escapesamsara

Everything is harmful though, that's the problem of existence. Nicotine is a psychoactive drug that does have both positive and negative effects. Vaping is safer than almost every other delivery method, and it's the safest recreational delivery method available. There's more than enough education on why nicotine is bad, which is the most you can really do.

People still drink, despite the physical addiction risks, the massive health risks of even a single drink a week, and the fact drinking any amount puts you almost comically more at risk of physical injury than not drinking. The education is fully out there. People still do it.

Free will is a hell of a thing, and restricting it has never ended well for those that restrict it, regardless of reason.

Outside of sneak damage (which in longer combats/higher difficulties is micromanaging hell in combat) every other class except cleric* consistently out-damages rogues. You can kinda make up the difference with the dual hand crossbow/Thief subclass cheese, but only until level 6 where every other class (except cleric*) awakens and can consistently do more damage per round after the first round. If you never get into combat, like your example, rogues can be powerful, but realistically a barbarian with half the levels will have better action economy and damage per turn the second combat starts.

*This isn't to say clerics can't be powerhouses, but the best/consistent damage output for clerics isn't online until level 8+(war domain multi with either paladin or fighter, or monk if you want to be extra spicy), at which point your cleric really should be focused on healing/buffing and not doing practically any damage themselves.

I am in the EU. There is literally no storage for highly radioactive waste.

Pay to store it in Finland, like everyone else is doing. They currently have a facility that isn't even a quarter full and can be heavily expanded.

That’s not true. Nuclear waste can also contaminate ground water, if stored incorrectly. And as we discussed: we have no storage solution for the highly radioactive waste and thus can’t store it correctly.

Solar panels can contaminate ground water if stored incorrectly, that's a useless statement.

And as discussed there are thousands of storage facilities available. Just because your specific economic union has not built one yet, does not mean you cannot use one of the commercial ones, and by the way these long-term storage facilities aren't the part that store the waste safely. The containers do, and short of a nuclear bomb going off the waste isn't escaping them. So much so that despite waste existing since the 1960s, there has never been an incident of nuclear waste escaping containment. Ever. Coal spillages have caused more radioactive contamination than nuclear waste.

Except can you really say “genociding native americans”

As a country, the US has spent more of its existence genociding native Americans than allowing women to vote, or having a standing army.

and “slavery” are a part of American culture?

The US currently has fully legalized privatized slavery. You, specifically you, can own a slave in the US right now. You can even treat them as if the constitution does not apply to them in any way. Simply buy a prisoner and get a judge to commit that prisoner to you for the length of their sentence. It's so ingrained in our culture, we've never stopped the practice.

The total cost per kWh of nuclear electricity is more expensive than common renewable sources of electricity.

Subsidize nuclear as much as renewables and the price equalizes.

The total amount of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions for nuclear is greater than the carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of common renewable sources of electricity.

This is incorrect, objectively.

which is hugely worse for nuclear? What is your point?

Objectively not. Precious metal mining is more than a thousand times worse for the environment than Uranium or Thorium mining.

Nuclear power plants require eye watering amounts of concrete.

Sure, in the 1950s. Modern nuclear reactors can be built in existing Coal plants. Most reactor types don't require any additional shielding besides what is already present.

They require continuous (and ever-increasing) extraction of fissile matter such as uranium ore (a limited resource, by the way - if we used nuclear power instead of fossil fuels we would run out pretty quickly, too, all things considered).

We have mined enough Uranium to power the entire world for the next 10,000 years; there is currently enough Uranium in just known mines for the next 1,000,000 years of current global power usage. And that's just Uranium. Thorium is a viable technology with the first reactors already online for commercial use.

Nuclear power also consumes (and irradiates) vast quantities of water.

No, it doesn't. This is just outright a lie, one I have no idea where you got. The internal loop never leaves the building, the external loop is never irradiated.

They are huge nightmares for biodiversity as they are massive projects usually flattening large swathes of land.

They have a smaller impact than solar or wind farms, by a factor of 100.

They produce waste which is not only irradiated and hazardous but also a major security risk, so it has to be safeguarded… and/or sealed into a hole in the ground where it will remain a risk for years to come.

They produce less toxic waste than Coal power plants, and all of the world's projected nuclear waste for the next 100,000 years fits into existing facilities.

The building projects themselves are astronomical in scale and require huge quantities of materials to be shipped by fleets and fleets of trucks followed by a lot of industrial work. Then in a couple of decades the site has to be decommissioned which is even more work.

This is the exact same for renewables, worse, arguably, since wind farms have to be off shore to be efficient and cargo ships are more than a thousand times worse for the environment than any form of overland transport.

We also determined in the 1960s that solar power was a pipe dream and it would never be efficient enough on a large scale to be worth investing in.

Maybe don't use an Appeal to Antiquity.

Gloom/Assassin is literally the only way to make rogues or rangers playable, so it's not impossible someone accidentally started that combo with a ranger

Can you define theft in any way that includes digital copying?

Close, it's really because you need to flip all those bits upside down so they can be read properly by the computers down there.

Sure, if the DLC isn't cut content from the game. That's the problem. If they have already developed the content, then it should be released with the rest of the game, for the price of the game. DLC, should it be developed at all, should be an expansion beyond the original scope of development funded by the excess profit from the game.

The open hatch almost definitely lead to the kill. You can overpressure loaded or stored shells with less than the .62kg explosive charge in the bomb. There's a small chance though that it penetrated; T90a's turret top armor has at most 200mm of armor, of which 90mm is steel; PTAB have been known to penetrate 90mm of steel and the rest of the armor composite does not resist HEAT rounds.