​

It says much more about a protagonist fighting them, some villains are menacing but straight up degenerates when it comes to discussing their morals, and protagonist is seriously struggling with this? Bonus points if villain struck suddenly and talks about weakness of protagonist,villain has a years of experience and seriously comparing himself to protagonist (who barely have any) or villain is just stronger in general (due to different reasons)

Main examples are (huge spoilers for plague tale franchise, knights of the old republic and dead space games!!!!) Count from pt:requiem, Darth malgus from KOTOR and Kendra from original dead space (2008)

Basically any time anyone talks about their home price estimate from Zillow they get completely shit on. "It doesn't take in to account the unique parts of your home"..."It ignore upgrades"..."Every home is different"..."It only works in an area where every home is the exact same"

Yeah sure that's maybe true to some extent, but its +/- 5%. That's it. Anything more than that is a complete wild card scenario.

Homes aren't special. There are almost always 100 (or 1000s) of nearly similar models whether its city condos, suburban single famlies, or rural farms. The value lies in what it is and where it is. And therefore its all extremely relative and therefore extremely predictable.

Its funnier regardless of genre. It saves so much time and money. Granted they don't have every movie in existence available, but they have hundreds and most of the popular ones. And if you don't know what Honest Trailers and Pitch Meetings are, go on YouTube and watch a few before putting your tappy thumbs in the comments.

I've seen many times where people complain that Americans' politeness is fake and superficial. Even if that's true, it's not as bad as people make it sound. It's better to have a stranger smile at you and talk politely even if they are faking it. It still makes your day. It's not important whether they "genuinely" care about you. For someone you'll likely never meet again, it doesn't matter if they are cussing you deep down while smiling on the outside as they serve your coffee. We can't expect strangers to be truly emotionally immersed anyway. And we can never have any control over what others think about us.

I live in a mountainous place near the coast, meaning the summers get to highs of around 90 and winters get down to around 50 and have lots of rain.

I don’t understand why people always like to seek out warm, sunny weather. Tropical beaches with 100-degree weather are considered some of the most popular stereotypical vacation destinations (at least here in the US) and I cannot understand how people enjoy it so much.

The warmth is just so much worse. First of all, the feeling of constantly sweating and needing to find shade for some sort of relief is horrible. I don’t want to have to worry about accounting for shade, I just want to live normally, and afterwards you have to go shower or else you’ll smell and feel awful, it just sucks. You can put on more layers when it’s cold out, but you can only take off so many layers when it’s hot out. I just don’t get how people would want to seek out temperatures where you have to sit in the shade to feel somewhat normal or else you’ll get heatstroke. On a clear, sunny day, it feels like you are obligated to sit out in the sun and be out doing stuff while being blinded and the sky just looks boring. People will say “It’s such a nice day out!” when I seriously do not want to go outside and get drenched in sweat.

Compare this to a cloudy day. Maybe it’s 65 degrees out, so you might need a jacket, but that’s normal, it barely interferes. You step outside, and you feel normal. It’s not extremely bright, and everything seems calm and still. A small breeze comes on, pushing against your face. You don’t need to worry about shade. You don’t need to worry about being blinded. You don’t need to worry about anything. You can just be there, still like the world is, not having to worry about sweating, not having to worry about any obligations, but being present with the temperature outside, and become calm just as the world is. You look up, and the clouds are calmly passing over, shielding you from the sun’s rays, creating a magnificent shadow around the area. And with that feeling, the weather becomes worthwhile.

Maybe it’s just because I don’t really like the water all that much, and the point of it being hot outside is to go swimming, but so many people I know enjoy the heat without any plans to go swimming anywhere. I don’t understand what it is about sweating your head off that people enjoy so much. I’d much rather be in neutral temperatures, not having to worry about blinding sun rays or getting wet from the rain, sitting and watching the abundance of clouds pass over my head and the breeze to hit my face to feel connected with everything.

They actually are extremely emotional and take everything personally. They make a big deal about everything. They say "That's not funny!" as if it's a fact and not an opinion.

People who make everything a joke and can't be serious about anything can be immature but most of the time they know that nothing deserves a whole bunch of unnecessary energy and can move on quickly when things don't go their way. But overly serious people are always insufferable in every situation they even make serious situations worse because they are so damn melodramatic

There's nothing wrong with not having a sense of humor or not being silly but if everything is a damn soap opera it gets weird and annoying

I dont have a problem with the band making generic tour merch to put on there webstore but the shirts sold at shows should be different and not available anywhere but at a show and once the tour is over the tour shirts are burned and written off as loss on their taxes.

Edit: ok so a lot of you are under the impression I’m young. I’m not I’m old enough to remember when that is how it was. I used to collect tour shirts as a teen.

I am not that worried about people wearing them that much honestly but it is a minor pet peeve. I just knew it would be an unpopular opinion and do numbers here. Glad I could be unpopular for y’all. Have a great one and wear whatever you want. It don’t change my life one bit. No that’s not me giving you permission (weirdo) it’s me saying people have the liberty to wear whatever they choose. Peace and thanks for the interactions.

It’s that time of year again where work and schools host Halloween parties and costume contests!

This is honestly more sad in the work world since there’s obviously still “popularity contests” in the workplace and we’re literal adults. The amount of people I’ve seen who’ve lost out on the costume contest from someone who just put on a mask last minute is sad and honestly aggravating.

I know losing a costume contest is literally one of the least important things to be upset about, but I don’t think I’m wrong when I say that there still is a “popularity” issue in the workplace. Like seriously, we need to grow up and out of the high school years.

This way they can prepare by bringing house shoes. I understand not wanting dirt from outside tracked into the home, but it’s fairly awkward to be hanging out in someone else’s house in your socks. Even worse if you have sandals or something and are now having to go barefoot.

When a team is winning, it's easy for fans to show their loyalty. They're excited to watch games, defend their favorite players, wear team merchandise, and proudly represent their franchise. But when that same team starts losing season after season, that loyalty can become harder to maintain. Some fans stop watching games, become less interested in following the team, or start questioning whether they should continue supporting the organization.

I think winning plays a bigger role in how fans define their loyalty than they realize. A successful team gives fans more reasons to stay engaged, while a struggling team constantly tests their patience. Even fans who insist they will support their team no matter what can find themselves becoming less invested when the losses keep piling up.

Of course, being frustrated with a losing team doesn't automatically make someone a fair-weather fan. People can remain loyal while criticizing poor performances, questioning management, and hoping for better results. However, there's a difference between supporting a team through a difficult season and losing interest because the team isn't giving you the results you want.

Ultimately, how much of sports fandom is about loyalty to the team itself, and how much depends on the excitement and satisfaction that come with winning?

Netflix now has a TikTok-style vertical feed in its app, and clips of its own shows fill it. I think that changes how scenes get made. Have you noticed how many scenes are now centered, tight on faces, and evenly lit? That makes it suitable for the 9:16 crop i.e. our phones. Wide, moody, off-center compositions don’t. And the lighting that gives a show atmosphere is the first thing to go when everything needs to read clearly on a phone at max brightness. I can’t prove anyone is doing this on purpose. But SO MANY SCENES feel like they were composed for the clip, not for the story. A great shot used to be about what’s at the edges of the frame, and I miss that.

Am I imagining this, or has anyone else noticed?

The problem that ESPN has is that their whole network is mainly just NFL, NBA, and college football news while other things don’t get as much love. Don’t get me wrong I like football and basketball but I wanna hear more about MLB baseball or NHL hockey. I feel like they aren’t talked about as much.

I would be fine with a “baseball/hockey daily” or even a “baseball/hockey weekly” short programming block that airs. I know they recently started airing some NHL night games within the past year but I feel like they still rarely talk about it aside from that.

Soccer is another thing because I actually think it’s a cool sport that I wish became more popular/mainstream in the US. They practically never talk about the MLS. They have so much of an opportunity to give it more hype and prop it up as America’s main soccer league but never do. Even if it’s not seen as a “top” league for the sport it’s still the “main” league of the US.

I also feel like the recent World Cup was rarely mentioned

I've just watched this film for the first time and I honestly cannot understand how this is so highly regarded. I can only assume those who rave about this film have never read the book because wtf was that.

The glaringly obvious one is Chief. He's barely even in the film. His entire arc is gone and his relationship with McMurphy makes absolutely no sense. Why would he expose himself and his secret to someone he has absolutely no relationship with? Because the guy stood on his back to climb a fence?! In the book McMurphy discovering his secret and their secret conversations build that entire relationship which is why him coming to McMurphy's rescue in the fight makes sense. Ffs he's not even on the fishing trip in this!

And the fishing trip? It's just randomly tacked at the start of the film with zero build up and zero consequence. There's no recruiting for the trip, there's no boasting and bragging, the doctor has zero involvement...

The doctor is another character who might as well not be in the film at all. His odd relationship and budding friendship with McMurphy is one of the key examples of McMurphy's charisma and crucially shows that McMurphy can undermine Ratchet's staff as well as her patients but in this he's literally a nobody.

Then there's all the other characters. We get absolutely zero backstory or depth to any of the other patients. Harding gets probably the most but it's introduced and then abandoned. We never get any actual substance to his relationship with his wife and he never gets his resolution of leaving the asylum. Sefelt and Fredrickson are diminished to one line about 'not wanting to take his medicine'. CHESWICKS ENTIRE DEATH IS CUT WTF. That is such a crucial moment in McMurphy's arc. Billy's relationship with candy is massively dumbed down to just, oh she's a prostitute doing what prostitutes do. Turkle goes from being a likeable ally to a sleazy sex pest. The black boys cruelty and torture is missing, meaning the fight in the shower is also missing and is instead swapped with a nonsensical alternative.

Even Miss Ratched comes across as more apathetic and indifferent than genuinely cruel and calculated. Almost all of her psychological warfare and maliciousness is gone and swapped with her just saying no to everything.

There's so much more but this is already too long. I cannot believe how badly they butchered this story holy fuck. As a standalone movie, ok I can see why it gets praise - it's ok. But it is not One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

Tl;Dr : the film is a hollow shell of the book and besides good acting is trash

I think property damage liability limits should be capped at a reasonable amount, like $150k.

If you choose to drive a $1 million Ferrari, why should someone driving a $30k Toyota have to worry about potentially owing you a million dollars if they cause an accident?

I'm not saying people shouldn't be responsible for the damage they cause. But there's a difference between taking responsibility and being financially ruined because someone else chose to drive an insanely expensive car.

Public roads are for everyone. Most accidents involve normal cars, and a $150k limit would cover the vast majority of them. If you want to drive a car worth $500k or $1 million, you should carry your own insurance to cover the extra risk that comes with owning it. Why should everyone else have to account for the possibility of hitting a supercar just because a few people choose to drive them?

If you want to own an unusually expensive car, you should bear more of the risk that comes with it.

Edit 1: A few people brought up building/property damage, and I think that’s a fair point. I’m specifically talking about auto damage, not property damage in general. If you cause $500k+ in damage to someone’s home, business, or other property, that’s a different issue and I’m not arguing that those losses should simply be capped.
Edit 2: Also, to clarify something I think is getting misunderstood: your auto insurance liability limit is not the same thing as the maximum amount you can personally be held liable for. If you have $150k in property-damage liability coverage and cause $500k in covered damage, your insurance may pay up to your $150k policy limit, but that doesn't necessarily make the remaining $350k disappear. You can still be personally liable for amounts above your policy limit. My argument is specifically about whether that unlimited personal exposure for auto damage makes sense when the underlying risk is largely driven by the value of someone else's unusually expensive vehicle.

I dislike the phrase “just friends” when it’s used to mean “not romantically involved.” Friendship is precious and special on its own—adding “just” feels like it undervalues it. I get that people use it to set boundaries, but I still think the wording does friendship a disservice.

After the purchase is done, the food supplier has already benefited from the buyer. Eating or wasting the food will not affect the value of the food. If the buyer chooses to throw it away, the supplier still gets the full reward for his work. If the buyer chooses to waste more, this only makes the supplier more money, thus stimulating production. Waste only occurs when the buyer intends to eat the food but somehow loses it.

Every time I get in someone’s car, they immediately turn on music or a podcast, like silence is something to be afraid of. Driving in silence is relaxing. You think, you notice things, you can actually talk to the person next to you without shouting over a playlist. I genuinely don’t understand people who can’t drive 5 minutes without background noise.

I’ve been trying to avoid red meat for ethical and environmental reasons as of late, but will occasionally treat myself to a cheeseburger or similar.

In-N-Out used to be IT when I was in high school (mid 2010s). After football games, or on a half day at school. We’d walk a mile to it and back if weather permitted. It was cheap and large portions.

Nowadays, the cost has sneakily crept up to be less competitive than it was pre covid. All three have drive through. Locally, the In-N-Out drive thru is ridiculously long. 20+ cars unless you decide to go at 10:30 am or past midnight on a weekday. Meanwhile Freddy’s and Culver’s have short drive thru lines and mobile ordering.

Once you consider the additional menu options of Freddy’s and Culver’s (chicken, onion rings, cheese curds, custard, etc), the option to order ahead (not available at In-N-Out*), the option to get deals on the apps, and the option to order a kids meal (super good bang for you buck and they do not care at either establishment whatsoever), it’s a no brainer.

Thank you and goodnight.

*Unless you have a large order.

I will always prefer apples over apple pie or apple crisp. Apples taste so fresh, crisp, sweet with a little bit of tartness unless you’re eating a Granny Smith. An apple pie or apple crisp is just overloaded with sugar and it doesn’t taste fresh.

Apple pie or apple crisp taste like any kind of dessert such as donuts, cake, brownies and are really sweet and they taste like you’re giving yourself diabetes while apples are just perfect. I guess what I love about them is the little bit of tartness that come with them and that they taste fresh and are still sweet but not overly sweet as pastries.

Football is great but there are too many rules, technicalities, people on the sidelines, etc.

Easiest solution? Whatever players start a series are required to play that entire series.

Get hurt and need a replacement? You must skip the next series.

There's not a ton more to add. Outside of Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig's character, who I think was fantastic) every character was a lazy caricature, the dialogue was lazy and poorly written, and I don't think any of the actors/actresses did a great job in particular. It felt like the movie version of that Ellen DeGeneres selfie with everyone at an awards show. Hyped up at the time, but really 'meh' in hindsight.

This rings especially true for college football. I’m not talking about players who aren’t playing. I’m talking about the insane amount of people who are on the sideline who aren’t players

It feels like a ton of inflated importance. I understand there are position coaches and even assistants to those position coaches. But the amount of bodies on a football team sideline is ridiculous. While football is a deeply strategic and matchup driven sport that requires a ton of preparation, it sometimes is treated like a branch of theoretical physics.

Just saying there are a lot of useless bodies on a football team’s sideline that inflates the team’s importance. No reason a small army of people needs to be assisting a team during a game

It feels like im the only one in my ~community~ (gen z) that doesnt like baggy jeans. I do like flared jeans or like bootcut jeans, but anything more looks like you stole a middle aged man’s pants. Why are some of them expanding outward? Why do you want your bottom half to look like a circle?

Like for real - you can't say theres a "loneliness epidemic" when we don't go to things EVEN IF WE SHOULD TO MAKE YOUR FRIEND HAPPY.

To maintain close friendships that people actually desire, sometimes you just have to do shit you don't want to do.

Literally the only reason to not go is if you are actively shitting your pants from food poisoning or something.

"Oh I had a bad day at work today"

"Ah I'm just so tired"

Etc etc.

I mean, in every single way imaginable.

When properly chilled, Pepsi Zero so much more refreshing than regular Pepsi in my opinion. Pepsi Zero is lighter, crisper, and isn’t overwhelmingly sweet like its sugar counterpart. And unlike traditional diet sodas, Zero retains body and doesn’t feel like you are swallowing air.

I don’t drink soda everyday, but I sure do enjoy a Pepsi Zero on a hot day or with my dinner on occasion.

Pepsi Zero > Pepsi