guylacaptivite @ guylacaptivite @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

150

Joined

2 yr. ago

Thanks chat gpt. But I'll give you my advice as a 10 year mechanic.

Don't. You'll look like a tool and you'll ruin a perfectly good truck. It's certainly not a "good investment".

Times have changed. They don't want to now and so be it.

It's still a fair representation of the cars as they are designed and used for though. There always is a "but if...". But yes, this is a fair way to compare those cars in reality. This is what would happen if you had a currently legal race spec F1 vs a currently legal race spec FE around a circuit. This is how you really compare stuff, by looking at what they are DOING instead of TELLING.

Which is a perfect example of the irrelevance of awards, and not just in gaming but pretty much any other subject. The fact I like pizza doesn't influence how much I love cake and people who love soup are also right.

Hit the nail right on the head. This is just a company trying to rebrand helicopters. And bad helicopters at that. They are banking on naive people who think this is actually a novel and viable technology. It will at the very best be another toy for the super wealthy to send the kids to Disney.

Your car. Just think about the forces and mechanisms invovled for this to happen. Every single day we travel at 100km/h in our 2ton at least metal box surrounded by hundreds of other people in their equally large and heavy and fast machines in a space barely wide enough to react in case of an emergency(not even considering if most are actually ready to act in such a case. All of this with realistically little training. Not to mention most people don't really pay attention while driving and certainly don't consider the life of others while doing so. It's so impersonal and dangerous. If it was a never heard of concept, individual cars driven by any normal person would be considered laughably stupid at the very best.

These already exist. Almost anything Platinum Games and the Devil May Cry series for example.

Strong world building. No matter how farfetched the technology/society/species, if there is enough backstory or precedent anything is believeable. For example, Isaac Asimov's robots aren't realistic at all but he starts by laying down a set of rules (three laws of robotics)and wrote entire books worth of stories detailing their development. This not only allows readers to suspend their disbelief and accept that sentient robots exist but gives context and relatability to all of your characters/events/locations. The Expanse acheived the same by simply rooting it's fiction deeply in reality which makes it inherently relatable. The rest is normal storytelling.

But reducing population without massive changes to behavior is not fixing anything either. We also don't have to change every single persons behavior but mainly how we regulate industries. Throwing a plastic water bottle in the garbage is not the problem. Manufacturing those bottles and filling them with fuckin tap water and selling them for a profit should be punishable by hanging

Not oc but we are not overpopulated. Every single hunan that ever loved could fit in the grand canyon only. The problem is how we feed and consume.

Only the outer body panels were stainless. The functionnal car was basically a lotus chassis and an under powered peugeot engine. Many claims were made when it was announced but the final product was literally just the shell with a different car underneath. And it ended up twice as expensive as what they planned.

It's also not at all what Juliette does in the book. She's almost entirely motivated by Holston's cleaning and it's myatery. Also the whole Peter Billings scared for his family and his "syndrome" doesn't exist. The whole point of the book is critical people questionning their way of life that find and help each other out. The show is really lazily written by people who did not understand or knew the source material. And that whole "big brother" camera room is a fucking joke. Bernard is a much better antagonist in the novel. No need for Sims as the ruthless killer that loves his son(sôooooo fucking dumb) and the judge that actually was invented for the show. He easily fit those three parts and that makes for a more fleshed out and complex character, just like real life. But ok I'll stop, I'm just tired of poor writers butcheringn an already existing amd well thought out book. There is no excuse, they're just writing by numbers.

I was in the process of reading the book when I heard about the series. All I have to say is that , once again with tv adaptations, the writers are doing fan fiction. So while the premise amd character names are the same, too many characters have wildly different motivations and arcs. I don't want to go to into spoilers so I'll leave it at that. The books are way more interesting. The show dives too much into overused tropes like "forbidden love" and "protect the family". Same thing happened to the Witcher series. A bunch of writers couldn't hold back their ego on reinventing the material that already existed that was actually great and what the audience loved.

So yeah read it if you liked the series, it's all better