There sure isn't much information on Light No Fire online. Hello Games must be keeping the cards close to the chest with this one.

> You could also setup a licensing / loan / dedicated car system.

I think the word you were searching for is leasing the vehicle.

> the word you were searching for is leasing the vehicle

Car leasing tends to be time based. A self-driving car may depreciate more like an airplane, based on miles driven.

Going outside costs $200 a day, and i cant afford to spend 1/4 my paycheck 7 times a week.

Also, I'm just doing my best to get the most out of the ludicrously high rent is pay every month.

I think you’re kidding, but I’m not sure. Can’t you walk to a park or ride your bike or something for free?

A Dog's heightened senses are an asset when detecting intruders. I'm sure thats probably the biggest reason humanity domesticated them in the first place.

If a dog keeps depression at bay, someone could possibly avoid having their brain chemistry permanently altered by owning a dog.

There are even working breeds with many different purposes. It's not all black lab and American Eskimo.

I mean none of this is contradictory to any of my statements. All of this can be true ALONG with my statements as well.

One of your statements was "They drain resources and get free care while offering no benefit other than satisfying maternal urges which were designed to work on human babies".

Any example of a dog offering a benefit other than satisfying maternal urges contradicts that statement.

In addition to the non-maternal urge satisfying benefits he named I'll give another: protecting human children. When I was around 4 our dog stopped me from going and picking up a rattlesnake. The dog blocked me from getting closer to the snake and barked until my Mom came to investigate.

I meant it in a general sense from a biological and evolutionary perspective.

Obviously from other perspectives it’s different or else why would someone even own a dog if it had zero benefit?

Is it legal to have a dog burger?

Depends on local laws.

> If you’re in your 30s-40s without kids and a dog, we’re of totally different mindsets.

I'm broke. As much as it pains me to be without a pet, I dont want to take on additional responsibilities if I am incapable of sufficiently giving the care these living beings need and deserve.

I've considered fostering, as they pay for many things the animals need. Perhaps in the future.

The current exploitative nature of renting is a policy choice. Renting doesn’t have to be like this.

There are real-world examples of providing affordable housing that allows people to live with dignity, even if they can't afford to buy a home.

How Britain (almost) solved the housing crisis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZpLiJdIGbs

Oof - it cuts both ways. Its near impossible to own a home in London when everything is on land-lease. You're just buying the house for a while...so...renting. Because some generations old family owns the land.

Not many humans play chess to pay their living expenses.

They could if their living expenses went to zero because everything was automated

Automation doesn’t mean life has zero cost. Even when it is extremely efficient.

And efficient machines earn for their owners. Not for the unemployed.

Also, efficiency increases the demand and price of resources. Including land.

This is especially true if there is extreme inequality, meaning a minority are benefiting from the savings and increased leverage from efficiency improvements. Increasing their lifestyles, but more significantly and endlessly, their need to compete harder with each other to maintain the value they have.

That self-reinforcing loop is already in full force. It’s just going to cycle faster.

We don’t tend to question that ever present reality in the wild, when we consider other species and individuals of other species.

For good, or ill, the human condition is about to change radically.

> . It will have the consequence of deanonymisation but it's not an attempt to achieve that.

How about regulating all social media to be healthy for all ages to use? The social media corporations should lose freedom, not the citizens. (IMO)

I don't think Australia has the power to do that. The world is full of unhealthy things that we prohibit from children. It's a popular idea, with most people in favour of a ban for kids.

People should be free to enjoy life their way. Including if they want to be grandpa Joe from willy wonka.