of the voters who voted for Rep1, 70% had Rep2 as their next choice and 30% had Rep3 as their next choice. So Rep2 earns 700,000 votes and Rep3 earns 300,000 votes. Then the next round of scoring begins.

    If no candidate reaches the election threshold that round, the votes from the lowest scoring candidate are eliminated and their votes are redistributed based on the voters' next choice similar to how the excess votes from a winner are redistributed (except now it's 100% of their votes). Then onto the next round.


    If we assume that everyone votes down party lines, then every time votes are redistributed (whether because a seat was won or because a candidate was eliminated that round) the votes would only be redistributed to someone of their same party. If Democrats have 33% of the vote, then when a Republican wins a seat the excess votes just get redistributed to other Republicans. When a Democrat candidate is removed from a round their votes just go to the next Democrat candidates. The Republicans aren't taking away any of the Democrats' slice of the pie. Inside that blue slice there might be several rounds of shuffling votes around until one of them reaches the election threshold but none of the Democrat votes would ever get redistributed to the Republicans.