I love cat
Account Details | |
---|---|
SteamID64 | 76561198071785065 |
SteamID3 | [U:1:111519337] |
SteamID32 | STEAM_0:1:55759668 |
Country | Italy |
Signed Up | November 15, 2015 |
Last Posted | February 13, 2025 at 9:15 PM |
Posts | 2113 (0.6 per day) |
Game Settings | |
---|---|
In-game Sensitivity | 6.91 |
Windows Sensitivity | 6/11 |
Raw Input | 1 |
DPI |
400 |
Resolution |
1920x1080 |
Refresh Rate |
240hz |
Hardware Peripherals | |
---|---|
Mouse | Logitech G Pro |
Keyboard | Logitech G Pro Keyboard |
Mousepad | Steelseries QCK + |
Headphones | Apple earbuds |
Monitor | Alienware 240hz |
IK it's one day late but this trailer looks pretty cool and I'm probably gonna go see this movie then it comes out. Thoughts?
bicycleforratsdont die without knowing how to write code prepare yourself for the technological age....
Tell this to rowpieces
PogChamp
Call your ISP and yell at them for throttling you at certain hours. If they give u bullshit just threaten to take ur business elsewhere and I guarantee they'll send you a new router for free.
GentlemanJonMax_If the US was a true democracy the president would pretty much be decided by California, Flordia, Texas, New York, Illinois and like 2 other statesI can only assume that this is the result of some kind of anchoring effect where your current perception is so focused on the idea that states elect presidents that this would continue to be the case.
In a true democracy the President would be selected by millions of equally weighted individual votes regardless of location. Pieces of land or lines on a map would have no votes. The millions of currently arbitrarily disenfranchised voters, democrat or republican, would be empowered.
If a state currently has disproportionate influence due to it's status as a swing state, and it's swing voters have disproportionate influence, that is bad for democracy and a failure of representational politics. Turnouts would improve, voters who have been ignored their entire lives would suddenly find themselves relevant and localised complacency would be exposed.
I can't think of a rational reason for continuing with the current system, but then again I have no idea why the UK persists with our system either other than vested interests and fear of change. Still, the US is at least making progress towards sanity http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/
Read Elliot's post
eee
The problem with trying to be fair is that it isn't fair in the end. 51% of the population agreeing on something that is very divisive means that 49% gets completely screwed. The point of the electoral college (modern) isn't to make it so that rural states count more, but make it so that you can't just appeal to 10 cities and then say you'll give Arizona a tax break to be president. Spreading out the vote insures that its impossible for a single base to control the entire election
I think the EC has failed and the results end up similar, but the way it has failed is still probably better than pure democracy. Right now you have to appeal slightly to your parties' locked states and then campaign across a few relatively diverse swing states ensuring that various types of Americans get some campaign time. Pure democracy would basically be decided by New York, California, and Texas and the democrats would never lose just because they could promise to do whatever the big cities want and then play nice with a few localized regions to push them over 50%.
So no, the EC isn't fair, but its less unfair than pure democracy so its not likely to leave soon.
"true" democracies are unfair.
https://clips.twitch.tv/b3arodactyl/LivelyAlpacaPraiseIt
https://clips.twitch.tv/b3arodactyl/WittyPonyPanicBasket
https://clips.twitch.tv/b3arodactyl/CarefulCoyoteKreygasm
was he cut? cus if so wtf sil pounded @i58
m4risawheres my stealth rock nerf
tbh im fine with thunder wave/eviolite/unaware nerf
i hate chansey
whymeoReeroIt can also be argued that if every state all over the country had uniform, lax, gun laws, than the overall murder rate could fall. Again, this is using Texas and other states with lax gun laws as a model. If everyone owns guns and is encouraged to purchase them, then less people will try to rob/attack others in fear that they too own a gun.
I don't think it's common sense that everyone having guns would result in less gun violence. I could only see that resulting in more violence, not less. Either way, the U.S. already HAS the highest amount of guns per capita and yet has quite high homicide rates, especially for a high-income country. So this argument just doesn't make any sense.
I mean once again, look at Texas. Very lax gun laws, tons of gun ownership. They have a very low crime rate.
Also, the overall homicide rate in the US is on a downward trend.
eeetrying to use Chicago to explain why gun laws don't work is like trying to use the most recent Measles outbreaks to prove herd immunity is bullshit
Chicago doesn't exist in a vacuum, all the surrounding areas have lax gun laws that make acquiring one a day trip at worst. The problem with trying to use comparative stats to discuss gun laws is that both sides can point to other areas to show where gun laws are good or bad. Japan has strict gun control and a far greater suicide rate than the US while Australia has strict control and lower homicide rates that can be measured as decreasing since gun bans took effect.
So many cultural and socioeconomic factors play into things like crime and gun violence as well as suicide and mental health that it becomes nearly impossible to even try to test gun laws in a scientific way. This makes most of the stats basically useless for comparison.
Good point, but still, perhaps total gun prohibition is not the solution? I can see how an increase to our education system can do a lot more for the crime/poverty in Chicago than an all-out gun ban could. If we improve our pre-schooling systems than more educated will come out of Chicago rather than criminals. http://www.eoionline.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/early-learning/ELCLinkCrimeReduction-Jul02.pdf
gemmArtz_HispanianWhat does color correction actually do ??
alters colour balance slightly. not sure how it was broken.
also wtf what's wrong with letting teammates know where a sniper/spy is when you die
I'm almost 100% sure the old color correction literally did nothing lmao.
correct me if I'm wrong.