It even domesticates some of the big ones

Ugh, no idea. Just clicked share image

The pace drove me a bit mad. So much stuff front loaded with all kinds of things in play, then you reach a point where they want you to wait X in game days for a crucial item so it grinds to a halt

All the little car icons add up to a lot of space, you need a separate one for each driver

Minute, pronounced like “my newt”, means tiny

Why a basking shark instead of a whale shark though?

You can make a free account, some of the articles just require a free account and others require a paid subscription. I can read this one with my free account

Ours is a fun god!
Ours is the sun god!
Ra ra ra!

Having a regular schedule of updates helps get individual big fixes or features out faster. You may not notice a difference because you may not experience the bugs that are being fixed. There may be slight changes to features that you don’t use enough to notice. There could even be features that are disabled until they’re remotely enabled. Mobile apps often run A/B tests for changes to see how those changes affect user behavior, so you might be in the “no change” test cohort when you don’t see changes, those changes may never activate on your installation if the test doesn’t pan out.

I recently convinced my team to adopt this practice so I’ve been brushing up on it. When done right it can mean a more stable app and quicker response to issues since it relies heavily on monitoring app performance, bug reports, and user reviews. Communication to users is hard since you don’t want to have every update be “fixed bugs” but it’s also unnecessary to say “fixed an issue where a batch upload job didn’t handle individual errors by retrying” for each change that may not actually impact you as a user but which impacts the business that builds the app.

Natural selection is dead.

What a concept

Black Hole Sun

Is this gain?

Oilrig

Tex-a-me
Tex-a-you

Not in those words

I’m voting both pragmatically and with my conscience by voting for Claudia De La Crúz.

With the goal of

Removing legitimacy from the system itself, and forcing the DNC to appeal to the left

Is that not good? Or is it not real?

Or maybe it won’t have that effect? Because that’s an idealistic plan, not a pragmatic one

Says the guy advocating poorly applied electoralism

Lol, yes. There are metaphorical carrots pulling the DNC to the right, I think we agree there. Now if you want to be “pragmatic” about it will a metaphorical stick from the left move them more left, or more right given the way we can see they calculate?

The same DNC that blamed the left for Hillary losing and then credited centrism with Biden winning?

Those are fine goals, but pragmatism involves addressing reality as it is, not how you would like it to be. I doubt you can achieve both removing legitimacy from the system as you see it and forcing the DNC to speak to the left simultaneously since the DNC is a part of the system that’s in place. Unfortunately the DNC appealing to the left needs to be a two way street, make the left more appealing to the DNC than the right. All those Republicans endorsing Harris is the right appealing to the DNC, the left needs to out do that effort to pull the DNC to the left. Rejecting them won’t do that, only the opposite.

It’s important to keep your goblin friend happy. If they find something gross and no one else wants to look at it, then go take a look, marvel at how gross it is.

What’s pragmatic about voting for a long shot candidate in a system that so heavily favors the two major parties?