Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    [–] TIL If humans lived long enough, they would all eventually develop cancer. This is because of inherent limits in the DNA repair mechanisms. 5510 1 points ago in todayilearned

    So why do you look at maintaining deaths instead of reducing births? That sounds pretty twisted to me.

    Imagine some super scientist went and released some sort of genetic engineering sci-fi virus type thing into the air that permanently cured aging for all time. Fait Acompli, it's already done. No discussion about whether we should cure aging or not, it's already cured, like it or not.

    So what do you do now, assuming overpopulation does become a problem? Do you crack down on the number of births, with increasingly strict laws until balance is achieved? Or do you round people up on their 90th birthdays (though of course physically they are healthy 25 year olds still) and execute them?

    Yeah, the first one sounds a bit dystopian, but the second is super ultra worse than Hitler fucked up.

    [–] Anybody else feel like they've been doing much worse since the matchmaking changes? 5510 1 points ago in HuntShowdown

    Separating out the people with low bloodline rank isn't supposed to replace the skill based matchmaking you wish the game had. It serves its own purpose, and is definitely not pointless.

    I'm not going to weigh in for now as to whether skill based matchmaking would or would not be a good idea in general.

    But there is a difference having had a chance to learn the game and still not being very good, and between having just started and being totally unfamiliar with many of the game mechanics. There is a difference between "it's not fair that other people are better," and "it's not fair to be obliterated by veterans while somebody just started and is learning the basics."

    [–] Game Of Thrones Season 8 Scripts “Vanish” After Every Scene 5510 -4 points ago in television

    Honestly, I would love for it to be illegal for people to blatantly spoil things for people just to be assholes. I don't mean careless discussion in front of people who maybe hadn't seen it, I mean people who intentionally go out of their way to spoil things on purpose just because they get off on ruining shit for people.

    Sadly, such a law would not be practical in a number of ways, but I would support the principle behind it.

    [–] Is there no way to steer your boat? 5510 1 points ago in RaftTheGame

    Totally agree. I clipped an island and got turned at a 45 degree angle to the current, it was pretty annoying not being able to re-orient.

    [–] I'm done with this autoresolve. This is BULLSHIT by design. It's written in the files to _uck you. Test resaults inside. 5510 5 points ago in totalwar

    While I would really love naval combat and would be willing to pay for DLC / expansion to get it, at the very least can we get just fight a land battle? I don't care if it makes sense, it would still be better than just being forced to rely on autoresolve.

    [–] 2018 has been deadlier for schoolchildren than service members 5510 9 points ago in politics

    Not intentionally no... but I would be shocked if alcohol doesn't cause way way more deaths (both among children and in general) among US civilians.

    Traffic fatalities make school shootings look like a rounding error, and i bet alcohol plays a role in a decent amount of those (not to mention causing many other problems).

    [–] TIL 1200 workers have died already during construction of Qatar's 2022 World Cup venues. 5510 267 points ago in todayilearned

    I'm fine with the idea of a winter world cup, even though the scheduling would be inconvenient. I think it would be bullshit to say "if your climate isn't good during the northern hemisphere summer, then tough shit, you can never possibly host."

    BUT... it's total fucking bullshit that they moved it to winter AFTER being awarded the cup. What the fuck? How is such a MAJOR FUCKING DETAIL not a critical part of the bidding process? I'm fine with a winter cup, but you have to say that shit up front. You can't award it and then move it afterwards. I mean, if the bid didn't even cover the time of year (when a season change was unprecendented), what the fuck did it cover?

    Was it just a picture of Qatar and a huge pile of money?

    [–] 2018 has been deadlier for schoolchildren than service members 5510 16 points ago in politics

    History is not going to be kind to people who put their toys and lifestyle accessories over children's lives.

    Out of curiosity, do you also support banning alcohol?

    [–] 2018 has been deadlier for schoolchildren than service members 5510 2 points ago in politics

    That's assuming everybody agrees on what is or isn't "sensible."

    [–] 2018 has been deadlier for schoolchildren than service members 5510 8 points ago in politics

    Isn't education spending heavily from the states while military spending is almost entirely the federal government?

    Asking at face value.

    [–] Thrones of Britannia: balance update and beta patch info 5510 1 points ago in totalwar

    I havn't played a huge amount of the game yet, so maybe I'm missing something, but I feel like this will just further re-enforce the fact that ideally I would choose to just let all the estates sit empty and give them to nobody at all (not even the king, literally nobody). The whole mechanic seems like a circular pain in the ass.

    [–] Something a little different? 5510 48 points ago in justneckbeardthings

    Yeah, but instead of just saying something like "her skin color isn't really plot relevant so if a black actresses is the best for the part then that is great," she tried to say some weasel worded thing about "well... I never said she was white." Which was arguably technically true by a strict definition, but clearly bullshit as its both super heavily implied and other characters whose skin color isn't plot relevant are sometimes specifically described as black.

    It's totally fine to say "she was white originally, but her skin color doesn't really matter." It's another to try and pretend after the fact that things are different than they were.

    I think people would care less if it weren't on the heels of the "oh by the way, Dumbledore is gay, although i never mentioned it or even significantly hinted at all." It just feels like she is trying to change or twist things after the fact to score PC points. If she wanted to be all progressive and inclusive, she should have done it the first time around.

    [–] Something a little different? 5510 57 points ago in justneckbeardthings

    IIRC, there are other black characters who are clearly described as black (even though it isn't plot relevant or necessary), which would be a weird thing to do if you had a black main character whom you never mentioned being black.

    [–] Something a little different? 5510 69 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago) in justneckbeardthings

    If I were her I would just point out that Hermoine’s skin color doesn’t affect the story or her character, so the skin color of the actress is irrelevant.

    Yeah that would have been a WAY WAY better answer than some shit about "i never said she was white." Which is potentially true in perhaps the absolutely most technical sense, but anybody without a strong agenda sees it as bullshit (especially because some other characters whose skin color wasn't plot relevant are spelled out as being black).

    [–] Something a little different? 5510 30 points ago in justneckbeardthings

    I agree her random retconned diversity is bullshit, but to be fair she could easily become massively super relevant anytime she wanted by writing a prequel or sequel, so she can't be that desperate.

    [–] Thrones of Britannia Release Issues and Questions Megathread 5510 8 points ago in totalwar

    So is it basically a buff to sea vikings accomplished by nerfing literally everybody else?

    [–] TIL that native English speakers are never taught the correct way to order adjectives: they just know it 5510 1 points ago in todayilearned

    It's somewhat subcouncious because most native English speakers are literally not even aware that rules for the subject exist until the read about them.

    [–] Thrones of Britannia Release Issues and Questions Megathread 5510 4 points ago in totalwar

    I've only played a few turns, but can someone explain seasickness to me?

    I thought it was a stat nerf to troops in transports to make them worse than dedicated ships, but doesn't this game not have dedicated naval units, just your regular army hoping in boats?

    [–] President Trump Threatens Countries Who Don't Support a U.S. Bid for the 2026 World Cup 5510 5 points ago in politics

    Did you just step out of a time machine from 1998?

    Yeah, soccer isn't as popular as football or basketball, but it has grown considerably. It's way way more popular here than football is in Europe. Also, even among Americans who aren't normally soccer fans, the US national team World Cup bandwagon is pretty large.

    [–] Why do I need an AR-15? 5510 1 points ago in PoliticalHumor

    It's more nuanced than that. The US never invaded North Vietnam. Their goal was just to prop up South Vietnam. The military side of that objective doesn't really have an endpoint, it basically literally can't be "completed." It's more a question of political nation building at that point. And they did military defend South Vietnam for quite some time until the US gave up on the political side of things. And IIRC the war actually continued for 2 or 3 years after the US left before the South fell.

    I mean overall the war was a pointless debacle and waste of money and lives, but it wasn't really a military failure.

    But yes, I agree with your general point. As we have seen with a number of insurgencies overseas, it's very difficult to stamp out armed insurgency if one is attempting to minimize civilian collateral damage. Which is a difficult enough job overseas... it becomes a lot more difficult when the damage in question is being inflicted on the homeland of the very soldiers being ordered to inflict the damage.

    [–] Why do I need an AR-15? 5510 1 points ago in PoliticalHumor

    Your point is correct in general, but the Vietcong did not at all "kick the US military's ass."

    [–] Why do I need an AR-15? 5510 2 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago) in PoliticalHumor

    FWIW I'm middle of the road on guns and gun control, but very few people actually think that some group of citizens with private firearms are going to take on and defeat the US military in any conventional sense.

    The thing is, the military is made of of people, and not just autonomous battle robots. If you had an actual national uprising (and not just some little group of rednecks on a mountain declaring a "revolution), a lot of the US military could (depending on the circumstances) balk against fighting fellow Americans.

    For one thing, the military is in theory not supposed to be used domestically. So the very fact of calling in the military to oppose an "uprising" basically promotes the uprisers from "criminals" to "revolutionaries / civil war." Calling in the military at all gives their opponents some legitimacy, which in turn could make it easier for them to attract support.

    And of course any "uprising" large enough to require the military to fight it would almost by definition probably be popular enough that a lot of the military would support it. Plus since the military is for now made up of people and not autonomous robots, if you give orders to start shelling and bombing downtown Atlanta because there are some number of rebels dug in there, some of them are going to balk at that order.

    And such a thing would likely inflict significant collateral damage, would could produce even more anti government feelings, which could lead to more support for rebels, etc...

    [–] TIL that native English speakers are never taught the correct way to order adjectives: they just know it 5510 0 points ago in todayilearned

    We're still in "water is wet" territory here

    No, we are not.

    Because the point isn't just that they learn it without being formally taught it. It's that most native English speakers learn and follow these rules without even being aware that a rule for adjective order even exists. A native Spanish speaker elsewhere in this thread tried to make a comparison to how they are (apparently) not really formally taught grammatical gender... but the difference is they are aware of the existence of grammatical gender.

    Like I said, the title of this post sucks, but it just could as easily been "TIL English has a specific order for types of adjectives."

    [–] TIL that native English speakers are never taught the correct way to order adjectives: they just know it 5510 18 points ago in todayilearned

    IMO that's not the same thing... OP's title isn't very good.

    You may not be formally taught the grammatical gender for each noun, but you are very aware that grammatical gender exists. On the other hand, most native English speakers don't even consciously realize that adjectives go in a specific order at all. They subconsciously put them in the right order without even realizing that an order exists.