Those are not 100 btw.

As your article says, they understood them. How could they make toys with them otherwise?

They obviously understood the wheel, engine would be a better comparison. You are correct otherwise.

Honestly I could say that about a large portion of all card, but people buy them. That is really not a good argument against them. Better focus on all the actual shit instead, like… how they can’t do what the vehicle type is supposed to be for.

Who cares about rottentomatoes? Especially the “critic” number?

Yes and the eagles are bitches for coming in so late. But seriously, it is fine.

Would have been perfectly sensible both in terms of saving the world and because of what a bitch he was.

Why would you put it in "? Do you think those are not going to be really and/or multiple?

We are talking about a monthly average upload of something like 100 Mbit/s, which of worth about constantly streaming 2 movies at 50 G. The peaks during prime time are multiples of that, realistically exceeding 1 GB/s, since most people stream evening/night. Then he would need to be streaming tons of movies, making him a prime target for a big lawsuit. Instead, if he just downloads and seeds some files, you get a near constant throughput. Linux, Tor node, or some mixture of all of that. But not a streaming service for a dozens of people.

Downloading tons of content. Seems more likely than being a central streaming hub for tons of people for multiple reasons.

So how much traffic do you generate?

40 TiB per month are 1.3 TiB daily. Even at 10 GiB per movie that’s 100 movies every single day. I doubt that is the reason.

The concept of cleaning things also saves a ton of money compared to throwing things away.

Ruby etc. is dirt cheap?

Wrong sub.

Why are you in a online community if you want to be alone?

They absolutely do not need to worry about food and housing. The sample size of these people is gigantic and it simply has nothing to do with it.

Those 2 have not much to do with it, since there are hundreds of millions on people that have neither of those problems in the EU and USA alone and they still age just fine.

Picture or it didn’t happen.

You say no, but what you then say seems to agree with what I say: A massive person could have a big bag far larger than what is allowed now and vice versa with a small person.

But now it seems to revolve around the “carry” part, you think that this is specifically about carrying something, as “without touching the ground”. Since carry has more meanings than this very specific one, that is where you are incorrect. Have a look here.

So it is not actually about the bag or it’s size or weight, it is about the relative weight of the bag to the persons strength? Massive guy: big and heavy bag. Tiny woman: small and light bag. Correct?