There are of couse exceptions and areas where cattle can graze all year, and the need to deforest areas isn't as large as other places. However, for the majority of beef production, there are less enviornmentally friendly cattle food implemented. So maybe the solution should be that only the areas that can produce beef sustainably should be allowed to consume it? I would assume that that would be an unpopular policy, so I find it to be a much better solution to reduce the beef consumption even in the areas with sustainable producion and rather let those areas export the excess production.
I'm guessing this is more pronounced at lower levels. At high level chess, I often hear commentators comparing the moves to their database of games, and it often takes 20-30 moves before they declare that they have now reached a position which has never been reached in a professional game. The high level players have been grinding openings and their counters and the counters to the counters so deeply that a lot of the initial moves can be pretty common.
Also, high levels means that games are narrowing more towards the "perfect" moves, meaning that repetition from existing games are more likely.
I see a lot of physical activities around here, and I strongly agree. Find something that gets you outside and makes you move around. Hiking, biking, running, team sports, climbing - all great. Find whatever suits you and is within your area.
I recently got into disc golf. It's something i look forward to play, and it makes me go outside often and I meet a lot of new people while playing.
Satisfactory. Been progressing my last save for a few weeks. I'm in the last (but largest) phase. My factory took a lot longer before turning into spaghetti comparred to my previous attempts. Now it's slowly getting complex to the point of considering going mass dissassembly and make something more pretty.
The prequal, Ingress, was even simpler, but that probably made it better as a long run game. There were portals to harvest and a simple system to create triangles between portals to claim territories. Nothing overly complex, and no expectations to bring gameplay mechanics from an other game.
Ingress was obviously dead as soon as Niantic launched the much more popular Pokémon Go. Of course fantastic for Niantic, but I just feel like Ingress would have been a game I would have played for a lot longer if Pokémon Go didn't happen.
Just to establish my background: I am by no means religious. I gave up my family's christian background almost 20 years ago, and I don't have any personal interest in religion. Like you, I attend whatever ceremonies that occur in religious ground with respect and without religious participation. My point of view is only based on personal respect.
I agree that there shouldn't be laws against these acts. State interruptions of peaceful/non-violent protests should not be a thing.
My point is that I get the sense that people are actively hosting protests which hit a much larger target than intended. Burning Qurans used to be an act of racist groups in my country, but somehow it has moved to something that people celebrate as a symbol of freedom of speech. I just find it unfortunate that the society celebrates an act which also targets peaceful integrated sunni muslims who has no intentions of forcing sharia or ancient rules upon the rest of the society.
There is a line somewhere. Saying that there is or isn't a god is fine. I don't think that's an action which attempts to provoke aggression. But bringing out their most cherrished symbol and burning it is more of a declaration of hate. If the hate was narrowly directed at a specific leadership of state or a system, that would make sense, but burning the Quran targets so extremely widely. While I don't think the act should be illegal, I don't like the idea of declaring a wide range of hate.
I'm out of the loop, but is this the idea of burning Qurans, or is this an afterthought? I have been divided on the subject, as I support free speech, but I don't enjoy the support of provoking aggression by undermining someones faith.
If the idea behind burning Qurans is to prove that there is no religious force that stops us, that's something different. Like showing the people that there is no reason to enforce the ancient rules and laws of whipping people for having extramarital sex, cutting of hands of thieves, claiming the right to bear arms or stoning people for cheating in marriage.
I live in a kinda small Norwegian town. I work full time as a developer with remote access to the customer. My office is ~5-6 hours away, but I am very rarely asked to travel.
Time-limited consumables as buffs can be a huge annoyance. In a ton of games I just end up stacking them, waiting for an opportunity where I need them, but usually when I need them, I don't have the time to stop and use them. I keep ending those kind of games with an inventory full of potions.
Right, it was the plot for the movie Lucy, where the protagonist increased the brain capacity beyond 10% and upon reaching 100%, she turned into an USB drive. I remember that now.
I've almost never heard anyone quote that, but I've heard numerous people arguing against that statement. So much that I'm wondering it it has mandela-affected people to think it's a more common misconception than it really is.
I did the same way back when playing pokémon red. My Blastoise was up in level 60-70 when I approached the last gym. Being a small kid, I didn't understand tactics of effective types - only that my pokemon was an awesome heavy turtle with cannons on its back. I never really tried to use other pokemon or switch out during battle.
It's a minor thing, but whenever I get into a pokemon game, I deposit my starter ASAP. I don't want to rely on the pokemon which is spoon fed to me from start, it feels a lot better to play the game with whatever I'm able to catch along the path.
Yep. The meme seems to be created by someone who has a vague recollection of the movie, with assumptions of it being a lot simpler. There are a ton if plot holes in the movie, but this is not one of them.
There are of couse exceptions and areas where cattle can graze all year, and the need to deforest areas isn't as large as other places. However, for the majority of beef production, there are less enviornmentally friendly cattle food implemented. So maybe the solution should be that only the areas that can produce beef sustainably should be allowed to consume it? I would assume that that would be an unpopular policy, so I find it to be a much better solution to reduce the beef consumption even in the areas with sustainable producion and rather let those areas export the excess production.