She went to war with unions and the working class. Destroyed workers rights, used the police to antagonise and dismantle strikes, left towns and cities in economic decline. She screwed a LOT of people. Many hate her here.
I didn't realise Valve had gone into vaccinations, but Mumps, Measles and Rubella are nasty fuckers.
I'd rotate it so it starts to grow to the light and give it a bit more balance.
I'd personally try it outside and see his it gets on with the drainage holes, can always bring back in if it gets sad.
The issue is your mindset.
You write bugs because you have something to learn. You're so focussed on what you're making, that when a learning opportunity arises, you are not open to it. You're just looking to speedrun/hack it.
You need to drop the delivery pressure and enjoy the journey. When a bug comes up, celebrate it "ah, you got me here. Interesting. What am I missing?". Then you slow down, focus not on solving it, but understanding it. If you understand it, the solving is easy.
If you consider learning "not progressing", then you need to reflect on what benefit the pressure and delivery focus is.
Garbage in, garbage out. Keep feeding it shit data, expect shit answers.
In agile development. You do a little, release. Otherwise it is too big and may never be done. The fact they committed resources to improve this is a positive. The hope is they build on it and add more options.
However, if they get trashed for trying, they and many other companies may not try. Why spend money to get a bad reputation when the spending nothing creates less I'll will to the company. That is ultimately the decision Product Owners and Designers will weigh up.
I think for progress, the best approach is maybe "positive first step but more options are needed for non-bonary for this to really make players feel comfortable".
From a technical perspective, separating pronoun hard coding from the models gives more scope to give more options in the future, however, as someone mentioned, there is a lot of art work needed on assets and animations so the new shapes function the same in all cases.
Or "Duck it up"
I'm not American. I don't know much about the history of the body, who runs it or whether leadership changes under different administrations. I also do not know the scientists and whether they are completely state funded or there is industry funding anywhere (on this, or on previous or future research papers). I'm asking questions. I looked at the paper and usually it has a section on conflicts of interest, even to state that none exist. I couldn't see that section on this paper.
So first cutting airline emissions increases global warming and now cutting ship emissions does it?
It's like someone is trying to get a message out that cutting emissions is bad for the planet. Are we being gaslighted? Is this industry FUD?
The weirdo think is quite light. Harris has a lead because the media have been talking about her rather than Trump. Why change what is working?
I don't think she needs to go down to his level. They should be responding to her, not the other way around. She should focus on policy and what will be good with her as president.
He wants attention. It is his oxygen. Do not give him it.
Oh yeah, I see now. I misread that.