ApatheticCactus

I was never really social to begin with, so I just resumed being my normal introverted self.

I have to do similar things when it comes to 'raytracing'. It meant one thing, and then a company comes along and calls something sorta similar the same thing, then everyone has these ideas of what it should be vs. what it actually is doing. Then later, a better version comes out that nearly matches the original term, but there's already a negative hype because it launched half baked and misnamed. Now they have to name the original thing something new new to market it because they destroyed the original name with a bad label and half baked product.

Even if it were thicker I'd still slap on a sacrificial glass screen protector atop it. I've dropped my phone only a handful of times, and so far have only ever broken the protector.

Just slap a shield on it, there's your added thickness and better drop resistance all in one!

That or build something that can stand up to being hit. Tall order, but the inner armchair engineer in me thinks it's like, totally possible.

No. Absolutely not. Lots of future tech comes from sci Fi fiction, which sometimes becomes real. Fiction about 'what if' scenarios give insight into how things could happen given certain events taking place, helping decision making for present events. Relationship books? I mean, those can be great examples of how healthy or unhealthy relationships work, and can help one identify the status of their own relationships. Fantasy books and sometimes a combination of the above, and all useful.

Nonfiction helps one understand what has happened. It gives context to the world we live in now, and what came before. Both are valuable, just in different ways. Reading anything helps your ability to empathize and think of alternative perspectives and is always useful.

Would creating the cyber truck be considered as a suicide attempt?

Generally speaking, you learn more about how something works when the core functionality is exposed to the user, and just janky enough to require fiddling with it and fixing things.

This is true of lots of things like cars, drones, 3D printers, and computers. If you get a really nice one, it just works and you don't have to figure anything out. A cheap one, or something you have to build yourself, makes you have to learn how it actually works to get it to run right.

Now that things are so comodified and simplified, they just work and really discourage tinkering, so people learn less about core functionality and how things actually work. Not always true, but a trend I've experienced.

I still get hit hard from just the trailer.

Leave no trace

Amnesia is one of my all-time favorite games. F.E.A.R. should have been scary, but all the scary parts were completely non lethal, so I just laughed and ran through them. Layers of Fear was similar in that a lot of the time it was creepy, but not lethal. It's kinda like checking if friendly fire is on or if fire damages the player. You need to set expectations in games or play with the player's ideas of what is and is not safe.

Odd aside, it's my test in a horror game to see if I should actually take threats seriously. If you see something creepy- can it kill you? Some games it's just creepy stuff that can only scare you- but if it can't hurt you then no big deal and loses all risk and threat.

39 here and still playing. The worst part is STILL having a huge backlog of steam games to work through.