@delitomatoes Many sitcoms have an overarching romance arc between two leads that gets stretched out for eternity. I don't know how much I can vouch for "The Office" handling other storylines, but the getting Pam and Jim together 1/3rd of the way through the series, and then not having them constantly breaking up and dating other people and then getting back together (like Friends) was a real breath of fresh air. The show really proved they could survive as an anthology without having the main romantic arc to fall back on. Of course, later on they introduce serious romantic arcs for other characters.
Blakerboy777
joined 2 years ago
Dungeons & Dragons tells illustrators to stop using AI to generate artwork for fantasy franchise
@Madison_rogue it does. The artwork was detected as being created with AI due to significant quality issues, not through thorough forensic analysis/mathematical models.
@picandocodigo @slimerancher I think you're underselling how important the price cuts were to the PS2's longevity, and I don't think Nintendo is willing to go nearly that far. The PS2, like the Nintendo Switch, launched at $299. 2 years later it dropped to $199. Then steady price cuts all the way to $129 preceeding the launch of the PS3 in 2006 at $499/$599. I think it's safe to say that the enormous price difference played a huge role in it's ongoing sales past the PS3 launch. PS2 launched in March 2000, and 7 years later it had sold 117 million units, taking us just a few months past the PS3 launch. In the next 5 years the PS2 sales racked up another 40 million units, or about 25% of all PS2's sold occurred after it's successor's launch.
If the Switch were to follow the same trajectory and a Switch 2 launched this holiday season, we'd see another 40+ million units sold over the next 5 years, ending in over 170 million units sold. But there are a number of reasons to doubt this will happen.
#1 there might literally just not be enough chips left to do that- it's speculated that Nvdia stopped production of the chips and there's a finite number left, which may fall short of that goal.
#2 Nintendo seems very reluctant to drop prices. The PS2 by this point was less than half of the launch price and only 65% of its cost after the first major price drop. The Switch is 100% of its launch price, and I believe in some regions it even got a price hike.
#3 it seems implausible that the Switch 2 will cost as much as a PS3 did at launch (more expensive than the Series S and PS5 digital, equivalent to Series X and PS5 disc). That means the price delta between the Switch and Switch 2 will necessarily be far narrower than the PS2/PS3, so continued sales after the Switch 2 launch are unlikely to be as robust.
#4 Sony wasn't trying to pump up the PS2 numbers, selling it nearly until the PS4 came out was a strange phenomenon born of unusual circumstances. I don't think Nintendo will have any interest in selling the Switch alongside it's successor except to clear out inventory, for the same reason the Wii U and Switch V1 were both discontinued promptly after their successor's came out.
@picandocodigo it's averaging about 20M units a year, so assuming Switch 2 makes the Switch 1 totally obsolete, we'd need another year+ of strong sales to rise to number one. If the Switch 1 continues to be sold after Switch 2 is released (not fully backwards compatible, Switch 1 price drop, Switch 2 is just more expensive), then less than a year or strong sales plus another couple years of long tail sales to get over the hump.
If it overtakes, I can imagine the most likely scenario to make it happen are - Switch 2 is considered unambiguous successor at $350-$400, Switch 1 price drop of only like $25-$50, basically just to clearance out the old stock, except no switch lite replacement for the first year, so the now $150-$175 switch lite continues to to rack up sales at a ridiculously apealing price. Obviously they could easily reach 1at place if they did a really agressive price drop but that doesn't seem likely for nintendo at all- a small price drop on the lite, especially if the choices are $150 Lite, $250 V2, $300 OLED, $400 Switch 2
I appreciate that you're attempting to put this in formal logical terms, but I think you're a little out of your depth. Your interlocutor was simply asserting that you are discounting the validity of systemic critique. He didn't imply that you had any position whatsoever on guns. He said your argument, if applied elsewhere, would lead to absurd results.
A strawman would be saying that you denied criticizing systems is ever valuable, and it's all down to personal responsibility. That's somewhat similar to what you said, but by reframing it as an absolute rule, it would be much easier to counter.
You're somewhat struggling to formulate the syllogisms here. I'll present the interlocutor's argument more precisely.
P1. If an argument works just as well to justify doing nothing to address systemic causes of gun violence, it is a poor argument.
P2. Your argument works just as well to justify...
C. Your argument is a poor argument.
Here would be your original syllogism.
P1. A system of rules that prioritizes freedom should not be blamed for actions of people who purposely abuse that freedom.
P2. The person who responded this way to downvote was misusing free access to downvote information.
C. Kbin's system that prioritizes freedom is blameless for a user responding to downvotes.
And here's how we would apply that to gun violence
P1. A system of rules that prioritizes freedom should not be blamed for actions of people who purposely abuse that freedom.
P2. A person who commits gun violence is misusing that freedom.
C. The USA’s laws that priotize freedom is blameless for gun violence.
@EnglishMobster @KairuByte an analogy isn't a strawman. He didn't say you were trivializing gun violence. He said the defense you used was faulty because it could just as readily be deployed to something more clearly harmful. It doesn't even prove the thing you are defending is bad, it just demonstrates that your argument defending it is a bad one.
@EnglishMobster every day on there's a main character on the internet, and you never want to be it. @Deliverator, how about instead of this getting totally blown out of proportion, you ease up and unban the guy, as well as make it a personal policy not to ban people from every magazine you own over a petty grievance. Going nuclear like that should be reserved for something extreme like CSAM, not just doing something that irritates you.
@Haus antivax "just asking questions" bullshit has made us all so cagey about asking genuine questions. Really sucks. I hate that so muvh conspiracy bullshit gets spread via asking loaded disingenuous questions.
I know what you're talking about, basically if the virus mutates the thing that vaccines target, there didn't seem like a very likely pathway to mutate and remain highly contagious. That's not necessarily a general vaccine rule, but it applies to the covid 19 spike protein. No idea how this news relates to that and would love to have some really smart person show up and explain it. Maybe Hank Green will do a video on it?
@rafoix I'm confused about the defense of "they should have closed off the roads". He drove around a barricade according to the story, so it sounds like it was shut off. Also just kind of weird to say "yes, I intentionally ran into those people, but the cops should a have done a better job of stopping me." He didn't negligently hit them, right? It was on purpose? You can try to share some blame when an accident happens and say <I was negligent, but the harm should have been mitigated by other safety measures which also failed>. But it doesn't work when you're actually trying to cause harm.
@skhayfa your wording is a little confusing - you said this will only bring them to $21, and and that they were hoping for more than $10. A) this will bring them to $21 today, with 4 more guaranteed yearly increases bringing the total to $28.52. B) if I'm understanding correctly, minimum pay today is $18.25, so this would cumulatively be a $10.27 raise over 5 years.
What would an actually good contract look like? To me, I can definitely understand why this would be dissapointing. But I can also understand why some people would be willing to accept a greater than 50% wage increase over 5 years as a win.
To be clear, this wasn't a zygote, which would be a fertilized cell. This was a fetus at week 23, which is later than most abortions are performed without fetal abnormalities. Less than 1% of abortions are performed that late. A fetus may be considered viable around that point as well (this would be on the extreme end though). Many pro-choice people base their justification around fetal viability and don't necessarily feel great about abortions performed after that much development.
I'm not trying to justify these charges, but let's steer away front hyperbole. Prior to Dobbs, a state could have restricted access to abortion in this same way. Saying "zygote" implies this could happen to anyone who gets an abortion, which simply isn't implied by this decision.
@beefbaby182
@delitomatoes
It sucks when a show is spinning it's wheels and a significant actor moves on to greener pastures, but you get it. It really sucks when a show rockets off and actors leave because the show has made them into a star who get offered bigger projects to capitalize on their fame. Mucking things up for the thing that made you famous is such BS.