I think the thing people always forget was that Pokemon was never at the bleeding edge of tech. Don’t get me wrong some of the games did some impressive actions here and there, but they were never at the far front pioneering the way unless it was something pushed by Nintendo consoles themselves (like the 3DS or motion controls).

Not that excuses them, they’re a massive company/IP but they don’t need to do all the bells and whistles to sell Pokemon so why would they.

In space we can hear you scream, a long time later, and very very quietly.

I think they’re saying it’s Pokopia that’s a “ripoff” but Nvm I’ve seen some gen 10 stuff now, it looks like more of the same. anything nintendo makes lately it’s just animal crossing with a story and a different coat of paint like pokopia. Which is basically what Tomodachi life is too, minus the story and plus generated voices.

Idk if it’s “AI Slop”, but it definitely doesn’t shine like some of the old Nintendo polish used to. But maybe I’m also not their target audience

The problem is that you’re not just sending parts out there. You have to:

• get the upgrade rocket going fast enough to actually catch up with something going very fast with a 20 year head start
• slow down once you get to it.
• make the upgrades while floating in space on a piece of hardware that was designed not to be upgraded and built on earth (hope you don’t need gravity for disassembly) that you control on a 30 minute delay.

At that point we could just launch a whole new satellite with better hardware, going faster, and covering a completely different area of space. Which is what we have done. But we can still make use of the system we have out there. It’s still the furthest out, so it’s still worth using for as long as we can

You’re a good kid. I’ve seen some people get really pissed off about losing “their money” like that and forcing the person to live with them or avoiding caring for them to save the money until they pass so they still get “their inheritance”.

100% agreed. Like I said I think it should be legal regardless, the punishments are way too severe for what it is. But on a completely different note, we do still need the tests. I love drinking and I love smoking, but there are rules of the road, and one of those is “don’t drive the death machine with impaired judgement”.

But yes you’re right, the legality shouldn’t be based on if “but what if they drive”. I’m more saying “if you do some life-disregarding level ignorant” shit you’re still getting in trouble.

THATS A LOTTA NUTS

I don’t think this is “car brained”. They’re not saying anything around public transit, just that we need to have a test for DWI and weed. People shouldn’t be jailed for 30 years regardless of the presence of the test or not, but we do still need some other test. Otherwise I guarantee that “don’t drive while baked” will be the next infomercial you see in a few years.

There are also a fair number of scientists that believe there may be a higher power or an afterlife that still devoutly hold to scientific study. You can be a person of science and a person of faith. As long as you don’t deny science along the way then there’s no problem with that. Now if you don’t believe in evolution or something then yes your credentials are weakened significantly, but believing that there is a higher power beyond earth doesn’t mean your test results are invalid.

Not only that but both of them, Kirk and WBC, were experienced. Not at being good debators but at shutting down people who tried to prove them wrong. Even if they were wrong. They had months if not years built around defending a flawed view and shutting down naysayers. They regularly practiced all their tactics so most of the people they debated (regular students who had an opinion) weren’t ready for their tactics. You don’t have to outsmart your opponent or be correct, you just have to trip them up and make them publicly look foolish. These guys travel the country ragebaiting and begging people to call them out daily, they know how to dodge and redirect and speak over.

Once you stoop to their level, they beat you with experience. It doesn’t make them right.

Also I’m pretty sure half of WBCs old tactic was saying stuff that would get them punched and then suing.

Sounds like a journalist pushed their own bias and an editor didn’t catch it or also had the same bias.

But sure, “the whole BBC wants to nuke Iran”.

Yeah but they forgot to draw the pane of glass on the front