But characters don’t have to be uniformly light-skinned to be pretty or make money. Fate has dark-skinned characters, and Fate is not exactly known for its moral standards. And miHoYo has generally not been afraid of breaking social taboos.
Anyway, I’m just disappointed that the region which should have darker characters has only one character darker than the palest biscuit. Maybe I should have seen this coming, oh well.
Oh, you mean the face? That’s definitely possible, but as another poster said below, they want the characters to fit a certain beauty standard so players will pay up. That restricts things a bit.
That’s a hard problem to solve. Genshin has, let us say, 100 characters. Making a separate model for each character, as well as the animations to go with it, would make the game size even bigger than it is. Instead they have five or so models, and all the characters are made with palette swaps, smoke and mirrors. (And if you do certain specific actions in the game, you can get the smoke and mirrors bit to glitch, which is fun.)
The characters are supposed to be Latin American / West African, not European. And while of course those countries have very light-skinned people, they also have a lot of dark-skinned people, which isn’t reflected among the characters.
I’m not vegan, although I agree with most of their arguments, so I can’t be self-righteous about it.
saying that everyone who doesn’t agree with you is equivalent to slave owners and fascists.
Since English is not your first language, I apologise if my wording was confusing. My point was that accepting whatever is seen as normal, or refusing to make a choice, is itself an action, one that says that you agree with your society’s ideology.
No. Their veganism is actively selected by them based on their subjective beliefs about animals being basically human.
Or maybe a general opposition to violence, or a concern for the ecological impact of domestic animals, or a fear that it could cause the next pandemic.
My lack of veganism is not based in ideology.
This is a weak argument. Based on your abortion example, I’m guessing you are from the US or southern Europe. So, you might know of the Confederate States of America and/or Fascist Iberia / Italy. In those places, were there not people who did not consciously support slavery / fascism, but went along with it because they ‘did not have an ideology’? How would you judge them?
Further, on your not having an ideology, do you support the eating of humans? Monkeys? Cats? Dogs? Which animals are haram to you, and which ones are halal?
No. Their argument is based on applying their subjective beliefs that I don’t share to my actions and as such by definition not sound.
Do you believe that racism or sexism is wrong? Do you think a racist or sexist person would share your belief? Are you not, then, applying your subjective beliefs that they don’t share to their actions?
We judge others based on our moral standards, not theirs. To someone who sees the killing of an animal as a great sin, your actions might therefore seem wrong.
If your diet includes meat, you are most likely causing the death of an animal. If you believe that killing animals is wrong, then it follows that eating meat is also wrong. As to what is more wrong versus what is less wrong, that varies from culture to culture and age to age. Perhaps they believe that killing an animal is almost as bad as killing a human. Their argument is sound; it is just based on different axioms than yours.
Are the emojis part of your username? How do you do that? And how would someone tag you?
0.999… = 1 in theory also.
Otherwise, there exists a δ such that 1 - δ = 0.999…
Then, the δ should have a first nonzero digit. Let us say it is in the millionth placd. But then, 0.999… cannot have a 9 in the millionth place.
Snipers arent picking Admirals off regularly on their own ships.
Nelson has left the chat been shot by a tailor.
No no, at some point a large part of Europe spoke Basque-like languages. Then Indo-European languages spread westward from Russia, and replaced all the rest.
This is possible, but plants with deep roots (shrubs, certain grasses and scrubs) usually take longer to grow.
The deeper problem is that it makes ‘financial sense’ to let a lot of people starve.
Pretty sure there are crops you can rotate in that replenish the soil.
Potassium is produced by breaking down potassium-rich rocks. Plants cannot replenish it like they replenish nitrogen.
There’s also a literal shitload of organic waste that humans generate that can be used for a similar purpose instead of burying it in landfills.
We do produce a lot of potassium-rich waste - sewage and food waste, for example - but most of it is also rich in other nutrients. So you can add a little of it, but adding too much of it can cause other problems (like eutrophication).
The other solution is to buy potassium fertiliser. A significant amount of this is produced in Russia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine, and I’m guessing its trade is being affected by the ongoing war.
It is not. Unneutered and neutered female cats pee indoors in my experience, although both were adopted strays. Also they’re extremely aggressive and territorial to other females, even after neutering.
That being said, I am less skeptical of the growth in users in India, but not for the reason the author listed. I think it’s more likely that it is growing in popularity due to its cost (ie, free), as well as the fact that many distros are more lightweight than Windows, which especially benefits older or cheaper hardware.
Most Windows in India is pirated. Microsoft doesn’t care unless you’re a big company. The second point is true. Another reason is that schools shifted to Ubuntu 10-15 years ago, and government departments are now shifting to Linux.
Humans can’t even make anything as beautiful as a tree. We just make square things and blocks.
Counterpoint: Islamic architecture and Art Nouveau. To be fair, both are heavily inspired by nature.
Maybe they read about Canada genociding Indians. (/s)
But yes, our current government is behaving in a very short-sighted way, pissing off other countries for immediate benefits (trade deals, more visas, etc.). It isn’t just Canada.
That’s like saying you can build a nuclear bomb by smashing pieces of uranium together. Technically true, but it’s a lot more complicated than that.