When you throw darts with the crossbow equipped, its special effect takes place. You just use the darts like you would any other throwing weapon. IIRC every shop should have at least a couple darts for sale.

1. Rape does not always involve physically overpowering someone. Someone may coerce someone else into sex with blackmail, lies, threats, or abuse of a position of power.

2. Erections are controlled by a person’s autonomic nervous system. A man can get hard even when he is not turned on or consenting to what is happening.

3. Not all rape involves a penis. A woman who sticks an object into a man without his consent is committing rape. Rape is about power and control over another person, and the rapist need not be directly stimulated for rape to occur.

Power stancing

Zweihander parries

Small white soapstone

Covenant of Champions

Bonfire Ascetics

Dark Souls 2 had a lot of cool things that didn’t get enough credit.

I’m glad I’m not the only one with that criticism. I enjoyed the first game so much more because of that.

As a heads up: I went looking for Black Hole on fdroid after seeing this comment, and couldn’t find it. Looks both the fdroid and github were nuked.

Physical therapists! I swear by physical therapy. I had sciatica for about a year, and after a few weeks of physical therapy, it was 100% gone.

The doctor I went to before that said basically “lose weight and come back in 6 months”. My first PT session, the therapist did some deep tissue thing to my lower back and (temporarily) made the pain go away almost completely. She was like “Yeah you have an injured muscle that tenses up weird now, do these exercises at home and it should clear up” and ended up being 100% right.

Octopuses have zero hands, but it only takes one gun to kill a cat so this works out.

Yeah! Kropotkin argues a couple points:

• People are generally pretty good at self-organizing to solve problems, and have done so effectively in small communities for thousands of years.

• We have the technology* and productive power to ensure everyone enjoys a decent standard of living.

• Much of the scarcity we face today* is artificially created and entirely avoidable if we produce to meet needs instead of maximize profits.

• Things like laziness, corruption, and greed can largely be addressed by ensuring that all of a person’s needs are guaranteed to be met. Many people we currently* call “lazy” are either stuck in a hyper-specialized job that they can’t leave because they need to sell their labor to survive, or unmotivated because much of the wealth they produce is absorbed by someone else. And people tend to take more than they need more often than not because they are stuck competing with their fellow man for resources instead of cooperating for the common good.

He also does some back-of-the-napkin math to show that it takes less than a year’s worth of labor to produce everything a household needs for a year, and that the remaining labor time of that year should be open for people to cultivate different skills and pursue their passions. He argues that the distinction between what we today call blue-collar and white-collar work is unhealthy, and that everyone should do a bit of both.

His central thesis IMO seems to be that in the event of a socialist revolution, people shouldn’t be afraid to immediately start doing socialism. Take inventory of the food & start giving it to the hungry, figure out how many empty houses the community has & start housing the homeless, stop growing cash crops / producing niche luxury goods and start growing food / manufacturing necessities until everyone’s needs are met. He sternly warns against half-measures: maintaining the state’s use of violence or keeping track of some kind of currency or propping up political leaders are all things he claims will spell the end of a revolution before it gets off the ground.

I really loved the book. I feel like it provided a great example of what communism could (and IMO should) look like without all the baggage of so-called communist states like China and the USSR.

*= The book was written in the late 1800s. I think a lot of it holds up really well and some points seemed like they really called events that would happen in the next hundred years. That being said, it’s probably not as airtight today as it may have been in 1894.

The Conquest of Bread was a breath of fresh air! I cannot believe I read a book about politics / economics that was actually optimistic and left me feeling good about fundamental human nature.

In the US, there is a history of white performers using blackface to play caricatures of black people, leaning hard on racist ethnic stereotypes. From Wikipedia:

The minstrel show, also called minstrelsy, was an American form of theater developed in the early 19th century.[1] The shows were performed by mostly white actors wearing blackface makeup for the purpose of comically portraying racial stereotypes of African Americans. There were also some African-American performers and black-only minstrel groups that formed and toured. Minstrel shows stereotyped blacks as dimwitted, lazy, buffoonish, cowardly, superstitious, and happy-go-lucky.[2][3] Each show consisted of comic skits, variety acts, dancing, and music performances that depicted people specifically of African descent.

True. They just visit to play poker.

He prayed for a TV and a gun. Clearly both were answered, hallelujah!

deleted by creator

Okay look. I am an atheist, I think magical thinking in general and Christianity in particular are harmful and unnecessary.

BUT

I also enjoy learning about new testament history as a hobby. I’ve actually read the book How Jesus Became God that the article mentions, and they do a sneaky thing that annoys the shit out of me: they quote things being said by someone who disagrees with them that appear to completely demolish their own position, without quoting the explanation and nuance that inevitably follows. Ehrman obviously doesn’t see the quoted text as a problem for the idea of a historical Jesus, and usually explains as much after saying something like that.

I won’t nit-pick all the little over-simplifications, but I want to make an example out of one of them:

The gospel of Mark is thought to be the earliest existing “life of Jesus,” and linguistic analysis suggests that Luke and Matthew both simply reworked Mark and added their own corrections and new material. But they contradict each other and, to an even greater degree contradict the much later gospel of John, because they were written with different objectives for different audiences. The incompatible Easter stories offer one example of how much the stories disagree.

The incompatible Easter stories are actually something many secular scholars point to as evidence in favor of a historical Jesus.

I’ll go into more detail if anyone cares, but the broad strokes are this: the nativity narratives in both Matthew and Luke contradict not only each other but also known history and even basic plausibility. We’re pretty confident they were both made up.

So, why? Why would two different authors working from the same source material both tell weird lies about Jesus’ birth?

Well, the expectation of the Jewish public at the time was that the messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Mark doesn’t talk about Jesus’ birth, but it does say he was from Nazareth of Galilee. That presents a problem: how is this guy who people are calling Jesus of Nazareth also the messiah from Bethlehem?

That’s where we get Matthew and Luke trying to smooth things over: Matthew makes up a story about how Jesus was totally born in Bethlehem, trust me bro but Herod the Great tried to kill him so Joseph and Mary hid in Egypt until he died but then his son took over Judea so they moved to Nazareth. True story bro.

Then in Luke, the author says that Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth, but Caesar ordered a census of the whole Roman empire where everyone had to return to their ancestral homeland because reasons. So they go to Bethlehem because David was Joseph’s… great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather? Why they stopped at exactly twenty generations (and how the fuck Joseph would have known that before ancestry.com) is never specified.

Even if we grant miraculous intervention, these stories are both ridiculous on their face (at least, to a modern audience). If Jesus was fabricated whole cloth, why include these bullshit Easter narratives in the first place? Why not just say “He was born in Bethlehem” and be done with it? To my mind, these stories make the most sense as a post-hoc ass-covering to explain how the guy who was walking around calling himself “Jesus from Nazareth” was actually totally from Bethlehem the whole time.

Yeah this whole thing may seem minor to some people but that’s what companies want you to feel.

Remember when Oblivion’s horse armor DLC was considered outrageous? $2 for an in-game cosmetic is hardly a blip on the radar now

All up and down I-95 on the east coast, too.

Oh shit, I do that too! Never occurred to me to stand there and drip for a minute. 😅

They turned off the servers for the ones on Steam not too long ago, if I’m thinking of the right game.

Here is a head on view:

The drawing has a little bit of his halo behind his head.

While NFA items are a different story, you’re generally allowed to manufacture anything you could legally buy in a store. So no suppressors / SBRs / destructive devices without the appropriate paperwork & tax stamps, no machine guns without all that and a time machine, and no fun allowed if you’re a prohibited person. Other than that, there’s nothing* stopping you from printing, say, a semi-automatic rifle with a 16 inch barrel or a glock frame.

*Federally. Also, I am a dumbass and not a lawyer, do your own research.