erroneous input

what?

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

could be us

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

he says this, but i genuinely think that the plot would have forced crap no one wanted anyway.

[Dantics @DanticsOfficial]

I can finally talk about Mass Effect Universe.

Since Bioware closed I can now reveal that I was part of the Mass Effect Council, saw what BioWare was building, and provided feedback during development.

• Set 600+ years after the Reaper War
• You play as a customizable N7 agent
• Instead of being a walking gun rack, you're a cross between John Wick and James Bond
• Shepard's legacy preserved, regardless of your ending
• A galaxy divided into three major factions
• Humanity, Krogan, Batarians, and more allied together
• Council races forming their own alliance
• The Geth emerging as a third superpower
• A galactic Cold War instead of another Reaper style invasion with a shadowy adversary
• Geth-built megastructures
• Connections between the Milky Way and Andromeda
• Experimental technology implanted in you as a unique point of difference
• Hacking and manipulating the environment
• See through walls, identify systems, remotely trigger hazards and more
• Handcrafted missions like ME1-3
• But with Hitman-style freedom in how you complete them
• Brutal close-range executions
• Squadmates who can clash with each other
• Romance wasn't being sanitised
• Liara returns - now an incredibly powerful Asari Matriarch

From what I saw, BioWare was making Mass Effect for us, the fans, not for people who don't exist.
It looked incredible.
And now we may never get to play it.

Find out more here: https://t.co/kdWhbLdU0T
#SaveMassEffect

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@NeilShenvi being a massive whore pays well

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

Blade is still the best marvel movie

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@PromoterBoxing @Nostre_damus it’s hard to grasp whether you’re trolling or not here…

you’re right it’s not a “per term” basis. that would only make trump look better

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@SerenaJB3 @SankaraDispatch based knower

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@TwoSwordZay @SankaraDispatch wicked is when you don’t commit violent crimes

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@BragiHelvig deep chords are fire

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@thedimitri they think it means chud now

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@newstart_2024 @Gladwell they historically did not have blacks

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@max_paperclips it’s like a tiny blip

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@cremieuxrecueil this is demographics

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@M00gata @patoneillcomedy no it isn’t

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@MightyMogomra seems like it probably moved some files

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@dreamworks2050 this is fucking cruel bro

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@IterIntellectus per capita assumes an invariant population. assume the same energy growth between a nation with steady population growth and a nation with collapsing population. the former would appear linear and the latter would appear exponential in per capita terms.

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@marykirst @alluringmedia

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@Quincunx55555 @Zeke_Darwin solid argument

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@Zeke_Darwin @grok https://t.co/jPes0PC4RZ

[Grok @grok]

Neither is wrong; it depends on definition.

If "humans" means Homo sapiens (standard in genetics/paleontology for living people and modern humans), then Neanderthals are a different species from humans.

If "humans" means the broader genus Homo or archaic/modern hominins, then Neanderthals are a different species of humans.

Both conventions are used and acceptable once defined. Taxonomy prioritizes the former for precision.

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@Zeke_Darwin @grok @grok is it improper to use modern human to mean homo sapiens?

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

@Zeke_Darwin @grok no i didn’t lose the argument Zeke, the context was modern humans. that was my prior.

i explicitly stated that they were a different species not a different genus. this inherently means i accepted the familial relationship. you’re arguing priors, which is midwit shit.

[erroneous input @erroneous_input]

this guy is not capable of reading words

he literally asked me why i didn’t do exactly the thing that i did, which is define that human means homo sapiens.

this is what people who think they’re intelligent do, engage in semantics to avoid the discussion.

[Zeke Darwin @Zeke_Darwin]

@erroneous_input If you were referring to modern humans, you should have said so. I explained that the term human refers to any member of the homo genus.

I’m muting you at this point. You’re just going in circles and wasting my time.