(Part 2) Best products from r/unpopularopinion

> If you want to connect your Wii Mote to your PlayStation 4, there's simply no way of doing so while on PC you can very easily hook it up through Bluetooth [...] So no, consoles don't have as many controller options as PC

That's a bit of a stretch, but even with that in mind...

> Want Wii-style motion controls? Been around since the PS3.

I should've clarified: you may not get the exact same options for controllers on PlayStation, but you'll pretty much get the same kind of variety. For example, you could only use the Thrustmaster TS-PC Racer on PC, but on PS4, you could use the Thrustmaster T300 or TG, the latter being based on the TS-PC and T300. Even if you don't get the same specific options, you pretty much get the same variety.

_____

> I don't know if you're even aware of this yourself, but you cherrypicked four games to support your argument [...] Just now, there's a Bandai Namco sale and Dark Souls 3 is $30 as opposed to the "inferior" PS4 version which costs $60.

It may cost $60 on PSN (where I assume you're getting the number from), but if I wanted the PS4 version of Dark Souls 3, I could get it for $40... for the Complete Edition, but I could also get the Standard Edition for $20. Both Physical.

I didn't Specifically go out of my way to choose these games, I just went with the first games that came to mind. But if you really don't believe me, let's go to the Steam front page and I'll just compare the first discounted game I see on the front page.

The Division, a game that came out recently going for only $20 for Steam? That's not bad.

In fact, if we look on Amazon for a New PS4 copy, it's $24 for a disc, maybe you were right... For a new copy.

If we look for used copies, We can get the game for as low as $12 for a PS4 disc. Now, even if you're thinking "Oh, well that just means you have to deal with someone's disc, they could've damaged it," here's the thing:

1. I specifically chose "Like New," which products are only specifically listed under if they have no defects, and are only really put here if, at most, the box has been opened.
   
2. The disc is installed to the PS4's hard drive upon the first insertion, after that you just need it so the system can verify that you still own the game. So? The disc doesn't need to be read to play the game, so scratches won't get in the way.
   
3. Games are on Blu Ray discs, which are far stronger than the DVDs they used to be on.
   
   Need I say more?
   
   _
   
   > This analogy is fine except you didn't mention anywhere that you don't get to choose your two additional (they're not free, you pay for them) meals every month, so if you're not interested in pizza and in one specific month they have free pizza then you don't get the additional meal that you paid for.
   
   This is true, but let's be fair, you get 2 new choices every month, per system. Even if you only own one system, chances are you'll get enough good options to make up for the $60. EDIT: Forgot to say, even if you don't like the Pizza, the other meal might be a steak dinner that you'd fancy.
   
   But even if you don't want to count the free games, don't forget the part about the part where I said "Exclusive/Extended discounts, especially during the weekly/seasonal sales (though you don’t need PS Plus to get sales, PS Plus members get to enjoy the best sales)."
   
   Now, you may be thinking "wait, weren't you just talking about how Digital games are more expensive?" Well that's the thing, these discounts can be amazing, and occur weekly, which I would say means they "occur very often."
   
   For example, remember when I mentioned DiRT Rally? That game was discounted for PS Plus members. How much? Well, I bought it for $18, which is even cheaper than you can get it on Amazon. Even if you want to mention that it has previously been discounted on steam for a similar amount (which it was), both sales happened for a week, and right now, they're both $60 digitally (but, again, cheaper physical disc).
   
   The discounts and the free games can near-guarantee that the annual fee will balance out, and again, it is not guaranteed to be more expensive to game on console.
   
   _
   
   > The weekly free Steam games are free, the games you get for paying a service are not free
   
   Ignoring the fact that I haven't heard about "weekly free Steam games," keep in mind:
   
   > even if you want to talk about Steam Summer Sales, what about the PSN summer sale, or again, disc sale discounts?
   
   Steam isn't the only one with sales, and PSN also has free games (that you don't need PS Plus for). Again, you don't need PS Plus for sales, PS Plus just gets you more sales.
   
   _____
   
   > pragmatically those systems are going to break down. Don't think there exists statistics for this, but my own PS2 and PS3 both had to be replaced during their own generations. If they were PCs, I could simply swap out the faulty parts for way cheaper than buying new PCs.
   
   ...Which costs money. I'll say it again:
   
   > You don’t need to replace your entire system to spend a lot of money on hardware.
   
   Just as easily as someone could say they needed to replace their PS2, someone could just as easily need to replace one of the many parts in their PC, which can often cost more than a PlayStation.

Your delusional pipeline comment:

First, you need to understand the nature of Indigenous countries. Prior to and during invasion, Europeans were not coming to some "undiscovered land" bullshit, but they were landing in foreign countries. The French sailed and planted down in Dawnland/Wabanaki but more specifically in one district of Mi'kma'ki. The expansion westward in the Manifesting a Genocidal Destiny was the invasion, settlement and colonisation of many hundreds of prairie countries like nêhiyaw-askiy (Plains Cree Country), Očhethi Šakówiŋ (Dakota/Lakota Country), Niitsítpiis-stahkoii (Blackfeet Country), Anishinaabewaki (Ojibwe/Chippewa Country), Nʉmʉnʉʉ Sookibotʉ (Comanche Country), Dinétah (Navajo Country), Apsáalooke Issawua (Crow Country) and many, many, many more. These are lands that have and had boundaries, that were and are named and are known to be the countries of these various nations

Ignoring the US for a second because every single treaty the US has every signed with an Indigenous nation has been broken. In Canada, treaties are kinda well-regarded (comparatively anyhow), for the treaties (like the US, but the US ignores this) form the literal foundation for the State of Canada. Weird, I know, but it is true. It is like how the Treaties of Versailles and other European ones are the literal foundation for the States of Europe we know today

British Columbia is a good example where majority of the province covers untreatied or unceded lands. This means that where treaties elsewhere in Canada allowed foreign citizens protected and negotiated through the Crown to settle in these foreign (Indigenous) countries. However, as protected through Delgamuukw which asserted §35 of the Constitution and §25 of the Charter which both in turn entrenched the rights of the Royal Proclamation of 1763 ... these decisions (and more are coming like one in Ontario and one with Secwépemc) all state that Indigenous countries do indeed maintain aboriginal title and rights to their countries as countries (though not quite stated as such)

Right now, there are about ~60 countries within and across the borders of BC, only about 15 or so are protected by historical or modern treaties. Otherwise, the rest of the countries and their citizens remain as subjects protected by and from the Crown.

The pushing through of a pipeline across Secwepemcúl̓ecw, through Wet'suwet'en Yin'tah or even through the treatied lands of Očhethi Šakówiŋ (Great Sioux Nation; Laramie Treaty) amounts to invasion of internal foreign countries and is a continuation of the same types of colonisation that began on this continent about 500 years back. Parts of their countries are being cordoned off by developers and development, taken away from the rights of that or those governments who traditionally and legally oversee those lands and you have the gall to say that that is not stealing their land

Please, please, please, please read these two books. One is easy and impactful, and the other is dense but also impactful. They should shine a bit of a light onto what is going on.

The first, Unsettling Canada, helps place everything into the correct spotlight and gives a great overview of the situation. There are millions of other American books like "American Apartheid" and "An American Genocide" that do similar work for the States, but Unsettling Canada is a fun, easy read for the most part.

The second, Secwépemc People, Land and Laws, is an excellent tome on the history of just one country: Secwepemcúl̓ecw. It goes through their 12,000 year history of solid occupation of their lands, showing cross-disciplinarily how they have lived and worked their country for those thousands of years. It should give an idea of how laws, at least from the Cascadian Plateau part of this continent, are formed and how the countries consider themselves. There is a heartbreaking passage about a BC highway extension that destroyed an immensely culturally important landmark in the form of some rock formations that should help shed some light on what modern-day land seizures look like and what toll it takes on the cultures whose lands are being stolen

As someone who believes in science as much as you do... your ideas are really unscientific.


What you basically are saying is "I don't walk because I value eating healthy more than the physical ability to walk". You are just confirming the stupid belief of r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM has that centrists are just too dumb to look into any political issues.


You haven't stated a single political issue in any of your comments. Its like saying "I'm a centrist when it comes to the debate of neanderthals being a cousin subspecies of modern man because I value the discussion of the Higgs boson."
Just identify as a-political if you have no care for politics. Centrism implies something a lot deeper than what you are saying.


Politically Center ≠ Centrist ≠ A-Political


Centrists in today's meaning implies, by definition, center right beliefs.
Its a right-wing version of a liberal.
A liberal is someone who defaults to the center left except for key issues.
A centrist is someone who defaults to the center right except for key issues.


Based on what you've said so far I, ironically, do think you are a centrist. You just never learned the definition of the term. You are a centrist because you are center right and will side with people on the right-wing on almost all issues save a few key points.


What irks me is 2 things:
1- Your use of science to defend your political position.
2- The fact that you think you admire science yet approach social issues so unscientifically


There is a rich field of Social Sciences that you can draw from but instead you look at all of it and just say "oh, who cares. Planet is dying lul".


I used to be like you. I used to say things like "social sciences aren't real sciences" without ever taking a course or reading any of the works.


This weird dichotomy between social issues and science you have is the exact one that I had... then I grew up. I went to University and left that high-school way of thinking. I don't know how old you are but as someone who is, seemingly, just getting into politics let me tell you an important piece of advice:
Your political position or opinions don't matter nearly as much as the reason you have them.


You being in favor of locking up people addicted to crack doesn't matter as much as you wanting to do it because crack users tend to be black.


You are a centrist but your reasons are juvenile and unexplored. Most centrists and a lot of liberals (less than in the past) suffer from this and this is why the idea that they are stupid has become so popular. You could have all the same view points but if you gave me a half-way decent but of reasoning I would be a lot more respectful.


I will recommend this book to you. Its about policies but its a good 101 intro into practical political science. As someone who likes science it will be a good jumping into politics so you can bridge the two and gain a new ability to judge the people you maybe voting on.

In Economics, right wing is capitalism, left wing is a centrally planned government, and than there is mixed economy approaches which encompasses a large majority of economic systems. You said that the National Socialist Party was "inhereny right wing" economically. To anyone who studies economics and has taken beyond an introductory class, that means a capitalist system. Not a mixed economy. I have said this multiple times.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

This is Peter Temin's original paper on the topic which led to all the pushback your papers were referring to. While I don't stand by 100% of what he says in here, he is one of the top economists in the world for a reason. This is the basis of where the socialist vs communist discussion in the academic community is founded upon.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1830929?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

This is a good paper analyzing the leviathan state and destruction of the free market and eventual civil liberties through Nazi Germany. This paper I have not combed through myself but a colleague of mine presented it's research at a conference I was at last year and this was the link on his LinkedIn profile so I presume it is the right one. I believe it also addresses the proposed inability to seperate social atrocities (in this case the Holocaust) and macroeconomics which while you didn't bring up, some people do. If this is the wrong paper, let me know and I will send him an email and ask for a link to the correct one.

The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy https://www.amazon.com/dp/0143113208/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_QHH6CbMGJCNCQ

While Temin's paper focuses mostly on pre-war, this is the best research done into the wartime economy of Nazi Germany. It discusses in extreme depth the command economy of the party and how the seeds of the wartime command economy were planted in the centrally planned economy pre-war and how that transition came to be. It is extremely fascinating but is a slow read.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24563068?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

This paper goes through a lot of the misconceptions that you have presented and while isn't the best written, fits your particular view point quite well. It makes a few overreaches into modern day political times but if you take it for its historical analysis it is a decent article.

Listen dude or dudette. This is something I have studied a lot. Once I get my undergraduate, I likely will shift my focus towards microeconomics (if I don't end up in Law School) but this is something I have spent a sizeable portion of my life studying. I've given an academic presentation at a conference on this topic. I've heard every arguement possible. You can accept the fields opinions or not. It isn't as cut and dry as something like vaccines, but it's an issue with little wiggle room.

While the Nazi party may have claimed to be against socialist policies, they certianly enacted them. Even in the best light possible you can only really argue it is an extremely left leaning mixed economy. Vox tried to make this arguement quite well earlier this year for what it's worth.

If research by some of the best economists in the world, that has been defended for decades at this point, doesn't convince you, than I can't conceive of what possibly could. As far as I'm concerned this conversation is over. You can remain unconvinced but these are the conclusions people much more versed than you or I have reached.

Edit: Grammar

Where have you been? Haiti perhaps? Maybe the Congo? How about Indonesia or the Philippines? I was born in India and grew up in 4 once-colonized countries in Asia, I spend a great deal of time across Africa for work. Comparing Australia and Canada, settler colonies, to India, Nigeria, Haiti, or Vietnam is, well, asinine and demonstrates a lack of understanding of different types of colonial conquest that took place and the resulting global economy/division of labor that was born. Does one really need to explain why countries like Canada and Australia developed while Belize and Guyana didn’t? I would assume you believe it’s because Europeans just know how to develop successful societies better than 4/5s of humanity.

A defining mark of civility? Let’s talk about civility. Shall we discuss the massacres or the many genocides? Or the fact that Britain considered Indians as such vermin that they shipped all produce abroad during the Second World War, resulting in the starvation of 3 million in the 1943 Bengal Famine. The caloric intake of Indians in Bengal during this famine was less than that of Buchenwald. Definitely the mark of civility to starve people to death more than once and then have Britain's celebrated mass murdering PM Churchill say: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.” 3 million. This was not the only British manufactured famine (a British imperial speciality, conducted in more than one dominated region), and the persistent malnutrition and starvation we see in India today is a legacy of Britain's use of food as a weapon of domination.

This idea that we were a bunch of poor backward scoundrels that were saved by the British is such a tired, vacuous delusion that I can't believe it's been resuscitated in 2017.

“And India, the world's largest democracy, and a huge, growing economy.” Have you ever been to India? Such tripe is a indicator that you have not. Home to the vast majority of the world's extreme poor. But surely the deindustrialization of India by British rule had no impact on India’s abject poverty. Surely the destruction of India’s most profitable exports by the forced imposition of tariffs and duties and the transformation of India’s market into a net importer of overpriced British manufactured goods (made from Indian raw materials) rather than a leading exporter of fine products had no impact on India’s poverty. India is growing despite Britain, not because of it. You really think this financialized system of capitalism with the metal exchange based in London and commodity trading floors in New York was built to benefit Indians or Indonesians? I suppose you're going to tell me the huge favor Britain did by building railroads.

Actually, no, before the British arrived it was not “South Asia”, the very concept of geographic designations like South Asia, the Middle East, are created from a European standpoint. The subcontinent was indeed a mosaic of various principalities and kingdoms, but saying that “so what you were rich? you were not unified” is, well, asinine. Britain’s industrialization was prefaced on the deindustrialization of what you call South Asia.

Here’s Britain’s leading India historian, William Dalrymple:

“If you take the long view of history, the simple fact remains that for 95% of world history, India and China, between them, have dominated the world economy. As early as the time of Strabo and Nero, you had emissaries from the west pleading with the spice exporters of Tamil Nadu and Kerala about their balance of payment problems. The gold of the Roman Empire hemorrhaged towards India. In Milton's 17th-century England, when he was writing 'Paradise Lost', trying to picture what the future achievements, what the wonders of mankind would be, Milton has Adam taken by god on a tour of the cities of Mughal India - Lahore, Agra, and Delhi. So far ahead was sultanate, Mughal India over anything in the west, that it's impossible to consider this seriously without realizing just how far behind the west was for 95% of our history. The Mughal Empire, then, was immeasurably richer than anything -- London, Paris, Madrid, Rome, Milan put together.

Antonio Montserrat, a Jesuit arriving for the first time in Agra said 'This city is second to none in Asia or Europe, with regards to size, population, or wealth. It is crowded with merchants who gather there from all over Asia.'

This was the pattern through nine-tenths of world history. It ends, quite simply, with the advent of European colonialism. And we drained India and the money came back to Europe. Alone, one man, Clive, brings the largest personal fortune made in Europe in the 18th century back to England on the back of one battle. The entire wealth of Bengal, then the richest country in the world, drains back to Shropshire.

Alexander Dow, a contemporary, says: 'The balance of trade was against all nations in the favor of Bengal. It was the sink where gold and silver disappeared, without the least prospect of return.' "

I’d also recommend this book, but before I do, where are my manners? I should be thanking the British governments and armies of yesteryear for civilizing and uplifting my family and people from our oh-so-backward ways. Our ancient ways and sophisticated culture can’t really stand toe to toe with the might civilization of Cornwall. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Inglorious-Empire-What-British-India/dp/1849048088

> we are on Reddit and it takes much more time to type this conversation than it would be to debate it in person :)

Tell me about it, dude. I completely understand. This is the sort of thing we should be doing over a beer. I'm going to drop one last big-ish comment. I don't expect you to reply to all or even most of it, but you brought up so many interesting subjects I can't help but talk about from my perspective :)

> What I meant by random is my existence is random (as much as it can be considering nothing is truly random), the fact that I am living and breathing in the way I am in the place I am was such a miniscule chance

The odds of you existing are 100%, because you do in fact exist. I know that there were all sorts of things that could have went wrong along the way... a different sperm meeting the egg for a different partner your father could have met instead of your mother ... and times that by thousands for each ancestor and then factor in the timing of those couples meeting and all the events that lead up to that and how so many of these ancestors came close to dying but didn't, and certain elements forged inside stars in to arrive at the right time, etc. etc. to give the elements necessary for early lifeforms, etc. An absolutely staggering series of events. But the probability is still 1:1 because, alas, you are here.

To address the fine-tuning implication to what you said, I'll mention Douglas Adam's (Hitchhiker's Guide to Galaxy dude) "Sentient Puddle" analogy as to how we have it backwards when thinking of ourselves and our place in the universe:

“This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.”


> That's the current theory, but logically, to me, it seems more likely that I was purposefully made living and breathing the way I am in the place that I'm at

The problem is, the words "logically" and "likely" have strict meanings.

When you say "likely" you're implying you used some kind of probability to get to your conclusion. Like in math class, probability is the number of favorable outcomes divided by the number of possible outcomes. So you have no way of calculating the probability of being purposely created. And you have no argument that is both valid and sound in which to arrive at that as a logical conclusion. It's not probability or logic at all... it's just what you want to be the case (correct me if I'm wrong).

> computers memory can be seen incredibly vast to a small byte (if it were sentient), but even that byte was created to do a specific action in the machine

That's a top-down operation for which a human programmer is required, though. And every single instance of bytes being created can be linked back to a human programmer. So, seeing a byte with no backstory, it's extremely probable a human programmer is behind it. We don't see anything like this with what you're talking about with respect to purpose and gods. As far as we can tell, the only "purpose" we have is that which was imagined by us as human beings. You get a divide by zero error when you try to work out the probability of that being a god because you don't know if gods are possible — let alone likely.

> There would be traces of me in everyone I interacted with, every thing I did but me, myself, and I would no longer be anything so why would what's after matter to me at all

There's a very good book that deals with this question. I'll butcher it by trying to explain here myself, but if you're interested there's enough really good content in the "LOOK INSIDE" (or whatever it's called) pop-up that's serious worth reading (ignore the "atheist" referencing of the reader, I know you're not an atheist, but still, it helps): https://www.amazon.com/Comforting-Thoughts-About-Death-Nothing-ebook/dp/B00QVLEQRU

> Plus one day, all of our universe will cease to exist and even if im not forgotten by then, I will be at that point. If I assume that I am here for a purpose, once I die I will have completed that purpose (hopefully). Thus it will have all been for something greater than I can even imagine. Something that my essense, soul, being, whatever you want to call it, will be a part of.

These all seem like really comforting ideas, but ask yourself: what does comfort have to do with truth? From my perspective, moving out of my comfort zone and seeing the world for how it really is a really scary, somewhat depressing but then all-of-a-sudden extremely liberating and exciting feeling. You have the kind of existential despair you described for a while, but then you realize that religion was really just gilding the lily so to speak and that it has absolutely nothing of value to offer when you really take the time to inspect it as an outsider and compare it to life and the universe in its purest, most unadulterated form.

Yea that's a problem but it's definitely not the problem with Reddit. The real issue is the fact that this site is an astroturfer's paradise. Create a thousand bots, have them create a thousand accounts, post a thousand reposts, then post comments from the original posts in the reposts and upvote upvote upvote. Do this for 3 months and sell the accounts to social media marketing companies. The absolute worst aspect isn't even the corporate advertising which I think is as benign as commercials. The real sinister astroturfing is the political type. Whether it was r/the_donald posts on the front page daily during the election or the daily anti-trump r/politics posts today. These are almost certainly not organic and there is evidence for it. It is propaganda pure and simple. Social and political manipulation on a mass scale.

I strongly recommended anyone who reads this post check out the book The Smear by Sharyl Attkisson. The book is truly eye opening and you will never look at social media the same way again. The media in general too. There's a reason the media seems to reflect reality so poorly, it's because it doesn't.

In the book she outlines how partisan political groups game internet algorithms to put their content in front of as many eyes as possible. She even interviews some of the people involved in the work. Reddit really makes it easy for them. They even prepared for 2020 by quarantining the only pro Trump sub on this site so that democrats are the only ones who can successfully game the system during the next election.

A large percentage of viral events on the internet are staged these days. Considering the potential profit of making something go viral, why wouldn't they? It's like a multi-million dollar ad campaign that costs a few thousand dollars. It seems people have no imagination when it comes to these things. A perfect example is that Popeye's chicken sandwich that people were mysteriously obsessed with beyond rationality.

> Anybody can sing but not everybody can sing well, that is a skill that takes practice.

Anybody can sing and anybody can sing well but not everyone is born with a good voice plus it takes luck to land yourself to music industry. Good voice is not equal to success. Some of the best voices I have heard on x Factor went completely unsuccessful. Luck, luck and luck + Skills! However, YouTuber need LUCK not skills. Completely irrelevant to what I was saying originally. You are just pushing me to the edge and trying to win. I will advice you to stick to your OP aka "Is Youtuber hard work?". If not, I will not bother replying.

> do not believe you can do what PewDiePie does

I can scream louder than PewDiePie.

> MOST people who work on YouTube make below minimum wage

Really? Source please? Anyway, irrelevant to HARD WORK. IRRELEVANT TO WHAT I SAID! SERIOUSLY! DO YOU EVEN KNOW HOW TO DISCUSS!? angry.gif



> editing, acting, writing/scripting, directing, producing

• YouTube editing is easy. If you think it's hard then it's your problem..
  
  
• YouTube acting is not acting. I hope you are not serious.
  
  
• Nobody writes scripts on YouTube. Even Smosh don't. VSauce reads everything off wikipedia. AsapScience reads everything off books they are about to advertise. I'm not saying it's not okay but it's definitely not hard work when compare to a real job.
  
  
• You know what directing mean?
  
  
• Producing what?
  
  
  You wrote such a loooooong post for what? To defend them with no.. umm.. no logic? I'm speechless. I really am.
  Btw, I am not anti-YouTuber. I sound like one becaues you are Pro YouTuber who think they work hard.
  
  
  I am a programmer but I don't whine how my job is hard. However, now I'm going to whine to you. I work on game engine graphic programming side and it is really really really tough. I need to study a lot and get a lot of new skills or I am fired.
  
  What is my everyday life is like?
  
  
• Wake up at 6:00am, Take shower, eat, morning exercise blah blah blah..
  
  
• Go to work at 9:00am.
  
  
• Solve new programming related problems. Lots and lots of math, geometry and physics(for lighting).
  
  
• 1:30pm eat lunch with co-workers who are my only friends because of my full-time job and talk about science(We love talking about alien and simulation world).
  
  
• Good! No overtime today! 7:00pm get home with headache. Study new technology. OH, new version of vulkan is released? Time to STUDY and impress my BOSS! If I don't, I will never be a senior game engine programmer.
  
  
• Eat dinner say goodnight to MYSELF and sleep. :/
  
  You see? An average YouTuber have nothing to do and spends most of his time whining how media is insulting them and how they work hard for nothing and haters gonna hate bullshit blah blah blah.. huh.
  
  
  
  PS: I only earn around $4000 a month! Companies prefer using their money to advertise their games using YouTubers. Who does nothing other than scream at top of their lungs and here are people like you who call it a hard work.. Try reading this book from amazon using "look inside". You will learn that there is so much to learn before you can even get into a game engine programming job! It is just one of 25 books.
  
  PPS: This is what whining is like.
  
  
  Edit:
  
  > I downvote ignorance, sorry.
  
  Funny how the ignorant one is you.

Well I balance it out with being active. I work out before work. I don't go home and get on the computer after work. Nothing says I can't go out for walks in the woods or go rock climbing or camping on the weekends. In the winter you can't really do all that except on weekends cause it gets dark soon after work but there's all sorts of indoor stuff. Like indoor soccer, swimming, indoor rock climbing, board games. Plus fire pits are awesome in the winter. Also, more and more jobs in tech are allowing remote work which means you could be anywhere in the world. I do like an office though as a regular place to go to greet friends and employees and give/receive help. Some tech offices are really nice and I have looked forward to going there in the mornings. Also these help a ton with headaches/eye fatigue https://www.amazon.com/Compression-Headache-Migraine-Patented-Universal/dp/B001HTYJLO/ref=sr_1_3_a_it?ie=UTF8&qid=1539168600&sr=8-3&keywords=imak+eye+mask I put them in the freezer in unsealed ziplock bags (so some air can get in but they don't physically touch anything in the freezer) and when I get home I lay down and put them on for 15-30 minutes and turn on a podcast or something to listen to and man it's refreshing. I dunno if being a park ranger in yellowstone will ever stop being appealing though :p

Classism definitely exists, but like everything else doesn't exist in a bubble. Class, race, gender, sex, age...these things all intersect and interact in ways that make social realities for people. Academics (which I am not) have different opinions about the extent to which one is more important than another. I would say yes, historically it has been far more difficult for a person of color to move up in American society and yes, that is still the case today. But I'm just a guy on reddit who likes to read. If you're interested in this stuff here's where I started: The Color of Law, New Jim Crow, Ta-Nehisi Coates, the autobiography of Malcolm X, The Warmth of Other Suns

Since I can’t edit it, you can buy bidets on Amazon that you can install in about ten minutes.

This is mine: Luxe Bidet Neo 120 - Self Cleaning Nozzle - Fresh Water Non-Electric Mechanical Bidet Toilet Attachment (white and white) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00JG2DETM/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_rTv3Db8N4V90K

I would say just quickly before I go to all the effort, if you want an absolute take down of the entire myth within an easy to read and straight to the point no bullshit format, then this is the absolute best source of information you can get.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/DEPRESSION-DELUSION-One-Chemical-Imbalance/dp/1908561017

Edit: or just down vote me.... I guess your not even willing to do the bare minimum.

get one of these. they are specifically to cut tomato and you can get it super thin


https://www.amazon.com/Rada-Cutlery-Tomato-Slicing-Knife/dp/B000H284LS/ref=sr_1_2_sspa?keywords=tomato+knife&qid=1570826298&sr=8-2-spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUExV0M4Q0IwMjU5UjVaJmVuY3J5cHRlZElkPUEwNzY0ODI0MURTMzVVRzhBMDFIViZlbmNyeXB0ZWRBZElkPUExMDMwMzEyM0NTRUdQVVQ4MlI4MSZ3aWRnZXROYW1lPXNwX2F0ZiZhY3Rpb249Y2xpY2tSZWRpcmVjdCZkb05vdExvZ0NsaWNrPXRydWU=