SheepSlapper

Who says he was targeting that specific place? In fact, it seems likely that the target was his head and the shooter pulled the shot a bit but was still within tolerances (with a 1 MOA scope @ 200 yards you're only looking at 2" of variance).

I've killed deer beyond 200 yards sitting on a stump with a cheap rifle, it's not actually that hard if you've shot a bit before. The nerves though... you're right there, I couldn't imagine.

If the reporting is correct, the shot was at 200 yards. Anyone who hunts with a rifle is (or should be) capable of making that shot, it's not exceedingly far (and like you said, if your rifle isn't junk and you're shooting 1 MOA, that's only a 2" difference @ 200 yards).

No serious training or equipment would be required for this close of a shot. I've taken deer over 200 yards away with my $500 rifle, no training other than shooting on and off since I was a kid.

Haha that bit cracked me up, all I could think was "yep, that'd be real scary!"

This site rules :)

I believe the question was "what is the rate of food stamp program eligibility for warehouse workers, regardless of their employer". Which is an interesting question, are there statistics for this which are broken down by profession?

Your link shows that 1 in 8 Americans are on food stamps, which is interesting (and a surprise to me) but it's missing the point of the question above. What's the rate of workers on FS in any given warehouse across the country?

As a hunter, I have to disagree. Properly harvested deer, elk, and bear are all amazing, and I'd take any of the three over the lowest common denominator ground beef. Actual cheap ground beef is garbage.

I buy half a cow every year from local farmers, and I'd put my ground elk up against that ground beef any day (though I do have to add suet because elk is so lean). In fact, nobody that I serve elk to knows that it's elk until/unless I tell them.

If your wild game tastes bad, you messed up somewhere along the line. Get it cold as soon as possible, keep it clean, and the meat will be great.

I mean, do whatever the hell you want. I'll call you out as a hack for doing it, but if someone out there enjoys it then more power to them.

Personally I think that if Nintendo eschewed new games, and kept releasing the original Super Mario Brothers (a beloved game from almost four decades ago) bit-for-bit on other devices, maybe with better graphics, they'd be irrelevant idiots today. Sure, there's SOME market for that, but what's much cooler is making new stuff that holds up in the current year. Nostalgia is a powerful tool, but porting code from 30 years ago to my smart fridge with upgraded graphics is a poor use of it (this is barely hyperbole for the franchise, which says a lot).

That all being said, I know the Cyan offices haven't collapsed into rubble so they're still doing OK (though their workforce is TINY now, compared to 'back when'). And if that's what floats their boat, great. I'd rather suck start my shotgun than release the same software for 30 years (same as in verbatim, no less, someone else is porting it to modern stacks) but to each their own...

I know they made newer games, I played Obduction in person in their offices before it was released :)

But you're on the same page as me, there was a time and place for these FANTASTIC games, but that's in the past. And it feels kind of silly to watch them push the same games onto new platforms in a futile attempt to stay relevant (and cash the nostalgia checks, even when players end up NOT feeling the same things as the OG release).

Part of why I didn't like D2 again is exactly what you said, I'm not a teenager with endless time to spend online gaming. But another huge part is that I've been there and done that, and a nicer, newer version of that fun just doesn't hold a candle to the fun I had years ago when it was fresh. I'm saying the same holds true for Myst/Riven, release it on my smart fridge for all I care, it's not the same :D

You're completely right, and if the shoe was on the other foot I'd probably do the same. I'd be happy to be a one hit wonder if it paid the bills and let me keep on rocking in the free world.

But at the same time, Norman Greenbaum doesn't release a new version of Spirit in the Sky every few years expecting to get a pat on the head. In fact, that'd be an insane choice to make. Cyan is making their new albums, but they're also releasing Myst[club-remix].mp3 and Riven[feat-shiny-bs].mp3 on a regular schedule, and part of you has to wonder when it's ok to embrace the one hit and maybe quit beating the dead horse (apparently there's money in the horse, instead of organs and horse meat, so they CAN beat it but why?)

I looked it up: Xonotic was the answer!

It was actually quite fun, even though I had to compile from source to play on an outdated office server :)

https://xonotic.org/

Fair point, and I sort of understand the nostalgia that's involved. A large part of my disappointment probably comes from the fact that the endless remakes never quite live up to the hype.

I was a big Diablo 2 fiend, it was one of my formative online games. So a few years ago there are rumblings about D2 Remastered, and I'm obviously pumped. Come launch day, Blizzard has my money and I'm deep into the thing I used to love, but it's just... meh. There was a time and place that made the original D2 fantastic, but it turns out that's not here and now. I feel the same thing for Myst/Riven, they were SO GOOD but who actually gives a shit about doing the same thing again with better graphics?

I can't write off the fact that those dudes made a few great games, and that's a crazy accomplishment. I think Myst is the first "real" PC game my family ever bought, and I still remember my mom staying up late at night to click around the world and figure out what the hell was happening. She wrote notes on those yellow legal pads, reminding her of lore and other important shit. But the lightning in a bottle thing works both ways, and that lightning is basically static electricity in todays world :P To borrow your example, id software didn't release the same version of DOOM 30 years later, we got DOOM Eternal. It's not a reskin of their (by today's standards) shitty game, it's a whole new experience that's a damned (hah) blast to play. That's not what's happening with Myst/Riven, unfortunately, but I'd love to see that level of innovation come out of the studio that was once great.

My hometown is also home to Cyan, who made Myst/Riven. I've been to their offices a few times, just to nerd out with some of the devs and play random open source FPS games (the name escapes me). Their offices are really cool, they've got a lot of physical stuff from the games in various display cases around the entrance.

It's... weird to visit, though, because they're like the high school quarterbacks we all know. They had some great years when they were younger, but they're continuously trying to relive those glory days while yelling from the bar stool about that one time they threw the game winning pass. Most of their cash comes from remakes or ports of Myst/Riven, and half the time they aren't even the ones making the damn ports (third parties have paid them for the rights to do it, if you buy Myst on GoG then you got a version that was ported by GoG themselves).

They recently put out Obduction, which on paper seems to be a commercial failure (though I haven't sold seven figures worth of games so who am I to say), raking in like $5M total. Saving the fact that there are just a handful of dudes left at the studio... I don't know, it feels like the oft referenced online version of Cyan (which again, is 30 years old now) and their current reality are completely divergent.

I have some nostalgia for getting trapped in a book in Myst and feeling that fury, but I also struggle to see how they're relevant in today's gaming landscape. It feels like if Super Mario Bros was a one hit wonder, would we still be getting this pumped about crushing turtles three decades later?

Person Located Between Two Other Equally Valid Persons doesn't roll off the tongue the same, does it?

Then you might not be in the target audience of Django. For the rest of us, the ORM is dope as hell and nobody cares that you aren't writing the most performant SQL the world has ever seen...

Coming from a construction background, I can confirm all of this. Permits are out of control, material prices are nuts (not COVID nuts, but still at least 300% higher than the good old days), and subcontractors are both hard to find and more expensive. It's not crazy to build a decent 3-4 bedroom house and have it cost $400k all said and done, even in my small-big-ish town.

A lot of people in here arguing, bet there are very few of us that have actually built houses before :)

Location: Spokane, WA, USA

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Python (Django, Flask, FastAPI), JS/TS (mostly Vue, some React), RDBMS (Postgres mostly)

Resume/CV: https://stephenleefischer.com/resume

Email: fischer.stephenl@gmail.com

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/stephen-fischer-88b80b5a/

---

I've been a professional software developer for 16 years, working in various verticals such as digital video, AI/ML, healthcare, and more. I'm looking for senior/principal/??? remote IC roles, with a bias towards startups (let's move fast!) I have 10 years of experience being a tech lead, and the right hybrid management/IC role could also be a great fit. Hit me up, let's chat!

I'm a hunter, and it's not a problem at all. You shouldn't be successful every time, and there should be some dang rules :) The state is doing exactly what they should be, given the circumstances. In fact, I'd expect a state with a game PROBLEM to do the same damn thing!

If I was successful every time, I'm not sure I'd enjoy the game as much. And if you've ever hunted, you'd know that you can do everything right and still walk away with nothing to show from your time. That's how it goes, anything less and you end up with killing and not hunting. I appreciate the meat in my freezer, if/when it comes, but being able to guarantee it isn't what I signed up for.

Plus, that "over-selling" is money into outdoor conservation, as long as it's not mismanaged to hell I don't care that they get a little extra. If you start moving that money into other bullshit then sure, we have an issue. But most of us like the outdoors and want to keep it around.

Oh, I'm not talking shit about the way the money is used, I almost unilaterally endorse it! The money isn't 1:1 supporting hunting, and that's not the point of the money anyway, it's for conservation. When the department is focused on preservation, us hunters are happy to support even things we're not doing (parks, nature trails, etc).

Recently, there are more activists joining my state's DFW, which is trying to subvert the original goal of preserving the balance between us and natural resources. Those people can go piss up a rope, because their naive understanding of the natural balance of these ecosystems is trumped by ideology. But in a perfect world, I'm happy to give the state a few hundred bucks that goes to preservation even if I don't have success during my hunts, because it's a worthwhile goal.

Most hunters want the animal to have a "sporting chance", otherwise there's not a lot of pride or accomplishment for taking an animal. If you removed every law around hunting, you'd just drive around with a spotlight until you found a deer, and shoot it from the road. That's not sporting, it's what many poachers do. Actually being successful in a hunt is HARD, and that's what makes it feel so good if/when you succeed.

And also, the laws mean that harvest numbers will be lower. It lets the state sell MORE licenses and tags than the number of deer they want to be actually taken, so they make more money. It's the same reason gyms want your membership, but don't want you working out :)

States are different though, some places have real population problems and will give ya a fistful of tags for cheap. My state isn't that way, they want the revenue and our game population would never support 100% success rates.

Because all hunting laws are (or should) be to either a) keep people safe or b) to give the animals a fighting chance, to keep it more "sporting". There's a lot more to hunting than just killing animals, in fact that's a tiny percentage of what you're out there doing (scouting, tracking, hiking around, sitting still for hours, etc). All of the "sport" part of hunting goes out the window if you can simply spotlight deer after dark and knock em over.

And if you wanted to know the REAL reason these laws exist, it's the same reason that gyms over-sell memberships. In many places, including where I live, the state wants your money, but don't want EVERYONE with a license to get an animal, because that wouldn't be sustainable. There are places where more tags are given out, and special hunts are provided to do actual population control, but I'd wager that a lot of states don't have that level of problem, and simply want the cash.

So there ya go. It keeps the "sport" of hunting alive, and generates more revenue for states because they can sell a ton of tags that don't get filled.

Coming from a construction family, this is THE problem with building right now. Material costs going up by an order of magnitude during COVID times (and not really recovering) was rough, but it doesn't hold a candle to the dumpster fire that is regulation.

Permits for everything (some permits are good, some are SO bad), mandates for things that increase cost for marginal/no gains in the finished product, and a ton of red tape/money going to people not involved in the actual work or the quality of the end product. If I, as a builder, have to go through all that bullshit for each house I build, the sane response is that I'm only building expensive houses that take more time but end up being similar $/hr for me, because I end up saving money and time dealing with the regulators.

Weight, presumably, because that's the topic of the parent comment. Mile for mile, batteries are heavy and gasoline is (comparatively) light

> You've (collectively) already fallen for it by allowing the government to develop a standing army (and not just any standing army, but possibly the most capable in the world of crushing any dissent even if it happens halfway across the globe).

The military is a non-factor in this, for a lot of reasons. Here are a few:

- What percentage of our armed forces will take their oath to the constitution (not the government) seriously, and will desert/change sides when asked to murder their own people? I expect a lot, but even if zero of them bailed, that's the least of the issues with trying to fight your own citizens...

- What good is all of that military hardware against yourself? Tanks, jets, drones, missiles... sure, you can turn major cities to glass but then what the hell do you even rule over? The US military is great at crushing dissent across the globe because the collateral damage has been deemed acceptable (by us, because we're not THERE). If you start doing any of that shit here, public sentiment will turn on you fast and you'll make millions of domestic enemies instantly.

- The US has 400 million people (ish) and just as many guns (again, ish). The US military is like 2 million, including reserves. Say 90% of people refuse to fight, well that still makes it 40 million vs 2 million. Those odds SUCK. And that's without anyone refusing orders and bailing to the other side (bring some of the hardware with ya!).

- This wouldn't be a traditional war, it would look like all the wars (ahem, military actions) that the US lost and continues to lose. Vietnam. Afghanistan. Our military keeps taking an L to dudes with 40 year old surplus rifles and busted Toyota trucks. Because that style of warfare is asymmetric and HARD to do without creating new enemies at every turn.

There is no version of a civil war that ends well for an established US government trying to subjugate its people BECAUSE of the 2nd amendment. Either rule over piles of glowing, radioactive rubble, or face the reality that it's open season on anything in a uniform and you're outnumbered 200:1 BUT you don't even know who you're fighting until you're already getting shot at. That's the intent of the 2nd, the US military doesn't actually pose a threat to its people because it simply can't win.

That being said... the US government knows all of this, and is just boiling the frog instead. Small oversteps over a long period of time add up to some real nonsense, and I'm not sure your average American has the balls to stand up, say "enough is enough", and push back. Old us threw the damn tea into the ocean (in front of the bastards!), current us will go on an angry rant on X while ordering Doordash. There will be more governmental overreach, there will be more boiling the frog, and who knows how it'll end. But the US military isn't remotely a factor.

Well until we figure out a way to remove pattern matching from humans... use GUIDs if that's an issue. Removing vowels fixes "spelling almost all bad words explicitly", though I'm open to being proven wrong with fun new swears in exotic (to me) languages :)

The problem of "pick any N symbols that don't make any profanity in any language across all time" isn't what this is solving, nor should it have to. Take the same concept but use whitelisted words to build the token if you're that adverse to computer generated, fill in the blank naughty words. Keep "pen" and "island", among other things, off that list ;)

Could you just remove vowels and hit 99.9% of profanity in all languages? Ditto for removing their 0-9 equivalents, if you're really worried about it. Quick out of the box support for that via being able to define a custom alphabet.

Which should lead you to conclude that I, in fact, don't live in or around Seattle? Contrary to what our governor would have you believe, there's a lot more to WA state than King county.

Not that any of this matters to the conversation about gas, my points still stand. Last winter we hit -10F, and there were power outages, so having gas meant having heat when it was extremely cold.

What subsidizing? I built my house, I had to pay someone to dig into the street to hook up to the gas lines and then fix the road. Then I had to pay the gas company to install a meter and turn on service at my new address. And finally, they send me a bill every month for the gas I use.

Having that gas hookup saves me a ton of hassle during the winter months when, inevitably, power goes out and I need to keep my place warm for a day or two (or more, though rarely) while I wait for service to be restored. My neighbors appreciate it as well, as they can come get warm in front of my gas fireplace and cook on my gas range.

I have yet to see a downside of having gas as an option, it's only helped ESPECIALLY given the geographic realities of where I live (feet of snow overnight, subzero temps for weeks/months). Ironically the pushbacks against people who are PRO gas proves how insular the anti-gas crowd is, because apparently they can't imagine a reason someone would NEED that as an option

As a WA resident, we also see weeks of subzero temperatures every year. And we've had power outages that can last a few days (if you're lucky) to multiple weeks (rare but not unheard of). Knowing that I have natural gas as a backup source of heating my house is great, and I've had to use it multiple times already in the last 3 years.

Having a backup method of ensuring my pipes don't freeze and my family is (mostly) comfortable is great. But if you're an electricity purist who hates cheap, available natural gas for some reason, enjoy sitting in the cold while your house destroys itself. Or spend thousands of dollars more on a device that BURNS GAS to run your electric furnace anyway

It's not the end of the world, I was just poking fun at a goofball who didn't see the irony in his kneejerk response. I'm a free speech absolutist, so I support his right to say whatever the heck he wants. That's how I know he's a goofy dude, I read a bunch of his replies in this thread and he CONTINUES to put his foot in his mouth.

Also, this hyperbolic style of response (end of the world, racism, xenophobia, the other million examples in the thread) is part of what the OP was saying is a problem today. Nuance in dialog seems to be lost, and the second someone disagrees instead of coming back with a well reasoned response, it's "oh so you YEARN for the days when minorities weren't even considered human?!" and the conversation ends.

That's boring. Strive to be less boring. It's not comfortable but it's worthwhile.

It only took 7 minutes for someone to come in and do... almost exactly what the above poster was describing. There's no way this isn't a simulation.

I built my house 4 years ago (with liberal use of subcontractors), and one of the things I knew I'd want is ethernet everywhere. So I ran the wire, bought a big patch panel, and now every room in my house has 2-4 ports for whatever I might want.

As a bonus, if I (or the next guy) wanted to have a landline phone, it's in the same closet and it can be patched to anywhere in the house by swapping a single wire.

Given the opportunity, even after the house is complete, it's a very useful thing to do.