Bet!
Wolf314159
joined 4 months ago
I've used it. But mostly by the time I had created a deck to study, I didn't need it anymore.
Start using it yourself. Use it in awkward, wrong, uncool ways. They'll drop that shit like, "What the sigma Dad!?!"
I'm not biased and I'm not picking a side, but there is a lot of whataboutism is this thread and I stand by my stance that it is a weak argument and a logical fallacy.
The argument is that running in the rain has extra hazards. Running across a now slippery surface is dangerous, increasing a risk of falling. Visibility is generally reduced for everyone (especially if they're wearing glasses), so your also at a higher risk of running into things or being hit by a vehicle. It's harder to detect and avoid puddles when you're moving faster. You'll also splash harder in those puddles, getting your shoes and pants wetter faster. Running through the rain really only makes any sense for VERY short trips or when you can see that you may be able to reach shelter before the rain gets significantly heavier. Otherwise, the difference in how wet you get isn't going be significant enough to risk slipping and falling, splashing through a puddle you might have been able to avoid at a walk, or some other incident because you were moving at a dangerous pace through a slippery and flooded world with reduced visibility.
Getting to your destination safely and unnecessary injury without soaking your socks and underwear is much more important than getting slightly less wet.
I generally wash they with warm water and soap after I'm done or taking a break. I usually take one of those little dish soap bottles from the hotel when I travel to keep in the truck, cuts right through the grease and grime pretty well even if all you have is a jug of water on hand.
Three is the Magic Number.
Runner up: I'm Just a Bill.
Whataboutism isn't a very convincing argument.
Fair? What's fair about how they hand out Oscars? Seriously. One example, I thought it has been pretty well established that awards are often handed out because of a person's history of work and not only the current thing they are being awarded for this year. I'm sure this could be hotly debated, but I've never heard anyone accuse the Oscars of being fair.
Sports photography is not a cheap hobby. Expect to spend 10 times your budget just to get started. You can save (some) money by shopping used on sites like adorama or B&H. Older models of DSLR can be had for a pretty good deal because all the kids these days are hyped about mirrorless. Expect to do a lot of research and wade through a lot of articles written by gear obsessed people with money to burn. I think you can still browse archives of dpreview.com for some in depth reviews and specs, especially if you're shopping older models.
Pretty much any consumer camera with an interchangeable lens will do the job, it's the lens that will really determine how good a picture you can get. There's a reason you see a lot of HUGE (and expense) lens on the sidelines. Megapixels are much less important these days because pretty much everything has enough. The metrics you'll be looking to maximize will be a fast autofocus system, a fast lens, and a long enough focal length to get your view in close to your subject from a distance. You might be able to find something that is "good enough" in a cheaper range with a camera with a built-in lens. If you get bit by the photography bug though, that might turn out to be a waste of money if you decide you want to upgrade.
A decade ago she would have been seeking that validation from her friends. ChatGPT is just a validation machine, like an emotional vibrator.
You asked the question, it's only fair that you do the counting. Memory Alpha has a list of species to get you started.
Most of each of the series is dominated by humanoid species simply due to the economics of it or due to the progenitors in story. But, I seem to remember just as many, if not more non-humanoid species newly introduced in TNG in addition to the ones that first appeared in TOS.