The headline reads like an onion article.
The headline reads like an onion article.
Guess we need the NACC to investigate the NACC
There’s an android app called URLCheck that can strip unwanted bits off the end of urls and then open them as well.
It’s okay, they can use AI to teach it to save money
Fines that were actually enforced properly might work. In general though I think the feds probably need to run an education campaign about AI.
The house might look good in a sort of greeny-teal shade
It’s funny because I can’t even see the LNP coming up with something this bad.
This has already cost what, $430B? We should just throw in another few billion and build our own diesel subs for safety.
I wonder if the new excuse any time a media company does something dodgy is “oh it was the AI sorry!”
I haven’t quite finished it yet, my feeling is that it slightly overstays it’s welcome.
I’ve also noticed that most of the time I do a thing or two in the game then realise there’s not quite enough time in the loop to do another thing, but just enough time to make me want to not waste the loop, since I find starting a new loop a bit tedious.
From memory it respawns the low level enemies constantly, since they’re just ammo/health/armour pinatas. You needed to kill the big enemies to complete an arena.
Not really a fan of the design choice, but I had a decent amount of fun when I clicked with how the Devs wanted you to play.
slug
That’s “vindictive and devious baby elephant” to you mate.
It really is shocking how talentless you can be to be a successful right wing talking head.
I convinced my partner to play it recently and the way I knew she’d finished it was that I could hear sniffling from the desk behind me.
American politics infects Australian politics in many ways sadly.
This changes the effect of negative campaigning (people still show up in Aus vs the US), but the idea is to dissuade people from voting for someone, rather than encourage them to vote for you. This might have a positive effect on votes for the party doing the negative campaigning, but I think it’s a poor definition of convincing someone to vote for you.
I don’t think this is a useful definition of voting for
which implicitly gets them to vote for you.
Seems to only be true if you think of there being only 2 parties, which is why I don’t think the definition is good.
It’s hard to cuff someone doing a nazi salute when your right hand is up in the air.
Seems like they did: