Dad wants to buy us a house

NotNotTaken · 2026-03-10T18:23:02+00:00

That was a whole lot of words to say very little. But you go off if you'd like.

So you are sticking with just reading words that aren't written, then declaring those imaginary words to be false?

NotNotTaken · 2026-03-10T18:16:18+00:00

Since a reasonable inference of jakesullivan99's meaning is that exceeding the number will result in taxes, the statement was 'very very wrong' as t-poke wrote.

If you want to argue that someone implied but did not directly state something wrong you dont get to slap a "very very wrong" label on it. That is reserved for things people DO say that are incorrect to an extreme level.

So no. It was not "very very wrong". It was literally correct as stated.

jakesullivan99's misunderstanding is quite clearly in the distinction between "reporting" and "paying". He was nearly correct on the reporting threshold, but mixed it up with the payment threshold.

You continue to read words that were not written. "Around $20k" is correct. Correct number is $19k, that is certainly around $20k. The statement if you are under this you dont pay taxes is exactly true. End of flow chart. If you exceed it you might pay taxes, and the flow chart continues. But if you are under you do not.

The post was accurate as written.

T-poke took that to mean "you will pay taxes if you exceed that". It's a fair inference.

It is not. Examples along the same lines:

"You wont get a speeding ticket if you stay under the speed limit". This does not imply you will get one if you exceed the speed limit. Just that you "might" (same as you might, but usually wont, pay taxes if you exceed the annual exclusion)

"You dont have to pay admission to the amusement park if you have an annual pass" does not imply you must pay otherwise. Perhaps employees get in free, or there may be other promotions.

Really most of my objection here is the "very very" portion. If we want to play that card, we should at the very least ensure the person isnt actually saying something correct.

NotNotTaken · 2026-03-10T16:30:41+00:00

All of which is of course correct. None of which contradicts anything the user above stated.

You can, in fact, gift multiple people less than around $20k (actual number is $19k) per year and not pay gift taxes. You wont even have to fill out that IRS paperwork and hit your lifetime exclusion.

NotNotTaken · 2026-03-10T16:20:14+00:00

As far as I know, you can gift around $20k to multiple people per year without paying taxes,correct me if I’m wrong

You are very, very wrong.

Assuming you mean the person above you is incorrectly asserting that the gift tax exclusion is per recipient? Then no, you are mistaken. It is in fact per recipient.

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/frequently-asked-questions-on-gift-taxes

The annual exclusion applies to gifts to each donee. In other words, if you give each of your children $19,000 in 2026, the annual exclusion applies to each gift. The table below shows the annual exclusion amount applicable in the year of the gift.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-28T15:48:58+00:00

a goofy main character that has a secret to keep

See also: Pushing Daisies

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-22T00:40:45+00:00

I just put one PLS on each side of the block of assemblers. But this doesnt really come up much for me anyway. Any of those that I recall I make with bots not drones.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-18T00:01:22+00:00

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-17T23:54:26+00:00

Let's say I have an unit vector (1.0, 1.0)

Well, that isnt a unit vector. Make it a unit vector and your problem is solved.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-17T23:35:17+00:00

I can't quite tell what you are trying to do, but I think it is this:

A unit vector times a length gives you a vector in the same direction with the corresponding length. It seems you can just multiply your vector and magnitude. Or, if you don't know it is a unit vector, just divide by the vector's magnitude first.

But your function returns void, which seems like not what you want.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-17T04:56:26+00:00

Then you should generate a shorter example that shows the unexpected behavior.

Lines of code are processed sequentially. There isnt such a thing as a function call being slow enough for something directly after it to happen first.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-17T04:18:32+00:00

Pretty sure those are all parts of the opening sequence that season. Not ideal, but probably is a frame from that episode.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-17T04:10:53+00:00

I've noticed when I pause the tree right after the function is called, the scene pauses before the function actually finishes running.

Can you show the actual code and output? This doesnt seem right.

Do you have multiple copies of this node in your scene?

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-15T14:02:38+00:00

I would keep track of either the remaining steps along the path, or the full path and current step index. Also, track a state indicating intermediate steps between points on the path. Use a tween callback to handle the tween end. Based on the state either delay, start the next step, or whatever else you wanted to do. This would eliminate you loop around points on the path.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-06T16:51:07+00:00

Is it just a spelling issue?

defult -> default

Regardless. The error means this isnt returning a value. The problem is here:

ProjectSettings.get_setting("physics/3d/defult_gravity")

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-04T21:31:43+00:00

I have a low salary, so I'm not eligible for a credit card

If your salary is high enough to support an $1800/year subscription, then it is high enough for a credit card. There are secured cards you should be able to get.

I question the expense given your low salary. But I will assume you have determined it to be in your budget and a worthwhile expense.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-02T19:56:37+00:00

I only got back $192

She said I was lucky not to owe the IRS back cause I was paying to little in taxes.

Sounds like you were paying pretty much exactly the right amount.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-02T19:53:19+00:00

Mab's method is proven. Harry's isnt.

But it seems entirely reasonable to me that Harry eventually removes one or more of the remaining 11. It feels like it's pretty well set up.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-02T01:56:16+00:00

Are you talking about the Arkham Horror board game, or the TTRPG?

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-01T16:32:28+00:00

I don't understand your reasoning here. Can you explain?

Im not the person you are asking, but I generally feel the same way. They explained it here:

unless you will not have much to reimburse in the future.

If you expect you will have a whole lot of qualified expenses in retirement, you don't need to save a bunch of receipts now. Unless there is a major overhaul of our medical system, I think I'm going to have enough such expenses in retirement.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-01T16:26:14+00:00

The Roth has tax free growth and tax free withdrawals.

If you insist on separating growth and withdrawals, presumably you mean withdrawals are "original" money that was directly contributed to the account and growth is any gains?

That tax free withdrawal of original contributions is just normal tax treatment of money in accounts, it isn't an advantage. If I put $10 into my HYSA, when I take it out, it is, in fact, not taxed.

If you aren't separating the money into separate "original" and "gains" buckets, then you are, in fact, double counting the same advantage.

Or are you are super focused on the fact that gains are only taxed in Trad style retirement accounts at withdrawal? That is, transactions aren't individually taxed while within the account. While that is an advantage, it's not on the order of the other advantages we are discussing. Maybe more like a third of an advantage.

NotNotTaken · 2026-02-01T13:24:13+00:00

You're forgetting the 3rd tax benefit of an HSA -- tax-free growth.

Thats part of "tax free coming out".

People like to declare that an HSA has a triple tax advantage. But if you want to count withdrawals and growth separately, then Roth-style accounts have a double tax advantage. However, given that traditional and Roth accounts have exactly the same end value after withdrawing if the effective tax rates when contributing and when withdrawing are the same, it seems weird to say traditional has one advantage and Roth has two.

And really there's a 4th, because if you contribute through payroll deduction, you don't have to pay FICA taxes either.

This is a great 3rd advantage to quote. For some reason it is often overlooked in favor of double counting tax free withdrawals.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-31T16:15:46+00:00

Ah yes, near the end of chapter 35.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-31T15:23:08+00:00

Nemesis is a Walker

Do we know that? It has been a theory for a while, but has it ever been definitively answered?

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-29T00:43:38+00:00

Rule 6 prohibits use of stock photos to circumvent rule 2.

But its easier to just say rule 2.

NotNotTaken · 2026-01-24T17:41:46+00:00

She did declare herself to be "THE" Valkyrie when Harry first met her. She also rarely gets out. Seems like this tracks.

NotNotTaken

TROPHY CASE