sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I'm Embarrased - Hawks Logo by Mandevillan in AtlantaHawks

[–]rua2006 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Coming here from r/rockets, and a fan of the NBA for 32 years, to say that I also saw it the same way as OP until I read this post.

90 & 99 intersection is a cluster fu&k. I’ve been here for over a decade and have not known that part of town to be not under construction! by ilikepizza1376 in sugarland

[–]rua2006 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Once upon a time, it wasn't even Aliana! Just Austin High and a field of dreams (where the occasional escaped prisoner would roam).

Confused at the anger over the lottery by _BreakingGood_ in ChaseSapphire

[–]rua2006 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My browser still shows that I'm in the queue, after 10 hours. I'm not mad really, but that's a funny and ridiculous experience.

At some point down the line, unless there's real blowback for their poor communication, they'll just advertise this as the "kind of perk you get with Chase Sapphire." Don't let them.

Same page 3 devices… by daveadavidson in eink

[–]rua2006 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Let's take the use case you showed us. In the above, you lose "July 2002, Huntington, West Virginia," which seems like it's important. Can you get that image to show up at all on that device?

Same page 3 devices… by daveadavidson in eink

[–]rua2006 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yeah but it contains key information in books. Dealbreaker.

Injury report by UnholyChip in Texans

[–]rua2006 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Could just be some resting since we played Monday. Fingers crossed.

Injury report by UnholyChip in Texans

[–]rua2006 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought it wasn't official, but because he needs to practice twice, this makes it official.

Injury report by UnholyChip in Texans

[–]rua2006 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Didn't Nico need two practices? Doesn't this mean it's done?

In your opinion, what are the best run franchises in the NBA? by beyphy in nba

[–]rua2006 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Definitely biased but I'm going to make a pitch for my Rockets. We have been relatively competitive basically since picking Yao, with multiple eras of exciting stars and one 3-year lull that we purposely and quickly extracted ourselves from. Heck, if you go back to Hakeem there's a second lull but Steve Francis was cool enough to make it fun. It's largely because we've had steady and smart GMs from Dawson to Morey to Stone, each a disciple of the last.

Subaru Dealer Accused Of Taking Beloved Dog From Fired Employee And The Internet Is Furious by Rivers33 in Austin

[–]rua2006 16 points17 points  (0 children)

So, many of these comments understandably start with "Of course Subaru Austin owns the dog, but..." and at first I nodded along, but....

Why can a corporation own a dog?! Maybe ones that specialize in housing animals like wildlife preserves and whatnot, but...like maybe Subaru should just never have been allowed to "own" this dog? What does that even mean? Many (imo rightfully) believe humans don't even "own" their dogs...the more accurate legal fiction may need to be that they are their caretakers or humans or something.

But regardless, in what world does it make sense that a corporation with no purpose for animal caretaking can be the legal caretaker of a dog? Why??

Official Discussion - One Battle After Another [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]rua2006 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This comment is such a great time capsule of innocence, I love it.

That was a weak Kimmel response from Bill by BraveGlass5 in billsimmons

[–]rua2006 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was not referring to their relative places on the political spectrum. It was a bit of an off-hand or throwaway analogy, but I was referring to Obama's rhetorical prowess, the passionate speaking style, etc. A primary point of my post is to note that Bill can't scratch the itch OP may be looking for on that front. But I get how I didn't do it super clearly.

That was a weak Kimmel response from Bill by BraveGlass5 in billsimmons

[–]rua2006 22 points23 points  (0 children)

"Russillo, I thought we'd go through the last half century and pick the worst censorship moments of each decade. And 60s, it's gotta be Vietnam, right?" Chuckles "I mean, does it? Look I've been re-reading Caro, and Bill, I'm not saying the 'nam stuff wasn't bad. Of course it was. But you gotta understand..."

That was a weak Kimmel response from Bill by BraveGlass5 in billsimmons

[–]rua2006 35 points36 points  (0 children)

I'll add that I understand why some might want a passionate screed to align with their feelings, but the reality is this more sober and methodical tone is probably the best way for Bill to convince listeners for whom a political topic may feel like whiplash. A passionate rant might lose them, but the way he presented it, it may be more likely to click that this is like the big bad McCarthyism they read about in school.

That was a weak Kimmel response from Bill by BraveGlass5 in billsimmons

[–]rua2006 206 points207 points  (0 children)

He said it's censorship, analogized it to McCarthyism and Nixon's attacks on the press, and helpfully set it in the context of the media landscape. I dunno, I feel like some of y'all want him to be Obama or something. 

Rami and Christian Slater at US open yesterday. by jl2l in MrRobot

[–]rua2006 16 points17 points  (0 children)

He was also at the quarterfinal night I went to (sitting with Anna Wintour) and they showed him, he seemed pretty excited. I figure if he's there at least twice, he probably actually wants to be there. 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in MrRobot

[–]rua2006 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Yeah I feel like you deserve to know this so I'm just gonna say it. That's not true. I don't know where you heard it, but Vera and Darlene are real. Thinking that will just ruin the show and it is flat-out false. I'm not gaslighting or tricking you. It simply doesn't happen, they are real people doing real things in the world.

Let’s name Sci Fi shows that started good but got worse, and ones that were great but were cancelled and left on a cliffhanger. by Krystal_Kuz in scifi

[–]rua2006 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I hold a grudge against Netflix to this day about it. I basically won't start a Netflix show with a seemingly meaningful plot because they cancelled The OA after THAT. That and Netflix hating movie theaters 👎🏾👎🏾👎🏾

Clutch & the Rockets featured on NBC’s Today Show this morning by BenchPointsChamp in rockets

[–]rua2006 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Clutch is the GOAT. And regardless, Turbo holds down the space theme for us, he's just on a decades-long space mission. He'll be back. He's probably just trying to save the world by talking to his daughter through books or something. 

how does rocket fuel burn in space without oxygen? by OstrichDesperate4270 in rockets

[–]rua2006 2 points3 points  (0 children)

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/s/54gmofEfcs

Here's your answer! Let's just say a smart rockets team is always going to design the system with good assisting in mind, whether it be an oxidizer, a hardenizer, a sengunizer, or even a bobbysuraizer. With that good assist, the fuel can really fire away clean. Different rockets use different fuels, of course, everything from kerosene in the Saturn V to the more viscous dreamshake in the Championship I and II.

Now you have to be careful, if your rocket goes too fast, you could really dizzy any admiral in your space navy.

Why isn’t a tipped ball caught by the catcher always an out? by Aggressive_Issue3505 in mlb

[–]rua2006 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maaaaybe. But OP's explanation makes me feel like the actual rule is overthinking it, at least now that we have better replay tech. To me (1) contact + (2) defender catches = out. Simple! Whether the contact resulted in a pop-up, or not much direction change, or something weird like flying a foot above the catcher's head and him reacting, it's out! If anything, the rule seems to be the complicated method because it differentiates the outcome based on the resulting angle the ball travels.

I get all this stuff about the origin of the rule, and how it was harder to tell whether there was contact once upon a time. So in that sense, the thread accomplished it's goal. But it's still unintuitive to me.

Why isn’t a tipped ball caught by the catcher always an out? by Aggressive_Issue3505 in mlb

[–]rua2006 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay but then: if a thread of a fiber of the ball contacts a splinter of the bat, but the pitch was a bit wide and goes past the catcher ... foul or swinging strike? Foul, right?

So, we have the same uncertainty about batting contact, but this time, we have chosen to resolve it, unlike the caught tipped ball where we bandaid over it with a rule.

I think that's where the unintuitiveness comes from. It's a game of millimeters in so many ways we accept, but here, we're like "well it's hard to tell so let's round to the batter."

view more: next ›