[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 15 points 5 months ago

I'm sorry but you're wrong: effect can be used to mean to cause something to happen. This is different from affect's verb form, which is to influence something.

Affect also has a noun form, if you're curious. This duality of effect and affect having both noun and verb forms, even though each has a more popular common usage, is a common thing to misunderstand.

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 2 points 6 months ago

In case my deletion of the comment wasn't federated: mb, I didn't realise it was an image post.

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 5 points 6 months ago

I didn't think it was misleading, but when I read it I automatically thought the article was talking about the extent of pollution in the ocean, not what everyone else seems to be interpreting it as...

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 74 points 6 months ago

Assuming what he's saying is true, I still keep coming back to this line:

“My boss said, ‘I would have killed someone who said what you said in the meeting.’”

How does someone say something like that? And how is this something that he's never been called out for?

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Just a small but very important correction: the article says 6 grams per serving. Giving them two extra teaspoons with the small amount that babies take is much more significant.

EDIT: A quick search said that one serving of baby food tends to be around 75g? That means that that's 8% of it being pure sugar.

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 6 points 6 months ago

The other person is saying that devaluing the US dollar would make it easier for others to buy American products.

I assumed you thought they were talking about strengthening the US dollar, so I pointed out that the original post (yours, I realise now) was talking about devaluation. Not sure why you think devaluation would give greater buying power.

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 2 points 6 months ago

The original post was asking about why devaluing the dollar would be good for Americans.

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 3 points 7 months ago

The point they are making is if it ends up in a landfill anyway, then you've wasted more energy/resources recycling it.

If it stays on your shelf, that's not what they're talking about.

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 2 points 7 months ago

I love both jackfruit and durian, but they are very different flavours.

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

People don't really like to read the articles before commenting, huh.

Knowing Stardew was such a beloved game, I knew I had to get context before judging the author because it could be read both ways.

People who assume games not changing = criticism are telling us more about their own uncharitable view of others than anything else.

EDIT: That said, if I were to offer criticism, I feel like the author gives too much credit to Stardew as though it invented or pioneered the tight gameplay loop: perhaps at least some mention could have been made to Harvest Moon, the game from which Stardew borrows - and perfects - most of its major systems.

Also to be fair, it doesn't go anywhere with that thought that Stardew hasn't changed. Felt a little low-effort, like a retrospective on Stardew that just basically listed what people liked about it.

[-] Sentrovasi@kbin.social 13 points 7 months ago

Excuse me? Who are the original people in your book and which year is the baseline?

I'm someone who doesn't have a huge stake in either side and still this take astounds me.

view more: next ›

Sentrovasi

joined 1 year ago