Our main objective during Episode 1 Fear in Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League is to raise our Rank. the higher our Episode 1 Fear Rank‚ the juicier the rewards in Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice: League. Best ways to raise Fear Rank fast in Suicide Squad KTJL Screenshot: PC Invasion If you want to unlock Joker for free‚ then you need to know how to raise your Episode 1 Fear Rank fast. Your Fear Rank increases when you complete anything‚ but there are ways to raise it faster. Increase the Metropolis difficulty My first suggestion for getting a high Fear Rank fast in Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League is to play on the highest difficulty you have unlocked. The more XP you acquire‚ the higher the difficulties you’ll unlock. If the game is ever too hard‚ you can scale it down‚ but you gain a higher XP and resource modifier the higher the difficulty is. Complete Incursions Screenshot: PC Invasion I’ve gotten more Fear Rank progress when I complet...

Have you ever noticed that certain areas in Diablo 4 let you stoke a Campfire? They’re not just for show. Let’s discuss how the Campfires work in Diablo 4. What are the Campfires for in Diablo 4 Throughout your time playing Diablo 4‚ you’ll inevitably come across a Legion event‚ which is one of the many timed events. At these Legion events‚ you’ll probably find a Campfire. But how do the Campfires work in Diablo 4? If you stoke a Campfire‚ you can get some interesting buffs. If you notice a strange white icon on your map with a ticking time bar on it‚ this is an overworld Legion event. You’ll only have five minutes or less to make your way there‚ and you’ll meet up with other players online. You should get to a Legion event before it starts because you’ll want to interact with the Campfire. Using them will give you a bonus for when you’re knee-deep in the fight ahead. Once you stoke the fire‚ your character will get an XP bon...

When it comes to party compositions and the best Pawns to have in your team in Dragon’s Dogma 2‚ what would be the best? There are a lot of choices you can make when hiring Pawns and switching your Vocations‚ so here are the best team comps. Dragon’s Dogma 2: Best team comps It’s hard to go wrong with certain party compositions in Dragon’s Dogma 2‚ but the best are typically a balance of a spellcaster (Mage/Sorcerer) and frontline tank (Fighter/Warrior)‚ alongside other unique Vocations. Since you can have four Vocations in one party there are many variations‚ here are some party compositions you should try out. Balanced party: Mage‚ Fighter‚ Thief‚ Archer. Magick party: Sorcerer‚ Mage‚ Mystic Spearhand‚ Fighter Offensive party: Fighter‚ Warrior‚ Thief‚ Mage Defensive/ranged party: Magick Archer‚ Archer‚ Mage‚ Fighter Image: Capcom Balanced party For an early-game balanced party‚ I went with Mage (my Arisen)‚ Fighter (my main Pawn)‚ ...

Whether it's their lyrics‚ stage presence‚ or vocals‚ some singers are downright overrated. Even some of the most popular artists around‚ such as Taylor Swift‚ shouldn't be regarded as "the best‚" thanks to their cookie-cutter way of songwriting. When it comes to these singers‚ people can agree to disagree‚ but they're some of the most overrated artists around. Katy Perry is known for her stage... Source

In 1913‚ Woodrow Wilson and his progressives promised that the Federal Reserve would avert both depressions and inflation‚ while preventing the wealthy from controlling America’s financial markets at the expense of the poor. More than a century later‚ it’s clear that was all a lie‚ and the Fed has helped create a permanent American underclass. The Fed was designed to transfer wealth from the American people to the government‚ mostly through the hidden tax of inflation. But this process has prevented countless American families from being able to save and get ahead‚ because their savings are constantly losing value. For two decades‚ the Fed kept interest rates artificially low to help finance massive government spending. When that spending reached unprecedented heights in 2020‚ the Fed intervened more drastically than ever‚ creating trillions of dollars and devaluing the currency. Thus began an unparalleled transfer of wealth that continues to this day‚ and which has driven a wedge between different groups of Americans. The painful inflation of the last three years has increased prices throughout the economy‚ distorting the signals that prices are supposed to convey to buyers and sellers. For example‚ the cost to own a median-price home today has doubled since January 2021‚ but it’s still the same house. This phenomenon represents the monetization of housing‚ where a dwelling becomes a much better store of value than the currency‚ even if the real value of the house hasn’t improved. Likewise‚ Americans’ earnings have increased substantially over the last three years‚ but not in the most meaningful sense—that is‚ what they can buy. Instead‚ the opposite has happened‚ and today’s larger incomes buy less. What would have been a decent salary in 2019 is no longer enough to even get by in many places‚ and it’s certainly not enough to ever fulfill the American dream of homeownership. A family earning the median household income can afford a median-price home in only a handful of major metropolitan areas in the entire country. In many cities‚ the cost to own a median price home exceeds the take-home pay from the median household income. Even if you didn’t spend a dime on other necessities such as food‚ you still wouldn’t have enough for your mortgage payment. It’s truly a condemnation of the status quo when even those with seemingly high incomes cannot afford a typical house. Worse‚ as prices continue marching upward‚ people can save less‚ making it harder to accrue a sufficient down payment. Even by the time a family reaches their goal‚ home prices have increased again‚ and they’re back on the hamster wheel‚ trying to save for an even larger down payment. Meanwhile‚ inflation is steadily‚ though silently‚ taxing away the real value of the family’s savings as they sit in the bank. This has left countless Americans as perpetual renters‚ with almost an entire generation of young people giving up on having the standard of living that their parents had. An artificial chasm has been constructed between those who already own capital‚ like housing‚ and the remaining Americans who can only borrow such assets‚ as they do by renting. Similarly‚ many of those struggling to afford sharply increased rents are going deeply into debt to keep a roof over their head while those who locked in a mortgage with a fixed interest rate before both home prices and interest rates exploded have shielded themselves from one of the largest drivers behind the cost-of-living increases of the last three years. Many homeowners could not afford to buy their same home today. The monthly mortgage payment on a median-price home has doubled since January 2021. Thus‚ even if two families have identical incomes‚ the one that bought a home three years ago has a nearly insurmountable advantage over the other family trying to do so today. The Fed‘s monetary manipulations have financed trillions of dollars in federal budget deficits‚ but they’ve also created a permanent American underclass‚ something antithetical to the Founders’ vision for the country. Class mobility is at the heart of the American dream‚ and the Fed has turned it into a nightmare. Originally published by The Washington Times The post How the Federal Reserve Created an American Caste System appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Academic culture is facing a crisis of its own making. The now myriad plagiarism and other scandals rocking the ivory tower increasingly are being waved away by left-wing media. But this growing phenomenon represents an existential crisis for institutions that have long coasted on flimsy claims to their exalted position in our society. Following the January resignation of Harvard President Claudine Gay‚ who a month earlier had had a disastrous performance before a House committee hearing on antisemitism‚ several other professors and diversity‚ equity‚ and inclusion administrators have been hit with serious accusations of plagiarism. The latest is influential Harvard sociology assistant professor Christina J. Cross‚ whose writing on families and race have appeared in The New York Times. She’s been accused of lifting huge sections of uncited work and claiming it as her own—among other‚ smaller infractions. The Left’s message on these scandals—copied and pasted‚ it seems—is that plagiarism has been “weaponized” by the Right. “As the culture wars lurch on‚ the Right has found a perfect weapon with which to hit the university—taken straight from the academy’s arsenal itself: claims of plagiarism‚” wrote the editorial board of The Harvard Crimson in February. Yes‚ how dare those mean conservatives use basic academic standards against academics for the purpose of the “culture war‚” which our unbiased and totally meritocratic universities surely never engage in. Defenders of the academy have also gone with the old standby of crying “racism.” Tiresome‚ but all very predictable. I will have to concede one thing‚ though: In a certain sense‚ plagiarism has been “weaponized‚” by the Right‚ which holds no power in academia outside of a handful of small‚ isolated bastions. This method of criticism has only become possible because higher education has made itself so open to attack. To use a historical comparison‚ the peoples conquered by Islam in the days after the rise of Muhammad were typically preyed upon and powerless. What those living under dhimmitude had was the Quran. Their only protection came from pointing out the violations of faith by their new rulers. That forced a choice on their Muslim overlords: Weaken their rule or weaken their faith‚ which was ultimately tied to their power and status. That’s the dilemma facing academia. While universities don’t punish leftist students for shutting down politically incorrect speakers and other kinds of illiberal conduct‚ they still—for now‚ at least—make an attempt to punish those who have violated their most basic standards. Here’s a question‚ though: Would plagiarism and other kinds of scandals have been such a problem if our elite institutions weren’t filled with so many superfluous‚ underwhelming hacks? That may sound mean‚ but it’s impossible not to notice that the quality of our most elite schools—and of the people who staff them—is quickly dropping. Stories about left-wing insanity on college campuses became run-of-the-mill generations ago. But now‚ something new is happening. Now‚ many Americans‚ even ones who placed a huge amount of faith in higher education despite its flaws‚ are coming to see that they aren’t even providing the most fundamental service they—at least in theory—promise to provide; namely‚ an elite education delivered by scholars in pursuit of the truth. With the costly‚ borg-like takeover of DEI initiatives that have bled into all disciplines‚ it’s become obvious to all who are not wholly blinded to reality that higher education now places more emphasis on ideology and identity politics than teaching and scholarship. In the end‚ those who hired and appointed the DEI administrators and “anti-racism” swamis like Ibram X. Kendi didn’t expect them to produce high-quality research. No‚ they are there to demonstrate institutional commitment to leftist beliefs. Nothing else has mattered‚ and now the original product that allowed them to amass such power is slipping away. Consider this: Harvard University’s history department finally brought back an introductory history course after going nearly 20 years without one. The previous yearlong survey course was dropped in 2006 for being too “Eurocentric‚” according to The Harvard Crimson. A description of the class makes it sound more like an NPR podcast than a high-minded instruction at one of the world’s most prestigious universities. It’s apparently been designed to teach “empathy‚” and according to one of the professors‚ “on Wednesdays‚ they will ‘riff’ on recent headlines for a portion of the lecture.” I only wonder what famed Harvard alum John Quincy Adams would think about this kind of coursework. In his day‚ its students used to be required to know Latin and have a deep understanding of the classics before they attended the school. Now‚ they don’t even require courses in Latin or Greek to complete a degree in the classics. The dirty open secret is that higher ed has abandoned its role of providing trustworthy research and transmission of Western ideas to new generations. It is increasingly an environment more committed to enforcing extremely narrow left-wing ideology and ensuring that all other governmental‚ political‚ and civic institutions throughout the West maintain the same level of ideological gatekeeping. Legacy admissions may be on the decline‚ but they are being replaced by new‚ smugger so-called meritocratic pseudo-elites who lecture America about all its problematic history while making excuses for genuine evil in the here and now. As the aftermath of the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack on Israel starkly revealed‚ these institutions hardly have claims to moral authority. Hating the West and excusing savagery are just part of the overall package. While the power that elite academic institutions have in Western societies is immense—perhaps greater than it has ever been—they nevertheless have a collective weakness. These schools are ultimately dependent on the support‚ both social and material‚ of the rest of society. They’ve operated for decades with nearly a blank check of private and public funding. And higher education has run up a massive bill on their graduates‚ too‚ that they expect taxpayers to pay. Let me ask: Would you rather pay for your groceries with money to spare or ensure that a Starbucks employee with pronouns on his or her name tag can get his psychology degree paid for? Exactly. The goodwill from times past is long gone. In its place is well-earned doubt and hostility. Higher education is now left with a choice: Abandon the path of DEI and ruthless ideological enforcement in a return to genuine merit or double down on them with the fading support from the rest of society. The post Higher Ed’s Dilemma: Punish Plagiarism or Stick With DEI appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The U.S. “would be a less safe place” if China were to invade the self-governing democratic island of Taiwan‚ according to Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts. Roberts‚ who led a Heritage Foundation delegation to Taiwan and Japan in February‚ made the remarks during a Thursday event at Heritage titled‚ “The American Case for Taiwan.” Jeff Smith‚ director of the foundation’s Asian Studies Center‚ moderated the event. (The Daily Signal is the news arm of The Heritage Foundation.) “Since returning from Taiwan‚ I have heard you use the word ‘indispensable’ to describe Taiwan and its centrality to U.S. security and economic interests‚” Smith said. “I don’t recall you using that word prior to the trip. Something must have changed your mind.” “Yes‚ the value of seeing first hand what the world would be like‚ what the United States would be like‚ if‚ God forbid‚ Taiwan were invaded‚” Roberts responded. “And again‚ just with my parochial hat on as an American‚ which‚ of course‚ is totally appropriate. People from certain countries need to place as the top priority the needs of their nation state‚” Roberts said. “If Taiwan were invaded‚ America would be a poorer place.” "If Taiwan were invaded‚ America would be a poorer place. America would be a less safe place." https://t.co/ggqQxtgfhU— Samantha Aschieris (Renck) (@samantharenck) March 28‚ 2024 During their trip to Taiwan‚ Roberts and the Heritage delegation met with both the outgoing Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and the incoming Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te. “America would be a less safe place. But also there would be a chain reaction‚” Roberts continued. “During the first Cold War‚ we’re in the second one with China‚ we operated with a thesis of a domino effect‚ which was real. The Soviet Union initiated that.” Chinese leader Xi Jinping has repeatedly called for the “reunification” of mainland China with the sovereign nation of Taiwan‚ though the island was never ruled by the Chinese Communist Party.  Honored to present President @iingwen with Heritage's Index of Economic Freedom‚ showcasing Taiwan's stellar #4 rank—a testament to an exemplary free-market nation.@Heritage and the American people are proud to stand united with Taiwan. https://t.co/EqobreT2bV— Kevin Roberts (@KevinRobertsTX) February 26‚ 2024 “Make no mistake: the Chinese saber-rattling toward Taiwan is born out of the same saber-rattling they do to us in the United States‚” Roberts added. “And if I may be really blunt‚ Jeff‚ Taiwan is indispensable if something like that scenario were to happen.” “But it’s also indispensable if hopefully that doesn’t happen‚ it causes us in the United States to realize the number one enemy in the world‚ in the history of this great country‚ the United States‚ is the Chinese Communist Party‚” Roberts said‚ adding: As awful as the Soviet Union was‚ as awful as Nazi Germany was‚ as much as we dislike the United Kingdom in the 1770s and 1780s‚ the Chinese Communist Party is the gravest threat to this country and to free people ever in the history of this country. Taiwan helps us remember that what’s at stake if something happens to them. Thursday’s event came just one day after the release of Michael Cunningham’s special report‚ also titled “The American Case for Taiwan.” Cunningham‚ who also spoke at the event‚ is a research fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Asian Studies Center. The report highlights how U.S. national security could be impacted should China take over Taiwan.  Specifically‚ Cunningham explores how the U.S. might not be able to remain neutral in the event of a war over Taiwan‚ noting that tens of thousands of U.S. citizens living on the island would be directly impacted. He also discusses the U.S.’ involvement in respect to its treaty allies‚ the Philippines and Japan. Why would the everyday American’s prosperity be affected by a takeover or conflict over Taiwan? Heritage’s Michael Cunningham explains? pic.twitter.com/UNWp6Y1tHJ— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) March 28‚ 2024 Cunningham’s report also addresses the potentially devastating impact a Chinese takeover of Taiwan could have on both the global and U.S. economy‚ and presents five recommendations for Washington with the goal of keeping Taiwan secure and free from the Chinese Communist Party’s control.  The-American-Case-for-Taiwan-1Download Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post ‘America Would Be A Less Safe Place’ If China Invades Taiwan‚ Heritage Foundation President Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The “new unofficial rules” around US elections were set years ago: if one side wins‚ the integrity of the vote cannot be questioned at all; if they don’t‚ then it must be questioned. And for Democrats the preferred way to do the latter is to bring up “foreign meddling.” This is now also done “preemptively‚” ahead of a ballot. And‚ this is proving to be useful in justifying many things‚ some of which should be considered blatantly illegal‚ such as the government colluding with private tech companies to censor speech online. Related: Shadow Games: Questioning America’s Battle Against “Foreign Disinformation” in the Upcoming Election But‚ if you frame it as spy agencies engaging in “partnership with tech companies‚” and if you explain the need for it as a way to “secure elections” against the ever-meddling foreign bogeyman – the current White House clearly hopes its highly controversial activities can be sold as something positive. However‚ critics and those on the receiving end of such activities in the US – namely‚ political opponents – see this as the Biden administration basically doubling down on tech collusion‚ regardless of the fact that allegations about it are currently being deliberated all the way up in the Supreme Court (the Murthy v. Missouri case). This type of brazen behavior could mean that the ruling apparatus is very sure of itself and its ability to get away with pretty much anything – or‚ that it is not confident at all it can get Biden reelected‚ and is making risky and perhaps desperate moves. Like this: “The US intelligence community is ramping up work with technology companies ahead of the November elections as cybersecurity professionals search for new ways to combat foreign threats to the American electoral system that appeared unthinkable four years ago.” That’s how The Washington Times describes the current state of “partnerships” with tech companies – although it isn’t entirely clear if the “unthinkable” reference is meant to concern the ways foreign threats are allegedly tackled – or the fact the US intelligence community should be “ramping up work with technology companies” in the first place. At the same time‚ NBC is reporting that the FBI – having reportedly “paused” what is called its “outreach” to social platforms (regarding foreign propaganda‚ of course) – is now resuming that effort which involves “sharing information” with some US tech firms. As for what put the efforts on pause in the first place – it was “lawsuits and government scrutiny.” But that is set to the side now that elections are nearing‚ as desperate times appear to call for desperate measures. The post Shifting Election Narratives and Tech Collusion: Federal Government Continues Outreach to Tech Companies appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Unsealed court documents in California – part of a class action lawsuit filed by consumers against Meta and alleging anti-competitive behavior via deceptive data extraction – have revealed that back in 2016‚ Facebook came up with a secret project dubbed “Ghostbusters.” We obtained a copy of the documents for you here. What Facebook effectively did was use man-in-the-middle attack-style ways to intercept encrypted traffic‚ initially targeting competitor Snapchat (hence the project’s name‚ referring to the Snapchat logo)‚ to later expand this to Amazon and YouTube. An internal Facebook email sent by CEO Mark Zuckerberg included in the now unsealed documents explains why the company decided to take this type of action – apparently‚ to get access to “analytics” regarding Snapchat’s traffic‚ given that Facebook had none up until that point thanks to the app’s encryption. The “analytics” referenced here was necessary for Facebook to improve its targeting signals. “Given how quickly they’re growing‚ it seems important to figure out a new way to get reliable analytics about them. Perhaps we need to do panels or write custom software. You should figure out how to do this‚” Zuckerberg wrote to his underlings in the summer of 2016. And so they set out to find a way to “intercept and decrypt‚” that work being done by the giant’s In-App Action Panel (IAPP). Three years prior‚ Facebook bought Onavo‚ a company in the business of analyzing web traffic sent through its VPN‚ Onavo Protect‚ to gain access to statistics about how other apps are used. We now know why that acquisition happened in the first place. Three years after Ghostbusters was launched‚ in 2019‚ Facebook had to shut down Onavo after yet another unrelated scandal. And this was the same year when IAPP also apparently ceased operations. As for the scandal developing now‚ members of the IAPP project came up with “so-called kits that can be installed on iOS and Android that intercept traffic for specific subdomains‚ ‘allowing us to read what would otherwise be encrypted traffic so we can measure in-app usage‚” TechCrunch writes‚ quoting from one of the emails. However‚ some of Facebook’s top engineers (unsuccessfully) pushed back against the idea‚ calling it “a legal‚ technical‚ and security nightmare.” But not everyone had to be spied on: if they agreed to give Facebook data‚ that is. At least that’s how the class action lawsuit describes the relationship between Facebook and Netflix. The post Facebook Used “Man-in-the-Middle” Approach To Snoop on Users’ Encrypted Traffic in Secret Project appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. RMIT ABC Fact Check – a collaboration between RMIT University and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation – is continuing to lose whatever credibility it had left after a series of previous scandals. And‚ this case once again sheds negative light on the phenomenon that is the fact-checking industry‚ one of the by-products of the censorship and information control that’s dominated the media over the past years. The latest scandal saw businessman Dick Smith directly accusing RMIT of being the actual spreader of misinformation and lies – after the group came out with its “fact-check” of his remarks related to nuclear and renewable energy. Related: Zuckerberg says he has “empathy” for those censored by “fact-checkers” who crush debate‚ but doesn’t suggest any changes And despite RMIT at first attempting to stick to its guns‚ maintaining that its assertions were accurate‚ Smith yesterday received an apology from the ABC‚ which also had to correct its original report‚ which is now described as “riddled with errors” thanks to RMIT’s “fact-checking.” It all started several days earlier when Smith spoke for a Sydney radio station‚ refuting a claim made by Australia’s government agency‚ the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO)‚ which said it is possible for an entire country to depend solely on solar and wind energy. That is “simply a lie (…) they (CSIRO) are telling lies” said the businessman‚ adding that since there is no example anywhere of a country managing to sustain itself‚ energy-wise‚ on renewables – “we should be making a decision to go nuclear now.” This “activated” RMIT ABC Fact Check‚ that quickly came out with a report supposedly proving that Smith was wrong by making what turned out to be a false claim that Nepal (and three others) is an example of a country which uses 100 percent renewable energy sources. What possessed RMIT to pick Nepal of all places as an example remains unknown‚ since reports say the country is “highly reliant on the debilitating burning of bio-fuel.” But it did provide Smith with another opportunity to call out liars. “I’m angry. The whole document is full of misinformation and lies‚ it’s designed to discredit me. Absolutely disgusting‚” Smith said. “They (RMIT) say on the document… this is your inoculation against misinformation and their document is just completely misinformation because the left at the ABC have to be against nuclear‚ so they just make up every lie they can to distort anyone who says we have to move to nuclear‚” he added. Smith also said that the three other countries mentioned by RMIT – Albania‚ Bhutan and Paraguay – also all use fossil fuel. Elon Musk was quick to support Smith’s comments‚ responding to journalist Michael Shellenberger by writing‚ “Having government ‘fact-checkers’ is a giant leap in the direction of tyranny.” Previously‚ even Facebook had to cut ties with RMIT after the group was accused of hijacking its fact-checking program and behaving as an activist. The post Facebook “Fact-Checker” RMIT Accused of Misconduct‚ Criticized for Spreading Misinformation about Energy appeared first on Reclaim The Net.