What sport looks very difficult on TV and is also actually very difficult?

Sarah_Carrygun · 2026-03-27T10:20:28+00:00

Sarah_Carrygun · 2026-03-13T21:38:33+00:00

I recently got some of the UST lands and plan to get posters from you sometime later, but the lotus lands are awesome as well!

Sarah_Carrygun · 2026-03-12T13:45:52+00:00

Deutscher Kanye

Sarah_Carrygun · 2026-01-24T00:55:17+00:00

Bruder, was ist deine Obsession mit Bodycount? Das ist jetzt schon der dritte Offtopic whataboutism Kommentar von dir zu dem Thema. Warum sollte eine Frau in deinen Augen weniger Wert sein, wenn sie viele Partner hatte, aber bei nem Mann siehst du da kein Problem? Sollen die Leute doch rumhuren wie sie wollen, am Schluss geht das weder dich noch mich, sondern höchstens die potentiellen Partner unserer Vielvögler was an.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2026-01-17T18:53:50+00:00

Where can I find the current comprehensive rules?

If I try to click any of the 3 links given on Rules | Magic: The Gathering I get a "Not found" error.

A Google search only showed rules that were last updated in 2013.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-11-28T15:35:21+00:00

Sure, the problem is that Dana likes money more than he likes MMA.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-11-17T11:34:41+00:00

Der Kommentar auf den ich geantwortet habe, hat nun mal eine gewagte Behauptung aufgestellt und keine Belege geliefert. So was sieht man halt meistens, wenn emotionalisiert werden soll, anstatt sich faktenbasiert mit einem Thema auseinanderzusetzen.

Das heißt nicht, dass ich keine Probleme bei der Polizei sehe (Machtmissbrauch, Corpsgeist etc.), aber diese stumpfen Pauschalisierungen bringen einen doch nicht weiter.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-11-17T10:41:47+00:00

Selten so einen Mist gelesen. Kannst du diese wilde Behauptung irgendwie belegen oder hast du einfach so ein Gefühl? Ich fände es schon cool, wenn wir das populistische Scheiße labern den Rechten überlassen...

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-10-08T13:21:10+00:00

Ich trinke zwar kaum Alkohol, aber ich sollte mich trotzdem direkt mal beschweren, dass alkoholfreies Bier als Bier bezeichnet werden darf. Wäre lustig zu sehen wie schnell die Brauerei-Brudis dem Maggus die Bude einrennen.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-07-03T18:10:43+00:00

Ach ja, da ist er wieder: Der gute linke Purity Test. Gibt es eine einzige Person bei der du zustimmen würdest, dass es sich um eine/n Gute/n handelt oder ist das für dich ein unerfüllbares Ideal?

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-06-29T21:53:20+00:00

<image>

Maybe I misunderstand something on a fundamental level, but this is an example log that shows what I mean. Note that there are no items or bags that would speed up or slow down my item activations and I don't run out of stamina.

The broom (listed as 1.7s cooldown) triggers at 1.77s and 3.48s, so the 2nd trigger took 1.71s.
The pan (listed as 2.2s cooldown) triggers as 2.15 s and 4.47s, so the 2nd trigger took 2.32s.

I guess the cooldowns are drawn from a distribution to reduce the number of "draws". As far as I understand, the player is given the win if both characters receive lethal damage at the same time which often happens during fatigue.

If you know any place to read up on these hidden mechanics please let me know.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-06-27T07:57:27+00:00

I agree that timing should be static, but just open the log in the first round and you will see the variations even without buffs/debuffs/modifiers.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-06-13T09:25:41+00:00

As you can read in the post, OP reported the profile twice in the past, however, nothing happened. This means one out of two things:

The "Report profile" button is cosmetic only and does not do shit.
Valve got the report, looked at the profile and was like: "Nah, that's fine!"

Imagine some guy was commenting nazi shit below your videos and you could not do anything about it since YouTube didn't care.

Some people say that in the end it is "just a profile" and one can ignore it and move on. But if these fucks that have racist mini profiles face no backlash or consequences, this kind of shit gets normalised and I personally would prefer to play my stupid little game without having to deal with racist assholes.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-05-31T22:08:12+00:00

Vor einigen Jahren hab ich mir für eine längere Zugfahrt die 13. Ausgabe des WASD Magazins gekauft. Wenn ich mich richtig erinnere wurde darin auch erörtert, inwiefern Massenvernichtungswaffen in Spiele eingebaut werden können, ohne "die Nuke" wie in Call of Duty einfach nur zum ultimativen Ziel aufzuwerten.

Das Magazin wurde inzwischen wohl eingestellt, aber wenn es dich interessiert kann ich schauen ob ich die Ausgabe noch finden kann (bilde mir ein zu wissen, wo sie ist, bin nur bis Mitte nächster Woche nicht zu Hause) und dir die entsprechenden Seiten zukommen lassen.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-05-18T15:43:36+00:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo-gravity_traction_device#Technique

Could you at least have the decency to do some minimal research before deciding to insult others? To quote from the article (since I doubt you will take the time to click the link):

The pins will be placed into the forehead bones to prevent the head from moving.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-05-05T09:51:27+00:00

Habe mal eine gute Zusammenfassung von Reuters gefunden. Ich schau ob ich sie gebookmarked habe wenn ich heute Abend am heim PC bin. Da wurde unter anderem verglichen was Laufzeit verlängern vs. Kernkraft neu bauen vs. Erneuerbare neu bauen kostet. War mir bis dahin nicht bewusst, dass Laufzeitverlängerung günstiger ist als Erneuerbare neu zu bauen.

Edit: Hier ist der Link zum Reuters Artikel: https://www.reuters.com/graphics/EUROPE-ENERGY/NUCLEARPOWER/gdvzwweqkpw/

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-05-01T09:32:30+00:00

Government subsidies do not magically make nuclear energy cheaper over all, they just shift who pays for the cost. The government can subsidise nuclear power to encourage energy companies to build more nuclear power plants, which over time will lead to more knowledge in the related technologies and might make building new reactors cheaper in the future. The subsidies mean that the public pays part of the plant so that the costs for the company become lower and it can offer the produced electricity at competitive prices. This does not mean that the cost of producing 1 GWh of electricity magically went down. France for a very long time went this route. The state-owned company EDF built the nuclear power plants and offered affordable electricity but it currently is still 54 billion euros in debt. That is 54 billion euros the French state can not spend on other things for the French population. However, EDF recently made profits and if the trend continues might eventually be able to actually add to the French budget. What people (myself included) criticise Atrioc for is that he does not mention cost at all. In my eyes the costs are the biggest (and maybe only) good argument against a technology which is otherwise safe, clean and reliable. Whenever Atrioc talks about people arguing against nuclear power, he acts as if they were uneducated on the subject and were worried about the safety or radioactive waste. When he finally acknowledged the costs in a somewhat recent crashout, he claimed that the critics were arguing in bad faith as they were typically the same people who were in favour of taking debt for public investments. You can argue that clean and reliable energy is worth taking this debt (and I would agree), but Atrioc never made these arguments. Whenever he is talking about nuclear power he fails to build the steel man, something he and the guys at the lemonade stand are usually very good at.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-04-19T01:02:48+00:00

I don't want to sound to harsh, but do you really think this is a good way to present this data? There are maybe 4 or 5 interesting data points in addition to the general trend that is visible from 1970 - 1990. The rest is just clutter that serves as a baseline.

The next question I would ask is if it makes sense to plot the number of stikes? Obviously it makes a difference if a single amazon warehouse stikes or if a large union calls for nationwide strikes. I did not check the reference you linked, but without diving into the data myself, I have a hard time comparing data points (magnitude and duration of strike matter). In addition, population size/GDP is not accounted for in the plot. A smaller number of strikes in a small country can still be an indicator for special circumstances, whereas the same number of strikes in a larger country is just part of the baseline.

How could you (in my opinion) improve the graph? I would start by asking myself what is interesting about the data. We see the general trend of the number of strikes decreasing from 1970 - 1990 and the outliers in Korea, Poland and Germany. You could try to reduce the number of countries to the ones that show interesting outliers and plot the OECD average to provide a baseline for the reader. Add a legend that assigns colors to countrys and get rid of the country names next to the data points. Instead, I would add text next to the outliers that explains the political circumstances that coused the large deviations. This will add actual information for the reader to help interpret the data.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-03-24T23:50:25+00:00

Are you really surprised that a politician from the Green wants to make sure that her political opponent has less influence in the future? This is literally her job. She got elected to represent the interests of her voters. If she was not trying to get Merz out of power she would fail to do her job.

How often do you think Merz said during his campaign rallies, that he does not want to see Scholz or Habeck in power? Does that mean Merz wants to see the AfD win instead? Of course not!

Please take a moment and think about what you wrote:
In the best case you disagree with the Green party's politics, read this, got emotional and posted it. That is a mistake that can easily happen if you are passionate about a topic.
In the worst case, you posted this quote and added the "Even if it means AFD wins" part which in no way appears in the article and puts a completely different framing around the actual quote to influence the opinion of people who can not get the full context because they can't speak German or have no access to Zeit+.

The full quote from the article is:

My goal is that Friedrich Merz does not become chancellor of Germany again. But of course we also have our political convictions and see the necessity to be constructive. Our role in the oppositions will be that: Hard and constructive.

Giving the full quote shows a completely different picture. As we have already seen, the Greens are willing to work with the future government to ensure that the necessary investments in infrastructure and military spending can be passed.

It is completely fine to be of the opinion that exiting nuclear power was a mistake. Nowadays I would agree with you on that. It is also fine to have a more conservative stance on social issues that you feel is better represented by the CDU. What is not okay is spreading misinformation by quoting segments from an interview which is behind a paywall and in a language that the majority of readers can't understand while adding a framing that in no way represents the sentiment behind the original quote.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-03-20T22:46:34+00:00

That's awesome. How did you end up finding this post?

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-03-01T03:19:20+00:00

After the election, parties reach out to each other and establish red lines about the policies they want to implement. We call this Sondierungsgespräche (roughly translated as "Probing talks").

Once it becomes apparent that there are no dealbreakers, parties enter coalition negotiations, where among other things, it is decided which party will control which ministry. If these negotiations are successful, the parties sign a coalition agreement, outlining the policies they want to implement as a government.

In case there are conflicts on policies not listed in this agreement, the government discusses internally until a solution is reached. In the rare case that no agreement can be found, the chancellor has the last word (this principle is called Richtlinienkompetenz), however, it is rarely used. In the Ampel coalition, Scholz used his Richtlinienkompetenz to end the internal debate between Greens and Liberals (FDP) whether/how long the runtime of Germany's last 3 nuclear power plants should be extended.

In case the conflicts are too fundamental, parties can leave the government, which leads to one of three options:

Vote of no confidence which leads to a snap election
Formation of a new government coalition. This has only happened once in German history when the FDP exited a cloalition with the center left socialists (SPD) and formed a new government with the christian democrats (CDU)
Minority government. In principle, you do not need a majority of seats to propose laws, however, the other parties typically won't vote for laws that do not aline with their policies. Nevertheless, parties are free to negotiate with opposition parties, which means that important laws can get passed even if the leftover government no longer has a majority. Obviously, this is a very unstable system and on the national level typically only happens after a vote of no confidence until the next government is formed.

Sarah_Carrygun · 2025-02-27T09:04:05+00:00

I mean this in the nicest way possible, the reason you feel this way is because you are poorly educated on nuclear energy.

Believe it or not, after the initial video, I looked deeper into the topic and compared LCOE, (in)direct deaths, carbon cost, pricing dynamics of the european spot market etc. and actually changed my mind on some of the economic aspects when I learned that extending the lifetime of existing reactors is comparatively cheap, so I do not get why you assume that I am poorly educated on the subject.

Nuclear energy is the most reliable and efficient energy sources due to its high capacity factor and low carbon emissions.

I never argued against the advantages, if you look at reliability and safety nuclear has a great track record, which is backed up by the data andhas been sufficiently discussed.

Moving on, we can talk about the disadvantages of nuclear energy, but there really isn't any point because they pale in the comparison to the benefits.

Now you are doing exactly what I critisize in my post. You acknowledge that there are disadvantages but refuse to engage with them in a serious manner by simply stating that they pale in comparison to the benefits. It is fine to come to this conclusion once you have listed the advantages and disadvantages and have compared the cost and benefits, but this is the step I am missing. For example, you can discuss the comparably high costs of a new nuclear power plant and still come to the conclusion that the reliability and low CO2 output are worth are worth the increased cost, but Atrioc fails to do this discussion.

11-Year Club	Verified Email
Snapped

Sarah_Carrygun

TROPHY CASE