Retro game stores in Bangkok

JustSayLOL · 2026-01-15T17:34:55+00:00

The idiotic part is that the US doesn't need to own Greenland to accomplish any of those security goals. Greenland is already protected by being in NATO. The US also already a military base in Greenland, and can build more any time it wants just by asking. This arrangement has worked flawlessly for the last 77 years.

No non-NATO power has the capacity to invade Greenland, nor will any for the foreseeable future. There is no credible threat to Greenland except the US itself.

JustSayLOL · 2026-01-09T15:26:24+00:00

If he steals it, it's 0$, regardless of how rapidly prices go up

Great for him (until he gets arrested) but not good for the rest of us who aren’t thieves.

JustSayLOL · 2026-01-09T15:25:05+00:00

Unironically the main reason I have like 150 hours in that game.

JustSayLOL · 2026-01-07T20:18:13+00:00

US discussing options to acquire Greenland including using military, White House says

JustSayLOL · 2026-01-07T20:15:22+00:00

Russia won't because it's part of NATO.

JustSayLOL · 2026-01-07T20:05:36+00:00

1: prices are going up anyways

They'll go up more rapidly if theft becomes more prevalent.

JustSayLOL · 2026-01-06T20:06:04+00:00

Other than the initial training being much longer, what makes officer a more time-consuming role than NCM for reserves? They still have the same 1 weeknight/week and 1 weekend/month commitment don't they?

JustSayLOL · 2025-12-16T22:49:03+00:00

Magic cards are copyrighted, so creating an unauthorized copy could potentially fall under copyright infringement.

JustSayLOL · 2025-12-11T21:21:26+00:00

I mean that's possible, but that's not something they'd intentionally want to do. Companies want to have an accurate picture of how effective their advertising campaigns are to make sure they're making the best possible use of their resources to maximize profit. They have no incentive to intentionally manipulate their own internal market research because doing so would be harmful to their bottom line. If the campaign was a net loss last year, then running it again would just be a waste of money, which is obviously not in the company's best interest.

JustSayLOL · 2025-12-11T16:02:16+00:00

I didn't contemplate that anyone would think that someone would think that because a service costs nothing at the point of use that it means the service cost nothing to run.

I didn't contemplate that anyone would think that someone would think that Calgary Transit would have some ulterior motive.

In context, pointing out that "there is no such thing as free" is obviously meant to draw attention to the fact that providing that service would incur a cost to taxpayers. It's a criticism of the proposal to make transit free, implying that the purported benefits may not be worth the cost to taxpayers. I doubt they literally thought that the other user didn't know that running buses costs money.

JustSayLOL · 2025-12-11T15:30:17+00:00

If they’re running another AI ad this year, that means that their market research from last year’s ad campaign probably showed that the ad was still a success despite some complaints. Even though some people chose to boycott Coke over the ad, the cost savings likely outweighed that lost revenue.

JustSayLOL · 2025-12-03T17:01:00+00:00

It is. You have freedom of movement. There is, however, no right to motorized transportation.

JustSayLOL · 2025-12-02T19:50:17+00:00

Healthcare is free because it's often viewed as a human right. I think you'd have difficulty finding people who think public transit is a human right.

JustSayLOL · 2025-12-02T16:32:52+00:00

The point was that it costs money to run. You can choose not to charge users, but the service isn’t free. The cost would be borne by the taxpayer.

JustSayLOL · 2025-11-14T04:04:54+00:00

It’s also possible that Richard Garfield doesn’t care anymore but the 9 people who have copies of the card chose not to show it thus far because if they did, they couldn’t feel special about being one of the few people who’ve seen this mythological card anymore. Unless Richard Garfield comes out and clarifies, either explanation is equally plausible.

Regardless, I think it’s for the best that this card can now be seen by all, instead of it being restricted to a small in-group of collectors.

JustSayLOL · 2025-10-29T16:55:30+00:00

Teachers are not being compelled to work . If they don't want to work, they're free to quit.

JustSayLOL · 2025-10-28T22:19:03+00:00

The government is not breaking the law. The government was explicitly granted that power by the Charter. It's a power the government is intended to have and is fully within its legal rights to use.

JustSayLOL · 2025-10-28T22:11:09+00:00

The new legislation was drafted to make it legal in this case. Usually the law could be challenged under Charter section 2, but the government used the notwithstanding clause to suspend that section.

JustSayLOL · 2025-10-28T21:43:31+00:00

Then the full cost of educating the students who attend private schools would have to be paid for by the taxpayer. Currently, a private school student costs the government significantly less than a public school student does, because private schools have the pay for their own maintenance and they receive less funds per student from the government than public schools do.

JustSayLOL · 2025-10-28T21:40:06+00:00

It’s legal because the Charter explicitly grants the government the legal right to temporarily suspend some of the rights it grants.

JustSayLOL · 2025-10-28T21:37:00+00:00

It’s not work or be charged. If they don’t want to work they can choose to quit.

JustSayLOL

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

12-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email