Yes, since there’s no way to fully cock the striker, you always get the ~6lb half cocked trigger pull weight every time.

• Yes for most glocks, although there are some glock models that do feature a manual safety.
• Glocks have a half cocked striker once you rack the slide, and this gives a factory glock a trigger pull weight that is directly in between a cocked single-action trigger and an uncocked double-action trigger.

Glock’s trigger safety is more secure than no safety although it is not as secure as a thumb safety, and the half cocked striker is easier to pull than a double-action trigger but is harder to pull than a single-action trigger.

Presumably this compromise was intentional and is one of the reasons why Glocks have become popular through their balance of reliability and ease of use - nowadays most striker fired pistols follow the same design principle.

Any normal program can do that too.

But they do not take up the idea, because they do not take it seriously. That is what it means to have a joke, no?

GOG, because I don’t care about badges and achievements and other trinkets, but I do care about DRM

You probably discussed it because you were aware and interested in it, and your awareness and interest showed through in your other trackable habits outside of your chatroom. You only notice when they guess your interests correctly.

Sure, if they were designed that way, I would not call them defects either.

Just because all defect stock are routed to the US inventory, doesn’t mean that US inventory is made up of all defect stock.

Proton/wine makes no security assurances, so it will be able to do anything that any other program you run is able to do. If a trojan or rat recognizes that it is running under wine, it can bring in some native Linux malware as well and it will execute just fine. https://forum.winehq.org/viewtopic.php?t=34573

If something happens I’ll make a switch.

To what?

Yes, I understand. I am claiming that colossal weapon users simply have less gaps to exploit and aren’t provided with enough advantages to compensate for the lack of attack opportunities for most bosses. And after playing the other souls games, this lack of opportunity is made even more readily apparent in comparison.

My time with bloodborne (saw cleaver) and sekiro (there is only one playstyle) gave me a taste of From Software’s design when they decide to treat your playstyle as a first class citizen, and I had a wonderful time. I just didn’t get that same feeling at any point in Elden Ring is all.

Yeah, after thinking it through, I can see where my confusion came from. Elden Ring might be significantly easier or significantly harder than the other Souls games depending on how you played the other Souls games.

I guess I wish that they had provided more scaling variety within the various build types instead of across them.

It’s honestly one of the easiest From games, once you engage with the particulars.

I see this being said from time to time and I thought it was just me not “Gitting Gud”, so after being filtered by Captain Niall even with my mimic summon, I went through and cleared Demon’s Souls, Dark Souls 1 and 3, Bloodborne, and Sekiro all for the first time, and they were a fucking breeze compared to Elden Ring. I used a strength scaled zweihander in the Demon/Souls games to have the closest comparison possible (and also because I think it looks good). I guess it depends on which weapons you enjoy using, but the fact that there’s such a big skill discrepancy between entire weapon categories is in itself a pretty big stain on Elden Ring’s claim to be an RPG.

edit: I shouldn’t say they were all a breeze. Bloodborne and Sekiro were difficult for sure. Not even close to comparable to my experience with Elden Ring though.

while also being unwilling to match that effort to create the textbook yourself.

But the textbook was developed jointly, precisely through the cooperative labor between the two groups, no? It would not have been possible without the native speakers willing to share this information in the first place, no?

From Software aren’t generally shitty like that.

Dark Souls 1 and 2 had notoriously horrible PC ports, and Elden Ring was one of the only games that Valve stepped in to fix themselves through Proton due to its horrible stuttering. Regardless of their intentions, their familiarity with PC hardware is still definitely a “work in progress”.

AFAIK there is no need to re-encode, since Youtube videos are stored and served in chunks anyways. The change is that they are now slipping in the ad chunks as if they were a part of the normal video chunk stream.

Here’s an image viewer example with 0 exposed HTML elements (all UI rendered through a single canvas) and 0 human readable code (all client side code compiled to webassembly bytecode). Trying to block unwanted content in this kind of site would be closer to cracking a video game or patching an android app.

Bad reading of the author’s intent and you ignore the immediately preceding sentence which provides context for your cherry picked quote

It is the subtitle in its entirety, as the author of the article intended. That sentence didn’t grow legs and and walk all the way up to the top of the article by itself.

slowly open it up to the point where you can actually install regular linux apps on it

The linux running Chrome OS is completely separated, by design, from the virtual machine that runs linux apps under Chrome OS.

That article (or rather, the article linked in that article) doesn’t contradict your intuition, just a specific interpretation of that intuition. The randomly generated data puts everyone around 50%, which is indeed what you would expect from randomly uniformly generated data. So the similarity that the generated data presents is supposed to imply the conclusion that “everyone thinks they’re about average, so their judgement is no better than randomly guessing (assuming that the guesses are uniformly distributed)”, which is a subtle difference from “dumb people think they’re smart” - the latter attributes some sort of “flawed reasoning” to one’s self-judgement, while the former specifically asserts that there is absolutely no relevant self-judgement going on.

edit: You would also be correct that this doesn’t disprove the previous explanation, it just offers an alternative explanation for the observed effect. The fact that data matches up with a generated model definitely does not prove that it is not actually caused by something else, which is one of the criticisms of that viewpoint. It is obviously easier to rigorously demonstrate a statistical explanation than a psychological explanation of course, due to the nature of the two different fields.