Would it be cool if all planets of the same type weren't a single climate stereotype? Sure. When you're going to visit multiple tens of different planets in a single play session, does that actually matter? Probably not.

Agreed. Multiple biomes on a single planet would be cool, at the cost of probably an order of magnitude more complexity on the procedural generation engine, but functionally the difference would be trivial when traveling to the other side of the planet to visit the "snow" or "desert" region (if your planet even has one) is about as difficult as just flying to another system with an ice or desert planet.

Can it be done? Probably. Would it be cool? Yes. Would it have a dramatic impact on gameplay? Probably not.

Mmm school cafeteria fish, sounds delish and like nothing could be even remotely disappointing about that option.

At first glance I thought this was rimworld and you were running some organ harvesting operation of epic proportions.

Thank you for your service.

Trump's a big fan of throwing out decades of precedence and international agreements. UK should formally renounce the Treaty of Paris and just to fuck with him.

I think about your text randomly once a week for the rest of eternity. Each time I go, "Nah, at this point it would be weird to follow up."

DS1518+ on (a lot of) borrowed time having lasted nine years

DS416 nervously blinks in the corner

Don't you dare.

Oh they're not going to squirm for a second - states rights just means "let me be racist and oppress women kthx" nothing more

Idk, but if I had to guess, the answer is almost always money.

On the flip side, living in a place Google doesn't index properly, I've found adding stuff to OSM to be infinitely easier than adding/correcting things on Google Maps. Google just has the advantage of already having 99% of stuff on it

There is a high amount of em dashes, and it reads as ai.

Look - as someone who is probably on the spectrum - I resemble this comment.

Came here to discuss dog with a propeller hat.

Where did he get it? What does he propel with it? Can I please pet?

Because reading articles is hard, better to blindly trust a headline and summary comment. People on Lemmy wouldn't lie to me, would they?

Even better, transfer those subsidies to plant agriculture so no one can complain "you're gonna make food more expensive for people who can barely afford it". And raise the minimum wage, because "barely affording food" should not be a problem in today's society.

Ahh yes, the "thank God I have infinite money, I literally can't lose" approach.

Use it? The US invented it. The US has historically funded it as part of their human rights initiatives. Like I said:

Also many of the sponsored projects help people circumvent authoritarian government overreach, which is something that until recently has been considered "good" for the US. The more freely information can flow the harder it is for authoritarian regimes to exert control.

Given the nature of the Tor network, it's likely any "official" use within the US government would probably involve things like communicating with people working undercover / informants, etc., and not be something broadly discussed.

Ahh foiled again by the ad blocker, thanks for the heads up! I feel much better now.

But there is a lot of growth. Which makes me wonder why people say to not compost citrus peels.

That was my reaction too! I read the headline and immediately thought "oh god they killed it didn't they". I was shocked to find out it was a resounding success, at least in comparison to the alternative of doing nothing.

It's probably got something to do with local soil ecology or rainfall amounts, so there may still be some merit to not composting your orange peels, but this definitely makes me want to learn more about why this guidance is so heavily repeated.

Better to ship it half way across the planet to make broth than to restore acres of tropical forests?

They mention a magical yellow sign like 8 times in the article and never once show a photo. LET ME SEE THIS GIANT YELLOW SIGN.

Edit: I was wrong, article is good.