I’m also bothered by very detailed QR codes. Milk cartons in my country had a QR-code for their website. It would be a ~10 letter url, maybe with a short path. But for some reason, the QR code was extremely detailed, as if it contained several kilobytes of data. I’m not sure if there were a large number of tracking-related parameters in the url, but it was very obviously unreasonably large.

My VW Passat hybrid has carried more material on the roof rack than I’d be happy to admit.

Buy new gf

I hope I recall correctly: I was watching an episode of wan-show where they looked into a backpack returned from a miner after heavy wear, but little real damage. Live on the show they wanted to showcase the double bottom, so they cut into it (can’t recall if this was in the miners backpack or another one) and were surprized to realize there wasn’t a double bottom. Linus quickly assured, still live, that this would be handled for all customers.

LMG did blame the manifactures of the backpack for removing a layer in a late stage design adjustment, but LMG have also alledegly taken a huge cost on assuring customers that they can receive a new backpack for free if the bottom fails for any reason.

My memoery of this might be fuzzy, and the story I have heard comes fully from LMGs perspective, so take everything with a grain of salt.

All of their thumbnails are unfortunately click-baity. They spoke about ut in an older video. Apparently, the click-baity images drive too much traffic for them to justify something more subtle.

But how do you apply this with Lorentz’ transformation (i.e. relativistic factors)? You cannot approach the speed of light without considering relativism. It is known that p = gamma * m * v where p is momentum, gamma is the gamma factor given by sqrt(1/(1 - (v^2/c^2))), m is mass and v is velocity. If you study the gamma factor, you’ll realize that it approaches infinite as v approaches c, the speed of light. Since we are actually dealing with light here, where v = c we are breaking the equation. Momentum cannot be defined for any mass which moves at the speed of light. It’s asymptotic at that speed.

Also note that the same goes for E = mc^2. At relativistic speeds, also this equation needs to consider the gamma factor. So those classical equations break down for light.

The answer is that photons don’t have mass, but they have energy. There is a good explanation a bit further up in this thread on how this is possible.

Or:

Easy. Just share the scripts in a reasonable advance to allow actors either withdraw from the project or brace/prepare themselves for the uncomfortable scenes.

Just to be a counterweight: I have ~15 hours in BG3. At some point I just realized it’s not for me. I can’t really put my finger on it, but it just doesn’t strike any nerve for what I enjoy in video games.

Skyrim, however was my favorite game through the 2010s, with probably north of 500 hours across multiple platforms.

Maybe it’s something about the pacing and freedom to disregard the story elements.

I just don’t get why Disney would go to that extent when the lawsuit should have easily been disregarded as not applicable to them. Digging up an old Disney+ membership to find some terms which could apply seems like a terrible PR move for their service.

Yeah, that’s a good point.

I really don’t have a clue, but calculating averages might yield results which don’t represent a directly applicable value. If some people lose tens of years due to dramatic complications, it could weigh up a lot for people who barely lose any life length.

Again, I’m just guessing wildly, but anything which scares people away from smoking is good in my opinion.

It’s a very rough approximation which was used in anti-smoking campaigns, at least in the 90s/00s.

When you want to create the atmosphere of the 60s without having to smoke anything yourself?

One inhalation on a single cigarette is said to reduce your life by 7 minutes. How does this apply here? Is the scale linear or exponential?

There are a variety of reasons, and of course there exists people who are in full control of their weight, but decide to not do anything about it. What I’m hinting at is that there are also a lot of people who suffer with deeper psycological issues. We don’t really tease depressed people with nick names and expect them to just snap out of it at any time. Hence I feel like we should generally treat heavier people with respect instead of assuming that it’s their active choice.

Yep, the same way people can take full control of their depression, alcoholism or other psycological issues. It’s all about just rolling up those sleeves and deciding not to have the issues. So we can safely assume that all heavier people are a result of them actively choosing to become heavy, so we should always treat them as such.

Similarly to religion and the bible, words mean whatever people want them to mean.

Having stress related bowel issues, I can assure you that you are in luck that it works that way for you and not the other way around like it seems to work for me.

It’s like that scene from The Office where Michael declared bankrupcy by exclaiming it loudly and clearly in the office space.

Except in this case, it’s exactly how it works.

I’ll have a go at this.

“No stupid questions” is something I think is applicable to any attempt at gaining knowledge, insight or perspective. “How big helicopter would you need to hoist an ice cube to the sun to extinguish it?” Though absurd, there might be a disconnect of knowledge, and the question reveals other things which could be explained.

To me, a stupid question would be some kind of rhetoric which doesn’t seek information, but instead attempts to redicule and push own standpoints or beliefs. “Have you gotten over that religious faith yet?” or “Do you realize how dumb your political views are?”. These are examples of ineffective and condescending and will likely just leave the other person with reinforced standpoints in addition to annoyance. I find that to be a stupid approach and thus a stupid question.

I don’t really know, but it’s my gut feeling.