Commander Abe Sapien's dialog early on is pretty rough. His character is entirely ruined by the forced tension with Michael.
I wish there was like a Season 0 where I could learn to care about the characters before the events of Season 1. I feel like it is taking me on a journey the characters havent earned.
You can literally see they have Terminal installed in the screenshot. It may not be default but it is certainly on that computer. But a web search is far more important than a program installed on the computer.
My biggest issue is I just dont like any of the characters and I wouldn't want to be on that ship. That to me is the biggest flaw of Discovery.
Every other Star Trek I can imagine it being so cool to get to be there. Discovery would be awful. Being around that crew sounds awful and exhausting.
I tried watching it and got to what I was told was a peak episode in S1E7 and it was still awful and seemed like it would be awful. No charm. I compare it to other episodes in sci fi like it and it has nearly 0 fun and the fun it had was dark and creepy.
They didn't bother maintaining water quality for the 35 years they knew it was a problem. Then when a company they were willing to sue got involved in the water cycle they decided it was worth testing.
I did some Linux gaming during COVID and recently swapped my HTPC to Linux (Bazzite/Deck) for a console style setup in the living room. Massively improved now over my previous experience.
The game I was playing heavily this last weekend (Wildmender) absolutely runs better in Proton on Linux than it did on Windows. Less crashes, less stutters, faster load time. I assume it is due to preRendered shaders? Honestly not really sure but it is nice.
Going to do some Enshrouded on it next which is a game absolutely not at all optimized for Linux, so far it seems to be working fine but I've not gotten to that late game CPU intensity of loading areas heavily modified.
When one divorced parent gets their toddler prescribed Adderall without the other parent being informed. AAP recommends against it for ages 3 (not 2 but 3) to 5 but it is allowed.
I'm not saying I even have an opinion on this, but I do think if someone said they think 3 is too young to take Adderall I think that doesn't automatically tell me they are anti medicine or a bad person.
What does minorities have to do with this?
Armenian's were a majority. The Fur people of Darfur are a majority in their region. Palestinians are a majority.
Genocide is a method often used in converting a majority to a minority.
I agree with your endpoint that those people don't care, but I think if you told someone like that that they don't care about minorities I think you would be confirming their thoughts not convincing them away from it.
Because I don't think a 2 year old should be given Adderall without a parent knowing?
I personally am pretty open minded about these things, I was able to get birth control with my partner when I was 15 without her Catholic parents knowing. That was very important, but I recognize that if we were 10 it maybe becomes a different conversation involving parents.
You might say a parent could be included but you also have cases of divorced parents where one parent is for and another is against and there is a question of if the childs opinions are theirs or their parents. What age should the child be able to make the call? 15? 10? 5?
You've got a bunch of nutjobs that will turn that phrasing into a white genocide conversation is the problem.
The second part of that is that genocide is a subjective term due to classification of ethnic groups being subjective.
Honestly this well encapsulates the problem I tend to have aligning on goals with other progressives and some liberals. Every time folks try to simplify something as complex as genocide down to a yes or no question it means they are already invalidating the majority of positions and forcing a conversation of agree with me or call me wrong. That isn't how it works, that isn't how discussion and debate work. Forcing people into Yes/No thinking doesn't lead to progress, asking for people to think critically does.
The reasonable debate is at what age is that allowed. I do not think that has an easy answer other than legal age of majority for the country you are a citizen of. I think that the problem is there are harder answers than that worth seriously considering.
I can't imagine thinking any medical procedure has a simple answer, especially anything that permanently alters you.
Medical professionals are people, sometimes they make the right choice, sometimes the wrong choice. There are people who shop for the wrong answer, and also people who get the wrong answer and live in suffering. It is important to question things and have a discourse.
If my 16 year old came to me and asked to have their hearing removed as a solution to their mispohonia and that their therapist agrees and they found a surgeon... I don't think I could just jump on board with that call.
They will make a really good series that well serves a niche DC property and then end season 2 on a cliffhanger and cancel it.