I’m a fan of academic and Pop-academic sources.

Pop Academic is usually the much easier to read version of a proper academic quality book. I’m a fan of Bart D. Erhman and a lot of his books are pop academia, but they reference his academic works.

The process I was taught for this kind of source finding is 1) Search for a broader topic 2) Find a well referenced book on the broader topic 3) Read book reviews of the book to determine if it has the content you want 4) Read the book or skim the book looking for mention of the idea you want to know more about 5) Check the relevant sources of that section.

If there are no sources listed (or they don’t exist because they’re hallucinations), its probably not a good book for information.

IF you got wide feet, Lems and Zero do pretty good. Lems I know goes to 15, but I’m just a 12

Sorry, you have a scale that can measure your water content?

I’m finishing Phillip Pullman’s “The Book of Dust” trilogy with “The Rosefield”

I heavily recommend the series to anyone interested in Magic, Consciousness, Fairies, and fighting a corrupt and evil Christian Church.

Pullman 's writing is flowing and subtle. Every pay off feels earned and all his foreshadowing is there enough that it feels like a mystery the reader can solve.

My favorite details are when details of events we’ve experienced in the book are mid remembered to other characters. Its often inconsequential, but I just love it when I know a character sounds so dumb for being wrong but they couldn’t know!

To add to this, I personally recommend “Did Jesus Exist” as the Dr. Ehrman follow up.

It has the same vibe as Dr. McClellan’s book while also being an incredibly useful popular academic book. Just as accessible and covers the second most important part of Christianity to understand, the origin as opposed to the current discourse.

“How Jesus became God” being a natural progression.

I finished the book a while back and I reference it often.

Its really good. All of the book is formatted as long form responses with citations and solid academic reason without being inaccessible.

What jargon there is is fully explained in the intro or in the text.

It was in fact a wonderful resource for a modern interpretation for the bible and a resource on modern discourse around it if you’re not religious like myself.

Its good enough that I keep a spare copy to give to friends if they’re interested in interpretations of stories inspired by or from Dan.

My papa

Builds and collects model planes

organizes fishing lures based on effectiveness, has extensive notes on how to catch fish

will leave the room if it gets too loud

frustrated easily in social situations

finds Sheldon Cooper from Big Bang theory so relatable

texture issues and will only eat from 4 restaurants only burgers or fried fish

“What the hell is autism? Sounds like being a brat!”

Thinking of him

Well the second part of his thought is that you’re not allowed to be happy until you’re perfect.

So you figured out the rest of his destructive philosophy

He did say that no body is a perfect 10/10 and that looksmaxxing will have to be a life long struggle.

So hes already in the right mindset to do that.

I’ve got a virtualized set up to.

Its pretty unbothered being virtualized so long as the disks are passed through. In my set up, I have the SAS board passed through and its using that.

My reasoning is that I wanted a lot of disks space, but I couldn’t get that without just a big case in general, so I use the extra space to store GPUs for AI and encoding stuff

Oh isn’t this the artist that does porn too?

Bowling For Soup either made it or covered it. Hard to tell with punk tbh

You see how

“Link” is highlighted?

Highlight “discussion”

I have a near complete control of a market segment.

I want to monetize that control further.

I release slot machine mini games into my most popular games.

I have contributed to the gambling epidemic that plagues modern society.

I am not a trust worthy entity.

I am Steam

Does that make sense?

Thank you for your click saving service

Loot boxes are not a monopoly.

Its a bad thing they did to abuse their monopoly stance

Insane to think an in image attribution is advertising, but a direct link is fine.

And didn’t you learn a valuable lesson about scrolling socials when you should have focused on those KPIs?

Maybe the difference is effort versus objective reality.

You and OP are concerned with whether or not they became a monopoly maliciously when I think the previous commenter is concerned with whether or not they simply are a monopoly.

In my view they are a monopoly and they have abused that. I’m thinking of their loot boxes and silent support of skin gambling.

We should be mistrustful of institutions with this much power, regardless of if they’re actively abusing it.