I wouldn’t expect an extremely old person to be aware of all the nuances of modern language. Least of all the pope, who, I’d assume, has effectively zero contact with anyone even remotely close to being a rainbow activist. External culture and langue has moved a lot in the last 15-20 years. While I am far from that old, it’s not unreasonable to expect that calling someone that was relatively normal during the popes childhood, certainly in a religious environment.
DaDragon
And maybe that was the point of that mission. To cause you to think about the violence that you normally included upon your virtual enemies without a second thought. If you play a FPS game, you won’t question why you’re shooting the other team, you just do it. The same way it doesn’t technically matter why the crowd of people in said COD level are your enemies. What matters is the developer telling you to shoot them.
How would funding work, then? If everything I do is available to the public with no protections on my end, then I can’t guarantee that I (the inventor) will ever be able to extract any value from some thing that I put a lot of time and effort into developing. Considering we live in a capitalist society, there needs to be a way to reimburse inventors.
As the person above me pointed out, how do you prevent a large company on capitalising on ideas that a small inventor has?
We’re going back to the og crowd control options, I see. If you haven’t seen the relevant forgotten weapons video, Thompson and other manufacturers used to produce birdshot shells for crowd control. Generally intended for indirect applications, but there’s nothing inherently present that would prevent you from directly firing at protestors.
Because they care about the west supporting them. That’s it, that’s literally the entire reason. That and they don’t have the capability without western support. (To some extent yes, but not really in the ‘precision-guided-munitions’ department)