Looking at the world rn, I dont think things have a tendency to get better on their own
This is called a recency bias (I think lol) - you're looking at the world rn and assuming its trends must continue. When you look at history you see that there are ebbs and flows, and that stasis is rare. If you focus on certain things, you may certainly decide we're in a downtrend. There will always be an uptrend afterward. And vice versa
Yeah I'm not subscribing to a whole service just so I can watch 3/4 of my team's games and no others. I want a service I can subscribe to and see all my team's games, and preferably all the games in one league. If it was multi-league that would be great, but I'd rather subscribe to one league at a time than subscribe to all leagues with randomly blacked out games.
Until then - and I know it's unlikely to ever happen - I won't be spending money on watching sports on tv
I always call it Magic Math. There's so much of it when you start learning about investing/trading. "Buying calls has infinite potential for gains. Selling calls has infinite potential for losses." Like, yeah, that's mathematically true. But at the end of the day it's not practically true, you're just putting a lot of weight on what you could be getting instead of what you are getting.
I went to my Dad and told him I'm stuck in a non-linear perception of time.
And he said "Hi stuck in a non-linear perception of time, I'm Dad."
Spock and Chewbacca is an interaction I never knew I wanted. Or Data
It's interesting that people try to explain this away with all kinds of retroactive in-universe technobabble. I mean, I enjoy Star Wars just as much as the next guy but it's abundantly clear that SW wasn't meant to be investigated at this level. It's space mythology, not hard science fiction. And that's fine! We can have fun asking things like "Why is the Outer Rim considered a backwater if it only takes a few hours to get from galactic center to the rim?" and we don't really have to stress about answers to those things as fans. Edit: Or we can if that's what fans enjoy doing, but it just isn't my thing and I think that's ok too
Who would win, a B-17 Flying Fortress with no bombs, or the USS Missouri?
Edit: Also the Missouri can fly too, but it's a little less maneuverable, usually
The Millennium Falcon would destroy the Enterprise somehow. Then Kirk and crew would be stranded on a planet until they find a way to get aboard and commandeer the Falcon. Ultimately they would use it to go back in time and save the whales or something
No no, I think he said "it's my-SSN-is-58385747 biased, friend who lives at 2747 Maple Street"
They did surgery on a grape
Yeah, it happens on both sides, it's an arms race. It will swing the other way eventually - it always has and always will
That was intentional. There's no estimating a timeline, but with the development of technology it's not unreasonable to expect a reversal even in a decade. Anyway, if you're trying to ward off doomerism you're not going to do it by only looking at what you stand to gain