You can get more reasonable prices per sandwich with coupon codes. For the ones near me, they almost always have a “FLBOGO” or “BOGOFTL” or “FTL1299” or similar variation to get two for the price of one. But YMMV and you have to be ok with leftovers if you’re eating alone.

Haven’t played Rise specifically, but I have played others in the series and I would expect Rise hasn’t changed the progression system too much.

You don’t really have stats tied to a level or anything. You do have a hunter rank that increases with quest completion, but this is just to pace the challenge of the available monsters you can take on at any point. Once you prove yourself capable of handling monsters at a certain tier, harder hunts become available.

That being said, you do get stronger from crafting better armor and weapons, which most of the time have most of their crafting requirements come from a particular monster. So to craft the full Rathalos armor set, I would probably need to fight one several times. This will have higher base defense than an armor set from an easier monster, but armor pieces also give certain passive skills in a fight, so new armor is generally a sidegrade rather than a categorical upgrade. You can do a lot of experimentation if you care to make a unique build.

Anyway, I don’t feel like it’s grindy. Hunting monsters is literally the game, so you just progress by playing and getting better. You may need to repeat some quests if you have a specific goal but it would be self-imposed. You would never need to for story progression or anything.

There doesn’t seem to be a pattern for whatever name politicians become known by colloquially, except last name is most common. Hillary makes sense to distinguish her from Bill, but I remember people generally using her first and last. Kamala is usually Kamala, but you see Harris too. Trump is Trump, but you’ll see people use his first name at times (like r/TheDonald). Biden is still referred to as Joe occasionally. Bernie was much more common than Sanders. For supreme court justices, it’s usually last name or first and last. I’ve never seen anyone refer to AOC as just Alexandria. Obama is Obama, but I’ve seen Barack in really informal contexts. Nancy Pelosi is first and last. Elizabeth Warren is either first and last or just last.

Actually, the devil demonstrated considerable skill with his fiddle. Johnny himself admitted he was pretty good. This poster needs to read the Bible.

I frequently see people get negative scores for politely expressing an unpopular political opinion. And people at c/UnpopularOpinion get downvoted for it all the time. Reddit is probably worse though

Op discovers fiat currency.

Least popular opinion on c/UnpopularOpinion

But seriously, no one likes feeling like their time is being disrespected, and it’s hard to convince the audience that “all just a dream” is a good resolution to a story they’ve invested in.

There are stories that can justify having a large sequence as a hypothetical/“what if” scenario, but often this trope is used as a crutch when writers either want to ignore canon to effectively write fanfiction for a while, or to retcon something that didn’t land well by deciding it didn’t happen after the fact.

Exactly. People aren’t taking issue with the idea that their country’s product compares poorly to another country’s product, it’s that some random person’s random encounters are enough to make that judgement. Sweeping generalizations very often do more harm than good.

Arguing with someone on an online forum is very rarely going to set that individual on the right path, but I like to believe others who read the back and forth may be more persuaded. I often take initiative to explore a topic I knew little about beforehand because someone asserted something I found surprising or simply suspicious. If people go as far as to post references, it’s even less of a burden on me to learn something new.

I always recommend Aldi if it’s a local option. It’s where I do most of my shopping and I honestly have no idea what people are talking about with increasing grocery prices. It’s probably gone up there too, but not enough to notice when I get my receipt.

Non-interference is a good default position to have, but we are capable of acting on behalf of others when we have a certain threshold of confidence for what they would want in a situation. Otherwise, we would consider it wrong to give CPR to an unconscious person.

When it comes to life, people overwhelmingly prefer to continue existing when they have the power to choose. So it makes sense for us to presume that a hypothetical person would choose to be born given the opportunity.

For general rape, the victim is typically capable of giving consent but chooses not to, meaning we know the rapist is violating them. For situations where the victim is incapable of consenting, it is true that we are assuming a position for them. As a society, we have observed that being made to have sex in a vulnerable position is a negative experience, so it makes sense to extrapolate they would be opposed if they were capable of choosing.

For life, the observation is different. Once people have the power to knowingly “opt out” of existing, they rarely do. Most people instead prefer existing and consider it to be positive. So we should assume a hypothetical person would also choose to be born when acting on their behalf.

This worked for me, thanks! You don’t need to be rooted, but you do need to change some developer options to get Shizuka working. Then disable the “Audio focus” permission in App Ops on one or both apps.

I remember seeing a video of a rubber arm experiment that goes through a series of exercises to convince someone’s mind that a rubber arm placed against their shoulder is theirs, while the real one is blocked out of sight. Once these phantom sensations are in place, the organizer then hits the rubber hand with a hammer, causing great shock in the subject but no real harm. The immediate panic is exaggerated by the fact their mind can’t actually move “their” hand out of the way when they see the swing coming.

Another study had organizers shine a harmless light on participants’ arm for a few minutes and see how they react, allegedly for some sampling purpose. The twist was that they would have the real subjects stay in a waiting room beforehand and watch actors leave while appearing to be in considerable pain from the session where the light was targeting. They then experienced a significant burning sensation from the “laser” despite the organizers insisting it was harmless. Some would go as far as to raise their voice and demand the experiment stop.

The idea is that people can be convinced that something is painful just from others’ reactions to it. This may have been what the organizers were actually testing for, and the electrical shock wasn’t real or was barely large enough to felt. But OP was just immune to being influenced. I would expect the ability to follow cues from others has strong correlation to success at socializing, so considering they use 4chan OP might actually just be built different.

The jokers are very specifically worded for things like this. Usually they will say they give a bonus if a hand contains a certain (scoring) pattern. A straight flush contains both a straight and a flush, so jokers specifying one such contain trigger will proc. Similarly a full house contains a pair, two pair, and three of a kind too.

Rarely, jokers will specify you must play a hand instead, which means it must exactly match what is listed as the scoring pattern (except I think royal flush is still a straight flush), similar to planet upgrades. To do list is one example, because otherwise something like a three of a kind roll would be strictly worse than a pair.

Two pair seems to require two different pairs in a scoring hand to proc, meaning it doesn’t count four or five of a kind hands. Some people disagree with this ruling.

This is a good example showing OP was being too broad. I like the sentiment but think they should limit it to topics for which there is a sizable amount of genuine dissent (meaning we don’t have to invent an argument for an hypothetical unreasonable contrarian) and that aren’t easily demonstrably falsifiable (meaning we are covering opinions and theories, not matters of objective fact).

OP likely was meaning to apply this to controversial social policies or philosophical questions exploring what values people prioritize. Too often loud voices demonize “the other side” and dismiss them out of hand with strawmen.

No one has mentioned Vivaldi yet. I haven’t found it slow in the years I’ve used it. It does hog memory with the amount of tabs I open, but no more than any other browser I’ve used. Fortunately it has inactive tab suspenders as an option to help with my bad habits (natively now, and through chrome extensions before that). Also, it is undoubtedly the most visually customizable browser I know, so it being ugly is really you making the sandwich.

If this was just bait, I guess it got me. If not, anon could try Tor if they value privacy, or maybe something minimalist if they really care about performance.

FEMINISM HAS CONTRIBUTED INDIRECTLY TO THE MALE LONELINESS EPICDEMIC BY EMPOWERING WOMEN TO SUCCEED IN SOCIETY WITHOUT RELYING ON A TRADITIONAL RELATIONSHIP. WHILE THIS SOCIAL PROGRESS SHOULD BE CELEBRATED, WE SHOULDN’T DISCOUNT THE STUGGLE THIS CREATES FOR DISENFRANCHISED MEN SUFFERING FROM MOVING GOALPOSTS AND A LESS DEFINED IDENTITY WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITIES. PRESSURE TO MEET OUTDATED EXPECTATIONS CAN INSTILL LINGERING FEELINGS OF FAILURE IN THE WAKE OF A SIGNIFICANT CULTURAL SHIFT. SO REMEMBER TO BE SYMPATHETIC TO THE STRUGGLES OF THOSE AROUND YOU! ARRROOOOOOOO!

This style of activism is harmful to the cause. No one in that restaurant is going to think “Huh, those people had a point. I will consider their message more.” They’ll simply resolve that vegans are crazy and annoying, and be pushed further than ever from converting. Honestly shouting like this is just performative for the people doing it. The best ways to be an activist imo are engaging people personally (like Earthling Ed’s good-faith debates) or even just presenting people with information and going for numbers, relying on people engaging in self-reflection on their own.