baxus

You're not the first one to assume that. Basically, my current username is a leftover from one D&D campaign I played over 15 years ago, where I named my character that, to reflect my luck when it came to rolling dice. Sorry about the thread derail, everyone.

Trust me, I am fully aware I was extremely lucky on that one. P.S. It's kind of ironic, since my username on here means "one with bad luck" (with different spelling, though).

My daughter had a period where she'd wake up during the night and had to be carried around for anywhere between an hour and two. To make things worse, she'd want my wife to carry her so we couldn't share the load. Not sure how old she was, I think she was not yet two at the time. We kind of just rode it out but it was really hard and stressful.

Wouldn't be the first time I was wrong, and I haven't been watching United that closely last season but based on what I did see I think that United were punching above their weight last season and that this season is painting a bit more realistic picture of where they're at at the moment. Also, the whole Greenwood and Anthony issues, Maguire saga and the whole ownership change talk are clearly leaving a mark on the team.

The more I'm watching this tournament the more I like rugby. I'm far from understanding tactical finesse or knowing the players strengths and weaknesses, coaching strategies etc. but I do love everyone's approach, going for that try no matter if you're 2 or 20 or 70 points ahead or even behind. What I especially loved was in Namibia's match (I think it was against New Zealand) is how a player's injury (looked like a badly broken leg) was handled both on the pitch, with everyone just stepping back and letting medics handle it, or during the broadcast, with no multiple angles slow motion replays of the leg breaking. Later on, another Namibian player got injured, seemed like a collar bone injury, and that was a result of a foul play and replays of that were shown to keep fans why a card was given. Another big plus is seeing how so called smaller countries can compete against the powerhouses of the sport. Fiji has a population of under a million and yet they went toe to toe with Wales and even beat Australia. All in all, I keep wanting to watch more matches and learn more about the sport.

Liverpool not looking good for long periods in their matches but still managing to grind out the result they need. As someone said, West Ham could've been 2-0 up before Liverpool took the lead from the spot, during the week LASK had to take the lead in order for Liverpool to wake up in the second half just like in the match against Wolves. It might happen that some top teams expose that weakness or it might be that Liverpool is once again managing to get the result even when not playing well just like they did in the title winning year. It will be fun to see over time which one of those is the case.

So, I'm rather new to rugby, but watching France vs Namibia last night it got me thinking. Are there continental tournaments in rugby like in football, basketball etc.? I mean, if South Africa is #1 in Africa and Namibia is #2, then I dread to think what African Cup would look like.

Again with the golf comparison...

I'm going to go out on the limb here and say that you haven't experienced what it's like when it's not a given. Do you have to wait until the state awards you with a flat, and even than you don't own it but have the right to reside in it while you live. When you pass away, your spouse and kids have to go through this whole bureaucratic horror so that they can remain in it. You obviously can't sell it, or rent it out or move etc. And the fact that there are so many family owned businesses in Western countries is proof enough that starting your business is a realistic option. Ok, what are we then using as the universal definition of socialism? Scandinavia?

What Ran said, and on top of that you at least have the freedom to buy the house you want (within the range you can afford, obviously) and can actually run your own business (which can succeed or fail, depending on your ability, among other things). Within socialist/communist systems that were in place in Eastern Europe, those things weren't a given.

I need to go back and correct the amount Loki used to it. He was around 170-180 grams per day at 6 months or younger. Nowadays, we feed him around 200g per day. The recommended range is insane, 150-250 grams. Probably due to what Ran said, and one size not fitting all. Shouldn't labs grow up to be in 30-40kg range?

A couple of days ago I started learning Swedish on Duolingo. I have no plans of moving to Sweden, I have no Swedish speaking friends and family, it's just a sort of a mental exercise and a fun way to spend 10-15 minutes every day. If I had unlimited time and money, I must say it would be unlikely I'd spend it studying languages.

Just out of curiosity, how much does a lab retriever puppy eat a day? If I remember correctly, Loki was having somewhere in 200-250 grams per day. Dry.

Loki had giardia last spring. He puked and had diarrhoea, he even pooped in the home which he never does. Took him to the vet, they hooked him up to IV to fix dehydration, gave me meds, some probiotics and special food for him and it was fixed rather soon. Still, it was hell for a day or two. Loki is small for a lagotto (especially when compared to some males in our neighbourhood who go 40% over the standard weight) but he seemed absolutely drained at that time. The vet said the same thing you are saying, it's quite common and often without symptoms until there's some drop in immunity and then it takes over.

Fixed that for you.

Finally having great weather - below 20ºC during the night and in the morning and 25-30ºC during the day. Can get some great sleep and also wear t-shirts and shorts during the day. Gotta love it!

Do you think you'd be able to "do something difficult, stressful and/or requires you to be incredibly focused as a starting point" for 8-10 hours a day? I'm a software developer, and based on experience I've gained over 12 years of my career so far I can tell you that I certainly can't do that. Even if I could, I'm not being given a chance to with all the meetings spread throughout the day. Don't get me wrong, I understand there are "good" meetings, the ones needed to keep everything running smoothly, but I've almost come to tears at how much of my time was wasted in various kinds of pointless meetings.

I'd say there's doping in every single sport that has achieved high enough level. People are just willing to turn a blind eye when it's their heroes doing it. The point was to start a conversation, not to suggest it is.

So, is this a step towards a more serious drug testing program in football? Off the top of my head, I can name Maradona and Adrian Mutu getting banned for cocaine and Rio Ferdinand for avoiding testing. Other than that, I can't remember anyone. Given the increasing number of games and insane amounts of money as well as all the pressure to perform, I find it very hard to believe that football is that clean.

I'm not following ice hockey as much as I'd like to, but I don't remember clubs ever telling players they can't play for their national teams except in the last Olympics when no NHL players were allowed to compete due to lack of an agreement between IOC/IIHF and NHL.

Serbia was projected as 8th or 9th favourite to win it. Projections mean nothing. No, don't play like the top league when the top league forces the superstar system, where superstars are allowed to take 40 shots per game on 30% FGs and are applauded for it. I mean, Iverson was one of the biggest stars of his era, a PG with top season average for assists around 7 and FG pct not topping 45%? I much prefer focusing on the team, where different player can step up in each game and not everything goes through one player. Refs issue is well known and everyone is complaining about it and it needs to be addressed. It's not just USA who get shafted by incompetent refs. It's what you prefer. If you prefer everyone shooting 3s all the time and throwing in a slam dunk, as spectacular as it may be, every once in a while and 80-90% of the regular season being meaningless, calling it "product" and not a competition, then NBA is the way to go. If you'd prefer team play, star players not shooting 30 or 40 times per night and every single match being important, then you need to watch Euroleague or another similar competition. And I did say that it's either lack of intelligence or lack of motivation. Pick whichever you want, I don't care. All I know is that the moment this USA team couldn't physically steamroll the opposition and ran into team cancelling out their advantages and playing smart, they were in trouble. We'll see what the response from USA basketball will be. My money is on sending a team that could steamroll harder and that would most likely be enough for gold in the Olympics. You think other national teams have this unlimited time to create a team and train them and sync them and all that? Boy, are you in for a surprise! Are you familiar with the qualifying system in Europe for this World Cup? Do you know about FIBA and Euroleague dispute which resulted in Euroleague players not being able to play in qualifying matches. Are you aware that only a handful of players who represented European countries in qualifiers saw game time in the World Cup? And not just Jokic skipped this tournament for Serbia. We've had 7 or 8 players who played more or less regularly for the national team in previous years withdraw from the team, either in order to rest or prepare for the upcoming season and some were injured. Sure, USA had more than 7 or 8 top players out of this tournament, but USA has a 300+M population, while Serbia has 6,5M so we can compare. Most of it has already been covered, but I think 5 instead of 6 personal fouls was missed. World Cup is nowhere near as prestigious as the Olympics are in basketball. That's a fact. USA hasn't sent their best team to the World Cup even once since I've been watching it (the first one I remember was in '98). That's also a fact. That's also USA problem. Send an inferior team and risk not winning a medal. If that's ok with you (players, coaches, USA basketball, the nation, whoever), then keep doing it. When motivation improves, you'll get results. We had Joker last year in the European Cup, got knocked out in quarterfinals. A certain number of best players don't make the best team. It's a complex system, you need to find the right pieces and fit them together properly. USA should medal in the basketball World Cup. It's weird they didn't in the last 2. They even medaled in '98 when NBA players didn't play due to the lockout and college players were sent instead. The difference being that World Championship in ice hockey takes place at the same time as Stanley Cup playoffs so many of the best players in the world can't play.

First of all, no way was Canada ever a favourite to win. To win a medal maybe, but no way to win. Second, it's not European rules, it's world rules. Everyone other than the NBA play by these rules. Third, refs in FIBA tournaments are horrible in general. FIBA don't appoint the best refs, they include refs from all over the world, just like FIFA does. Today, a ref from Panama was appointed to officiate the semifinal match between Canada and Serbia. He was bloody useless. What level of competition does he usually officiate? Why was he considered a better fit than Euroleague refs? Because a European team was playing? A load of crap. Fourth, no, FIBA rules don't make "objectively a shittier game". Your opinion does not equal an objective fact. This may come as a surprise but not everyone likes an endless procession of 1 on 1s and guys jumping very high. It's a tactical game, not just physical. Also, if NBA players can't adapt to this set of rules, some questions regarding their intelligence and/or motivation need to be asked.

Sure, authors can get it wrong, unintentionally... But what did Rothfuss actually get wrong unintentionally? He very intentionally built his "brand" by taking shots at authors taking long to finish their series, explicitly saying things like "this trilogy is finished, you'll get the books one year apart", "there's no such thing as writer's block" etc. Fast forward to today, 16 years since NotW was first published, and the past decade was mostly filled with Rothfuss throwing tantrums whenever asked about progress on book 3 and making false promises in return for donations to his charity. P.S. GRRM was getting a lot more shit for taking his time with A Dance with Dragons than Rothfuss is getting and was nowhere near as big of an asshole in communication with his fans.

Fixed that for you Petty grammar nazi outburst aside, I do agree with you that there's obviously no legal obligation from author's (whether it's Rothfuss, GRRM or whoever) side to provide us with completed series. That being said, there's a difference between GRRM writing his ASoIaF series for close to 30 years now and not being finished and Rothfuss saying "it's done, part 2 will be published a year after part 1 and part 3 a year after that" and then letting it get to the point where you publish 10 year anniversary edition of book 2 (which was published 4 years after book 1, btw) before you have even the vaguest idea when part 3 can be expected. Now, I'm not saying what he said was legally binding, but the gap between what he said (and how he said it) and what he failed to deliver (and how he failed to deliver) is enough for people to see him as an asshole.