That's a shame. I was actually holding off on getting unlimited until there was a native client. I was just last week testing Celeste from flathub and it works but is kind of limited and I would very much prefer an official client.

You need to find better podcasts to listen.

The one I listen the most and for the longest is No such thing as a fish.

Other that that, Better Offline, Darknet diaries, Money Stuff, Search engine, a local politics one that I disagree with but I use to be aware of what my local conservative pseudo fascists are arguing about.

And not so regularly many others whenever there's an interesting episode.

I don't know the precise answer, but I do know this:

1. Often the kind of measures that are about something vast and complex (like population for example) are really good approximations, not completely exact numbers. So maybe doesn't matter because the number itself is not trying to be 100% accurate.
2. As far as I know those measures are made from the top down view, like with airplanes or satellites, so no it would not include inclines. To include inclines in a precise way it would have to be measured each one on the spot, which is not the way that is done. There are almost no field surveyors these days, again, as far as I know. And to include inclines in an approximate way takes us to point 1 again so it wouldn't matter much if there were a small difference.
3. Why would we do that? Almost everything we use land for requires it to be horizontally flat, so we flatten it. For example, an irregular coastline doesn't matter because we can use the crevices and irregularities to fit in more boats or ports or beaches, since the sea is horizontally flat and that is what really matter to us. But if there's a hill with a greater area because of the steepness of it we cannot fit more houses or warehouses of streets. We have to flatten it first so we gain noting from it being inclined.

So form my point of view it would be almost as if we tried to include the sides of a ravine or gorge in the measure just because technically it is area space.

Sorry if I cannot give you an exact answer, but I wanted to comment because you raised an interesting point that made me think.

Cheers.

official 'very cool post'

so much interesting stuff in here

Neither Trump nor his campaign have direct ties, though many former officials and staffers contributed to the project.

So people he hired because of ideological alignment then writing the ideological thing is not a direct tie?

one of the first things I do after every install is switch to inter, this will save me a minute every couple of years so I agree

Can't wait. Also really appreciate the fact that in my third world country it seems to be priced very fairly, instead of the usual "Original USD price converted + 20% more just because fuck you".

it would have been so much cheaper to just start the xchan imageboard from scratch instead taking 4 years turning twitter into it

Hey thanks, no apology needed. In fact, I think you are making me think about giving the original another go now that I know about those mods.

btw i didn't know that it was based on Roadside Picnic, haven't read it, but I have in my reading list since I saw it mentioned in HyperNormalisation. Thanks.

Thank you for such a detailed comparison!

It seems that they are largely different in many aspects, but probably similar in the ways I most enjoy of a game. I actually tried to play STALKER once a long time ago and never really clicked for me, in part because of the same reason you mention, it was very wonky and didn't run well at all, but I am willing to give this one a chance given that the same happened to me with the Metro series. One of my favorite parts of metro was the Caspian desert in exodus, which I would say is kind of an open world map, so maybe I can hope that this one captures me in the same way.

Thanks for the response, and let's hope this will be a great one!

Nah, you are trying to salvage this situation by changing everything you meant. Suddenly you are trying to sanitize every reference you made to political ideology and try to dress up this as concern. Now you accuse everybody else of conspiracies and extrapolation when you used 'suspicious' (which has a very clear connotation about a malign or hidden background https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suspicious) instead of 'indicative', 'concerning', 'worrisome', 'troubling'. People can read, and they read 'suspicious' which along with your references to political ideology really says who is the one thinking about conspiracies.