To be fair, about that women’s world cup team, if i recall correctly it was a PR move to play an exhibition match with those kids and they were not trying very hard to win. I don’t think they would truly lose to U-15 if it was, for example, a tournament.

Your overall point has merit but i think that specific example gets overused a bit.

One of the finer points of something new is getting in at the right time. I have to imagine if you’re a streamer and you force yourself to stay on your old game “for the fans,” you could miss out on the shiny new thing that people care about. This could literally cost them money that they need for rent. I am confident that many streamers are not highly paid and depend on this income.

Don’t forget, fans are fickle, corporations are fickle, everyone is fickle. I don’t think any employee of a company should be loyal to that company if it is to their own detriment as that company will let their employees go if it needs to (better companies try harder, worse companies make worse decisions).

I don’t see why a streamer should treat their career differently. Do what you think is best for you. Streamers don’t owe me, the fan, and it doesn’t do me any good for them to force themselves to play a game they’re less interested in just to appease me.

Compared to the other Uber wealthy, he at least seems to have some sort of a code of ethics from what i can see, which is obviously limited. He’s still in it to make money (obviously), but his actions seem to suggest that he won’t go to the extreme of hurting everyone else just for money.

I started liking Mark more when he opened cost plus drugs. It’s a pretty decent endeavor to try to reduce pharmaceutical costs for the consumer

If you travel, you’ll find very interesting combinations of flavors. As a few modest examples, I recently came upon paprika flavored and cheese and onion flavored Pringles, and awhile back i had sake flavored kit kats.

Travel more! Plenty of flavor experimentation going on

I think the joke is that a dominatrix is meant to, well, dominate their client (sexually). Think like with whips and chains, for example. Unfortunately, everything in her house, even the ficus, dominates her. It’s a bad first impression and she appears to be unfit for the role.

Looks like a Milchkaffee, which is kinda like a cafe au lait

I feel like the wealthy people you see are the ones who either get excitement from flaunting it or from lying about it (for example, mtv cribs was all fake). There are plenty of stories (yes i know they’re just stories) about multi millionaires who drive the same old truck, wear regular blue jeans, and have a nice quiet (albeit larger than average) home.

It’s not crazy at all. I just think we see the outliers more frequently than not because they want us to see them.

I don’t think this is a particularly fair take. Some people bought at high prices because it seemed like the right move (in 2008, for example), market crashes, you’re stuck with your investment even if you’re underwater (upside down).

It’s definitely not fair to assume what his costs are compared to the cost to rent. It isn’t necessary to have the example above to reside in an area where mortgages far exceed rent. Northern Virginia in the USA is a good example, where townhomes can easily exceed 1 million USD, which would typically require a 30-50k+ down payment plus closing costs, and would then be 5k+ in a mortgage. Rent that place for 4500 and that’s a loss on monthly costs, but of course the landlord is earning long term equity (and that is the value, but they may not be turning a profit).

Edit: I’m simply stating that it’s unfair to assume the original commenter is lying about not making a profit. I’m not suggesting they aren’t experiencing a net gain in equity.

Oof I’ll be on the lookout for that, thanks for the explanation without too much spoiler. I really haven’t been fond of combat for the last several final fantasy iterations, but i have some hope that XVI at least delivers on story.

Totally understand, and that makes sense, and i can appreciate the clarification and sentiment. I’m just starting XVI and the story is interesting, though the combat is not what i typically look for in a final fantasy game. I guess we’ll see how it progresses…

I appreciate that point of view, and I’ll probably give it a go eventually. Interesting that it’s more of a reimagining. To be fair, remake was free on my ps5, but I’ll still wait until they’re all available. I might try it when the final two are on sale

This is a really weird and unnecessarily aggressive take. I think that the other person is saying is that the communication about the games has been pretty poor, and it really isn’t clear what the right move is. Other games make a lot more sense in both continuity and playing order. I’m not sure why that’s such a difficult concept to grasp.

For example , FF7 remake isn’t actually a remake. It’s only the first act of ff7. Rebirth is somehow act 2? I don’t understand why. Some people seem to think rebirth is DLC instead of part 2 and a standalone game at that.

I’m personally an og ff7 purist, and I’m rather annoyed that they split this up into multiple games. I’ll just wait until all 3 are released and then… admittedly probably not play them unless they go on sale

I’m not entirely sure this is a fair take. Although i can understand where you’re coming from, i think it’s reasonable to consider that a decent number teachers (although certainly not all) are both passionate about their profession and also underpaid. This almost forces teachers to have a second job (side hustle) to enable them to continue teaching. The teacher in the article chose a less socially acceptable side hustle, but not an illegal one, and once found out, her employer activated a morality clause to fire her.

From a purely monetary standpoint, she’s probably fine (assuming she continues her other job), but I’m not sure it’s reasonable to say that money is the only thing she cares about. Being fired from her (probable) passion of teaching sucks.

Also, being unemployed sucks. It isn’t really about being bored so much as not feeling like you’re part of society. And for many, of course, it’s a financial hardship, but it can definitely be mentally taxing when feel like you don’t have a meaningful role in life or your community.

There is also added social connotation. For example, meeting people, you often ask what you do. “I’m a teacher” will elicit significantly different responses than “i used to be a teacher” or “I’m an onlyfans model.” Whether or not any of us agree that it’s “ok” has no bearing on her future interactions and life. Labels like these matter to a lot of people, so i could definitely see how this would be mentally and emotionally taxing.

Yeah man i don’t think you’re following me at all. I’ll give my bottom line up front: I’m not criticizing food culture in the US, I’m retelling the perspective about American food identity that was reflected in the docuseries. I agree that there is a wide diversity of good food in the US. That’s not the discussion here.

I’m completely aware that foreign cuisine in the USA is culinarily distinct from their home countries. Legitimate Chinese restaurants don’t serve general tsos chicken, and legitimate Mexican restaurants don’t serve tex mex.

But they’re also not identifiably “American cuisine.” Your additional point doesn’t seem relevant. New imported items? So like how tomatoes are ubiquitous in italian cuisine but come from the new world? I’m not sure what the messaging is here.

I understand there are regional differences. Not arguing that point either. It’s also not MY point at all, i was, again, retelling the point in the episode of the documentary chef’s table that i found very interesting. Besides, most regional differences are a specific dish (philly cheese steak, chicago style pizza, etc). Those aren’t entire cuisines, they’re a single dish. I don’t think chili in and of itself defines an entire culinary experience, even though various regions of the US are extremely particular about what even constitutes chili.

Speaking of regional differences, look at india for an example. It’s 1/3 the size of the US, but has multiple identifiable regional cuisines, while also having an overall “indian” cuisine. Goa in particular has a pretty distinct cuisine compared to northern India. But we’re not discussing chinese food or Mexican food in india, because that’s not really relevant.

Respectfully, i believe i understand your point, but you’re not understanding mine. I like to think that i understand food culture better than the credit you’re giving me. I am in no way suggesting that the US has no food culture. I’m trying to state that the documentary episode made has a chef who shared the perspective that there’s no such thing as authentic “American” cuisine.

Hope you have a great day.

Right, but that was the point of the episode of the documentary. At a basic level, American cuisine is based on plentiful food sources, and we get things like burgers and hotdogs. I recommend watching it, it was quite interesting. I’m not trying to suggest that this is the only explanation, but it was an interesting theory nonetheless.

Sure, some regions have some variety (as you mention, a casserole). Size is a factor, but similarly maybe countries have some form of culinary identity (russian, chinese, brazilian). They have sub cultures as well. I’m not well versed in them, to be honest, but i know they exist.

It was an interesting point that i found to be somewhat profound especially as i explored other cuisines, which are typically developed during hardship.

Yeah that’s fair, but in some ways other young countries have their own distinctive cuisines that are popular, such as Mexico and Peru. Additionally, i don’t think the blend of other cultures is really the problem in having an identity. Other countries have plenty of immigrant populations, but they still have their own identity. For example, turkish doner is huge in Germany, but German cuisine is very much its own thing. Then you can even dial it in even further, looking at bavarian, franconian, swabian, etc.

I don’t think i made my point clearly enough. I get that there are regionally distinct cuisines such as cajun cuisine, but my point was that this occurs even in smaller countries and locations such as the UK, which has numerous culinarily distinct cultures despite being a fraction of the size of the US. I’m not sure why you’re completely ignoring my point there. I’m also not sure how highlighting Americanized versions of other cuisines is relevant at all. I understand that other cuisines coexist inside of the US, but they are not actually US cuisines. Are you suggesting that Mexican food existing in California or the midwest is one possible definition of US cuisine? Because this actually feeds into the point that American cuisine doesn’t really have its own distinction.

I’ll try using Germany as an example. German food has an identity, wurst, schnitzel, etc. sometimes it’s borrowed (wiener schnitzel from vienna), sometimes its distinctly German. But Germany also has various regions with their own distinctive cuisines (former independent states like bavaria, swabia, franconia, hesse, etc each with their own cuisine). This would be like cajun is in the US. On top of that, there’s plenty of transplant cuisines, such as Turkish doner which is quite popular. This would be like mexican food in California. Yet, german cuisine is still able to stand out as its own thing.

I also completely disagree, North African cuisine as an example absolutely has some level of shared culture. Sure, Morocco and Libya have different cuisines for example, but they sit on the southern Mediterranean and share spices, vegetables, etc, and have a shared history.

I understand that I’m not a food expert and I’m citing a documentary about food experts that was interesting. I’m not certain why this feels like an attack. Additionally, that doesn’t mean it’s my only source of information.

I typically don’t watch documentaries, and I watched the entire series. It’s pretty well done!

Each episode follows one world renowned chef and their personal history, their food journey, their take on food in general, and where they are now. The first episode was an Italian chef who tried to bring home cooking to restaurants in Italy and was met with backlash by the community (you can’t monetize Mom’s home cooking). The second one was about a highly regarded chef who moved to Argentina to cook for a remote village and that’s pretty much it (as far as i recall) because it was way less stressful cooking a whole pig underground than running a 3 Michelin star French restaurant.

Fascinating stuff.

I think they would identify as more as their own regional cuisine, as opposed to being a part of some larger US identity. I think this would be similar to understanding of french or italian cuisine, but then if you dig into specific regions you’ll get “tuscan” as opposed to prototypical “italian.” That nuance for “US cuisine” is not as well defined because it doesn’t exist in the same way, even though regional cuisines are totally distinct in their own way.

I used the UK as an example because they have distinct regional cuisines like Cornish, Welsh, Scottish, Yorkshire, etc, even though it is geographically quite small. To me, that defies the logic that the US can’t have a more distinct food identity but then also coexist with various subcultures across a larger geographic area.

Lol fair. Though I don’t mean to suggest that there is no hardship anywhere in the US (i think that’s why chicken wings became popular), but across the board, food has historically been more easily accessible in the US than most nations than pre existed it. Sure there are some regional delicacies, but no true US cuisine. I’m sure that could be partially explained by the geographic size as well, but there are some distinct differences in UK cuisine even though those cultures are significantly closer.