Who says he was targeting that specific place? In fact, it seems likely that the target was his head and the shooter pulled the shot a bit but was still within tolerances (with a 1 MOA scope @ 200 yards you're only looking at 2" of variance).
I've killed deer beyond 200 yards sitting on a stump with a cheap rifle, it's not actually that hard if you've shot a bit before. The nerves though... you're right there, I couldn't imagine.
If the reporting is correct, the shot was at 200 yards. Anyone who hunts with a rifle is (or should be) capable of making that shot, it's not exceedingly far (and like you said, if your rifle isn't junk and you're shooting 1 MOA, that's only a 2" difference @ 200 yards).
No serious training or equipment would be required for this close of a shot. I've taken deer over 200 yards away with my $500 rifle, no training other than shooting on and off since I was a kid.
I believe the question was "what is the rate of food stamp program eligibility for warehouse workers, regardless of their employer". Which is an interesting question, are there statistics for this which are broken down by profession?
Your link shows that 1 in 8 Americans are on food stamps, which is interesting (and a surprise to me) but it's missing the point of the question above. What's the rate of workers on FS in any given warehouse across the country?
As a hunter, I have to disagree. Properly harvested deer, elk, and bear are all amazing, and I'd take any of the three over the lowest common denominator ground beef. Actual cheap ground beef is garbage.
I buy half a cow every year from local farmers, and I'd put my ground elk up against that ground beef any day (though I do have to add suet because elk is so lean). In fact, nobody that I serve elk to knows that it's elk until/unless I tell them.
If your wild game tastes bad, you messed up somewhere along the line. Get it cold as soon as possible, keep it clean, and the meat will be great.
I mean, do whatever the hell you want. I'll call you out as a hack for doing it, but if someone out there enjoys it then more power to them.
Personally I think that if Nintendo eschewed new games, and kept releasing the original Super Mario Brothers (a beloved game from almost four decades ago) bit-for-bit on other devices, maybe with better graphics, they'd be irrelevant idiots today. Sure, there's SOME market for that, but what's much cooler is making new stuff that holds up in the current year. Nostalgia is a powerful tool, but porting code from 30 years ago to my smart fridge with upgraded graphics is a poor use of it (this is barely hyperbole for the franchise, which says a lot).
That all being said, I know the Cyan offices haven't collapsed into rubble so they're still doing OK (though their workforce is TINY now, compared to 'back when'). And if that's what floats their boat, great. I'd rather suck start my shotgun than release the same software for 30 years (same as in verbatim, no less, someone else is porting it to modern stacks) but to each their own...
I know they made newer games, I played Obduction in person in their offices before it was released :)
But you're on the same page as me, there was a time and place for these FANTASTIC games, but that's in the past. And it feels kind of silly to watch them push the same games onto new platforms in a futile attempt to stay relevant (and cash the nostalgia checks, even when players end up NOT feeling the same things as the OG release).
Part of why I didn't like D2 again is exactly what you said, I'm not a teenager with endless time to spend online gaming. But another huge part is that I've been there and done that, and a nicer, newer version of that fun just doesn't hold a candle to the fun I had years ago when it was fresh. I'm saying the same holds true for Myst/Riven, release it on my smart fridge for all I care, it's not the same :D
You're completely right, and if the shoe was on the other foot I'd probably do the same. I'd be happy to be a one hit wonder if it paid the bills and let me keep on rocking in the free world.
But at the same time, Norman Greenbaum doesn't release a new version of Spirit in the Sky every few years expecting to get a pat on the head. In fact, that'd be an insane choice to make. Cyan is making their new albums, but they're also releasing Myst[club-remix].mp3 and Riven[feat-shiny-bs].mp3 on a regular schedule, and part of you has to wonder when it's ok to embrace the one hit and maybe quit beating the dead horse (apparently there's money in the horse, instead of organs and horse meat, so they CAN beat it but why?)
Fair point, and I sort of understand the nostalgia that's involved. A large part of my disappointment probably comes from the fact that the endless remakes never quite live up to the hype.
I was a big Diablo 2 fiend, it was one of my formative online games. So a few years ago there are rumblings about D2 Remastered, and I'm obviously pumped. Come launch day, Blizzard has my money and I'm deep into the thing I used to love, but it's just... meh. There was a time and place that made the original D2 fantastic, but it turns out that's not here and now. I feel the same thing for Myst/Riven, they were SO GOOD but who actually gives a shit about doing the same thing again with better graphics?
I can't write off the fact that those dudes made a few great games, and that's a crazy accomplishment. I think Myst is the first "real" PC game my family ever bought, and I still remember my mom staying up late at night to click around the world and figure out what the hell was happening. She wrote notes on those yellow legal pads, reminding her of lore and other important shit. But the lightning in a bottle thing works both ways, and that lightning is basically static electricity in todays world :P To borrow your example, id software didn't release the same version of DOOM 30 years later, we got DOOM Eternal. It's not a reskin of their (by today's standards) shitty game, it's a whole new experience that's a damned (hah) blast to play. That's not what's happening with Myst/Riven, unfortunately, but I'd love to see that level of innovation come out of the studio that was once great.
My hometown is also home to Cyan, who made Myst/Riven. I've been to their offices a few times, just to nerd out with some of the devs and play random open source FPS games (the name escapes me). Their offices are really cool, they've got a lot of physical stuff from the games in various display cases around the entrance.
It's... weird to visit, though, because they're like the high school quarterbacks we all know. They had some great years when they were younger, but they're continuously trying to relive those glory days while yelling from the bar stool about that one time they threw the game winning pass. Most of their cash comes from remakes or ports of Myst/Riven, and half the time they aren't even the ones making the damn ports (third parties have paid them for the rights to do it, if you buy Myst on GoG then you got a version that was ported by GoG themselves).
They recently put out Obduction, which on paper seems to be a commercial failure (though I haven't sold seven figures worth of games so who am I to say), raking in like $5M total. Saving the fact that there are just a handful of dudes left at the studio... I don't know, it feels like the oft referenced online version of Cyan (which again, is 30 years old now) and their current reality are completely divergent.
I have some nostalgia for getting trapped in a book in Myst and feeling that fury, but I also struggle to see how they're relevant in today's gaming landscape. It feels like if Super Mario Bros was a one hit wonder, would we still be getting this pumped about crushing turtles three decades later?
Then you might not be in the target audience of Django. For the rest of us, the ORM is dope as hell and nobody cares that you aren't writing the most performant SQL the world has ever seen...
Coming from a construction background, I can confirm all of this. Permits are out of control, material prices are nuts (not COVID nuts, but still at least 300% higher than the good old days), and subcontractors are both hard to find and more expensive. It's not crazy to build a decent 3-4 bedroom house and have it cost $400k all said and done, even in my small-big-ish town.
A lot of people in here arguing, bet there are very few of us that have actually built houses before :)
I've been a professional software developer for 16 years, working in various verticals such as digital video, AI/ML, healthcare, and more. I'm looking for senior/principal/??? remote IC roles, with a bias towards startups (let's move fast!) I have 10 years of experience being a tech lead, and the right hybrid management/IC role could also be a great fit. Hit me up, let's chat!
I'm a hunter, and it's not a problem at all. You shouldn't be successful every time, and there should be some dang rules :) The state is doing exactly what they should be, given the circumstances. In fact, I'd expect a state with a game PROBLEM to do the same damn thing!
If I was successful every time, I'm not sure I'd enjoy the game as much. And if you've ever hunted, you'd know that you can do everything right and still walk away with nothing to show from your time. That's how it goes, anything less and you end up with killing and not hunting. I appreciate the meat in my freezer, if/when it comes, but being able to guarantee it isn't what I signed up for.
Plus, that "over-selling" is money into outdoor conservation, as long as it's not mismanaged to hell I don't care that they get a little extra. If you start moving that money into other bullshit then sure, we have an issue. But most of us like the outdoors and want to keep it around.
Oh, I'm not talking shit about the way the money is used, I almost unilaterally endorse it! The money isn't 1:1 supporting hunting, and that's not the point of the money anyway, it's for conservation. When the department is focused on preservation, us hunters are happy to support even things we're not doing (parks, nature trails, etc).
Recently, there are more activists joining my state's DFW, which is trying to subvert the original goal of preserving the balance between us and natural resources. Those people can go piss up a rope, because their naive understanding of the natural balance of these ecosystems is trumped by ideology. But in a perfect world, I'm happy to give the state a few hundred bucks that goes to preservation even if I don't have success during my hunts, because it's a worthwhile goal.
Most hunters want the animal to have a "sporting chance", otherwise there's not a lot of pride or accomplishment for taking an animal. If you removed every law around hunting, you'd just drive around with a spotlight until you found a deer, and shoot it from the road. That's not sporting, it's what many poachers do. Actually being successful in a hunt is HARD, and that's what makes it feel so good if/when you succeed.
And also, the laws mean that harvest numbers will be lower. It lets the state sell MORE licenses and tags than the number of deer they want to be actually taken, so they make more money. It's the same reason gyms want your membership, but don't want you working out :)
States are different though, some places have real population problems and will give ya a fistful of tags for cheap. My state isn't that way, they want the revenue and our game population would never support 100% success rates.
Because all hunting laws are (or should) be to either a) keep people safe or b) to give the animals a fighting chance, to keep it more "sporting". There's a lot more to hunting than just killing animals, in fact that's a tiny percentage of what you're out there doing (scouting, tracking, hiking around, sitting still for hours, etc). All of the "sport" part of hunting goes out the window if you can simply spotlight deer after dark and knock em over.
And if you wanted to know the REAL reason these laws exist, it's the same reason that gyms over-sell memberships. In many places, including where I live, the state wants your money, but don't want EVERYONE with a license to get an animal, because that wouldn't be sustainable. There are places where more tags are given out, and special hunts are provided to do actual population control, but I'd wager that a lot of states don't have that level of problem, and simply want the cash.
So there ya go. It keeps the "sport" of hunting alive, and generates more revenue for states because they can sell a ton of tags that don't get filled.
Coming from a construction family, this is THE problem with building right now. Material costs going up by an order of magnitude during COVID times (and not really recovering) was rough, but it doesn't hold a candle to the dumpster fire that is regulation.
Permits for everything (some permits are good, some are SO bad), mandates for things that increase cost for marginal/no gains in the finished product, and a ton of red tape/money going to people not involved in the actual work or the quality of the end product. If I, as a builder, have to go through all that bullshit for each house I build, the sane response is that I'm only building expensive houses that take more time but end up being similar $/hr for me, because I end up saving money and time dealing with the regulators.
I've killed deer beyond 200 yards sitting on a stump with a cheap rifle, it's not actually that hard if you've shot a bit before. The nerves though... you're right there, I couldn't imagine.