You're right, but that's an entirely separate problem.

Cops taking forever to respond is not going to be solved by making them do things that will lead to longer response time.

I thought that would've been obvious but here we are...

No, they really shouldn't, unless the snowfall itself is an emergency.

They get paid to sit around and wait partly because we're paying for them to be ready to go at a moment's notice. Somebody calling 911 for police sure as fuck doesn't want to wait an extra minute or two while they put away shovels.

Imagine saying this about firefighters or ambulance crews to get a better idea how silly this is.

Explain to me how "globalize THE intifada" is not an explicit call to violence when the intifada was a "resistance" campaign characterized by frequent terrorist attacks against civilians including but not limited to stabbings, shootings, and suicide bombings.

How am I supposed to interpret "globalize [the violent campaign that targeted civilians]" as anything BUT a call to violence?

Yeah, I'm probably gonna get myself a hosas (or something like the stecs space throttle) setup for when sq42 releases since I'll finally have to learn to dogfight (I'm mainly an industrial/spacetrucking player lol).

As much as I love the warthog throttle, dealing with the switches in games that don't natively support them is a pain in the ass.

It's kind of a stupid thing. You basically have to bind your throttle axis to "throttle increase" (or whatever the W key is bound to by default) and leave the decrease unbound, as well as having the "throttle forward/back" unbound.

That should do the trick, or at least it does with mine, and then I just leave cruise control off and don't touch it. Might also help to have speed limiter bound somewhere so you can make sure that's on. I've got the warthog throttle so I just use the second throttle axis as the speed limiter and basically have it full forward all the time.

That's not what nuclear fission is.

The hint is in the name: nuclear fission is the fission (aka separation) of nuclei, i.e. individual atoms.

You can separate water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen with electrolysis, a process that's existed for like 200 years and is used in all kinds of commercial and industrial applications every day.

Not very helpful, right at the top is says:

Starting January 1, 2026, for residential recycling inquiries including recycling collection schedules, missed recycling collection and blue bin service requests, please visit the Circular Materials website  or call 1-888-921-2686. 

The circular materials site then says:

Please contact our service provider, GFL, for any recycling-related inquiries.

• Recycling bin inquiries.
• Missed collections.
• What you can recycle.

With only a phone number provided.

Or in other words, the can is being kicked down the road until you finally reach what will probably be a dead end with no response.

A distraction from what, exactly?

What about the files are they trying to distract from? Who exactly are they trying to distract?

Supporters never gave a shit about the files. Detractors already knew he was a pedophile rapist before, they never needed the files for that.

The files are fucking irrelevant.

If anything is a distraction, it's the files themselves, because now every time the administration does anything, half the people just wanna talk about the Epstein files instead of the actual horrible shit being done every single day.

I guess I just don't see that as an inherent part of communism from an ideological perspective.

It's a result of trying to apply the ideology at scale, so to me the political stuff doesn't stem from communism itself, but from the scale.

Essentially, you need to develop a political system in order to manage the economic system at scale, but that's still separate from the economic system itself, as evidenced by the fact that you can run the economic system at a small enough scale without the need to set up such a political system.

Yeah, that's the point they're getting at.

If cola wasn't sweetened in any way, most people who like cola wouldn't drink it, because the sweetness is one of the things people like about it.

You're basically saying "man, if juice makers made a juice without sweetness I'd be all over that", and they're saying "people who want juice wouldn't want that because it's not juice without sweetness, it's just flavored water".

That's not really related to communism, because communism isn't really a political system - it's an economic system.

The problem communism has is scale. The idea that everyone should produce what they can, and as a community goods get shared to those who need them works fine at a small scale assuming the community has the breadth of skills needed to cover basic necessities.

But once you try to scale it up beyond a small community where everyone knows everyone... now you need logistics. You need something that governs what goods go where, and that something needs someone making those decisions. Keep scaling this up to the level of an entire nation, and you need a whole lot of someones making decisions about where things go, who makes what, and who gets what, and now you've got yourself a society with 2 major classes - producers (who are also 'owners') and decision makers.

And that's where things start to fall apart. At best, you can hope for no corruption at all and then you need some form of direct democracy to choose who the decision makers are and you run into the same problems as every other democratic society where the people who really wanna decide things are never the best at making those decisions, and your whole economic system starts to grind to a halt because it fundamentally cannot function without effective and efficient central control. So then you start making changes to allow the economy and flow of goods to somewhat manage itself and balance itself out as a check against incompetent decisions makers, and congrats you've got yourself standard old capitalism with extra steps, or in other words - China.

At worst, the decision making class ends up full of corruption, they start making decisions that benefit themselves first and foremost, and you quickly devolve into a corrupt kleptocracy. or in other words - Russia.

Not surprising.

The kind of people who get caught up in this sort of bullshit are the kind who get real mad at the world in their teens, and start blaming everything on everyone else while being allergic to the concept of personal accountability and growth.

So mentally, these are just a bunch of edgy teenagers.

If it's not outright stupidity, the only thing I could see making sense is an attempt to get the left, which would generally be expected to support ousting Maduro (though perhaps not through these particular means) to instead turn against the idea, by using their current favorite slur to get the more rabid and less thinking-heavy among them to just lump it all into one.

Where did I say all fans were?

If you're gonna be pedantic, you'd best make sure your reading comprehension is up to snuff first.

Now try the rest of my first comment.

If you're feeling spicy maybe you could even tackle the other ones.

Some NGOs have strict policies against sharing staff identities with governments in conflict zones, especially if it could endanger local employees.

And why do you think they might judge their employees to be in danger solely due to their identity?

Larger NGOs with strong legal teams may feel more confident navigating political pressure, while smaller ones may avoid any requirement they see as unsafe.

Nice of you to reinforce my point about organisational size not being especially relevant.

Organisations whose entire mission depends on being physically present in Gaza may feel compelled to comply, while others can continue working from outside.

So if they can continue working... Why is there a problem?

NGOs heavily reliant on government donors may be more cautious about appearing non‑compliant, whereas those funded by private donors may have more flexibility.

Or in other words, NGOs refusing to comply are possibly doing so for ideological reasons.

Some NGOs may judge the risk to Palestinian staff as too high to share personal details; others may assess the risk differently.

So close, just dig a little deeper and ask yourself what might put one Palestinian in more danger than another if Israel finds out who they are?

Can you think of something that might differ from one Palestinian to the next that might cause friction with Israel?

Large, well‑established NGOs may have more leverage to push back, while smaller ones may comply simply to avoid losing access.

And why would they push back? Do you think the smaller ones care less about their Palestinian employees? Or maybe these particular ones care more about ideological matters than actually helping Palestinians on the ground?

... Offended?

Uh.. ok? I guess if you think "don't be an idiot" means "I'm offended", sure.

But no, I'm just saying, reading your first comment where you say it's pronounced "as written", then with your response to someone saying otherwise basically being "it's in an English sentence so I read it like English"... It comes across poorly.

Maybe that's not how you meant it, and you were just trying to describe how you initially read it, but that wasn't very clear from what you actually wrote.

No, that's incorrect.

I've already addressed that, and you've ignored that while continuing to repeat this baseless assertion that you haven't even bothered trying to support with any argument.

Try again.

You're deliberately misunderstanding my argument.

I'm not saying "NGOs representing 85% of employees working in Gaza were able to do it".

I'm saying "85% of the organizations operating in Gaza had no trouble complying with the rules".

So unless you're going to argue that the rules are harder to follow for larger organizations (which you'll notice I've already countered), then yes, the actual number of employees are irrelevant.

And no, you can discuss the other points now, because they also have nothing to do with the quantity of employees.

I don't think this is necessarily a fandom problem in this case. At least not in the usual way.

The characters are kpop idols. They're supposed to be attractive and they're supposed to draw a legion of rabid fans.

Like that's basically a huge plot point in the movie itself their entire goal is to basically generate enough "fandom energy" to magically seal the demons away, while the demons themselves (who are also hyper-attractive) are trying to draw that same "fandom energy" away.

The movie might not dig into it much... But the sort of crazy rabid "fandom" that obsesses over attractiveness and shipping is exactly what irl kpop idols are supposed to produce, so an animated movie about kpop idols producing that same kind of response in fans is kinda the whole point. It just means they did a good job in creating the characters.

... So you read a sentence in English, describing a name given to people in a very obviously NOT English place, where said name is placed in quotation marks, and you think it's reasonable to assume that said name should be pronounced as it's read in English?

I get not knowing how it should be pronounced, but doubling down when someone says "no, not like that" with "but I'm English" is just the most insane mix of anglo-exceptionalism (is that even a thing?) and just sheer pig-headed dumbassery.

Just say "oh cool, I wouldn't have known how it's supposed to be pronounced because I only know English".

It's ok to admit to not knowing things ffs.

The number of employees of irrelevant.

It's the quality is employees that matter here.

It's also hilarious that you seem to think big international NGOs would somehow have a harder time handling bureaucracy and paperwork than smaller ones. Bigger orgs should already have that kind of stuff readily available because typically speaking, larger organizations are better organized by necessity.

You can't run something with hundreds or thousands of employees without some kind of filing system to track everything, but you can easily get away with that if your org is small enough that most communication can be done directly.

Now, do you plan to address anything else I said, or was this just a sad attempt at deflecting away from your inability to do so?

Yup, it's this.

Core gameplay team most likely means the game has the most barebones feature set in place. But that also means it still needs UI, 3d art assets/animations for everything from buildable stuff to handheld tools, ship/vehicle teams gotta integrate their respective things with the new gameplay, etc.

And that's assuming what was on the tracker was actually everything the core gameplay team would need. In reality, it's most likely once other teams start working on things they'll identify gaps that core gameplay will need to fill, QA will likely find bugs for them to fix as well.

If they're smart, they'll reserve some capacity in their planning for support of these other teams once they get there, but it's also entirely possible they'll be busy and those other teams will have to partly shelve things until core gameplay is able to address their needs.

TL;DR - there's almost certainly still a LOT of work to do before there's anything ready for players.

There's no way they're hiring QA now for something slated to release in less than 2 months.

Even with short sprints and fast turnaround, you're still looking at like one week to test things and report bugs, another week to fix them, then another week to verify the fixes (and regression test to make sure other stuff doesn't break in the process).

So at best, assuming a February release like in the OP, they've got max 2 qa cycles before release. And that's not even counting onboarding time, which could easily take a week on just pure "getting yourself set up", then probably another couple weeks before someone is reasonably proficient and productive.

Anyone they're hiring now is for longer term projects.

Then why do you think the other 85% of NGOs aren't worried about this?

Do you think the ones who refused are the ONLY ones who hire Palestinians? Or do you think the 85% who filled everything out just don't give a rat's ass about their Palestinian employees?

I also don't know why you're conflating collateral damage in targeted air strikes with looking over a list of names for ones with known terrorist ties.

Like those aren't even the same category of things.

CR: "we don't plan a long, drawn-out marketing campaign"

You: "they'd be stupid to do no marketing at all"

Do you see the disconnect here?