sylver_dragon

Not to mention many troops still have an emphasis on Christianity. Though it’s slightly less mandatory than it used to be.

Do you really want Musk starting a game console company?

the minister of the interior can deport people for a period of up to 20 years to the besieged Gaza Strip or another location based on the “circumstances”

But don’t worry.
Work will make them free!

Do I even need the /s?

It’s a dick move, but I can kinda understand why SpaceX would make it. There has been a push to “de-risk” supply chains, after the disruptions caused by Covid, Russia’s invasion of Ukranie, and other world events. This type of de-risking was partly responsible for the CHIPS and Science Act. The US Government has a strategic incentive to have a stable and resilient supply chain for semiconductors.

For SpaceX, having critical components be only available from fabs in Taiwan is a risk to business. China has been more and more vocal about it’s desire to annex Taiwan. With Trump taking office, one can imagine that the US commitment to protect Taiwan may not be quite as iron clad as it has been in the past. It’s not hard to imagine a future where China launches an invasion of Taiwan and the US does little more than shrug. At that point, any business which is solely reliant on Taiwan for semiconductors is going to see major disruptions.

So ya, it’s a complete dick move. But, I suspect SpaceX will be far from the last company looking to build a supply chain outside Taiwan.

This “transformational technology,” as he says, will “accelerate the velocity of development and unlock truly novel game experiences that will surprise, delight, and inspire players.”

Oh look, buzzword salad. Apparently though, the Netflix execs bought it. Not that I thought that Neflix has any business trying to run a game studio in the first place. But, this sounds like the same sort of bullshit which has cause many companies to burn billions of dollars on “blockchain”. I suspect this “AI driven” drivel is going to end up in the same landfill as ET and NFTs.

I don’t think that Republicans need to kill the filibuster further. It’s already dead for judicial nominations, which they have used to full effect.

I’m not sure I agree that this removes the incentive to kill the filibuster. A lot of what the GOP wants to do will require passing legislation. Sure, they can kill a lot of existing legislation via the courts and I also expect “budget reconciliation process” to re-enter the political lexicon in full force again. But, there is going to be stuff they want to do, which will be blocked in Congress, via the filibuster. And I think that will raise the specter of killing the filibuster in some wings of the GOP.

Also, the map is much more favorable to Democrats in the next two Senate election cycles.

Ya, and this is why I mentioned there being wings of the GOP who understood just how useful the filibuster is.

I’m not completely sold on that idea. While I’m sure there are wings of the GOP who will buy into the idea of never losing power again, I also suspect that there will be members of the Senate who are old enough to know from experience that things never quite go to plan. Yes, we could be in for an end to Democracy, that possible. But, if we’re there, the filibuster doesn’t mean a thing. If our institutions are strong enough to hold up for the next four years, then the filibuster will be as contentious as it always is, when the majority has only a slim hold on power.

Even worse, it appears that Republicans have also managed to win majorities in the Senate and House. While thin, those majorities are enough that we can expect some of the Republican priorities to start getting passed. My major question for the first six months of 2025 will be, does the filibuster survive? I know many folks on the left wanted to kill it, when Republican Senators were using it to obstruct anything more progressive than not kicking puppies. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, will the left suddenly fall back in love with the filibuster? I suspect so. I also suspect that the MAGA wing of the GOP is going to be keen to kill the filibuster the first time it gets in the way of their project. And I wonder where the less dickish members of the GOP will come down on the issue.

Personally, I don’t find Evangelical support of Trump all that surprising.
When you get down to brass tacks, this is an election between two candidates. Almost no one is going to look at those two candidates and find a perfect fit. It’s quite possible that people won’t even find a good fit. But, they have three choices, either one of the candidates or not voting at all. The latter of those choices is pointless, if one has policy preferences that they want to achieve. That only leaves picking the closest fit among the two candidates.

In may corners of Lemmy, and in this community specifically, there has been a very strong push towards the sort of “vote Blue, no matter who” message, which has been around for several cycles. And this message is not wrong. Harris’s position on the war in Gaza has a lot of detractors. But, the choice is not between Harris and someone with a better position. The race is between Harris and Trump, whose position on Gaza is likely worse for those detractors. If those detractors don’t want things to get worse, they pretty much have to accept the situation as is, vote Harris and push for changes. And I suspect a lot of folks will support Harris, some enthusiastically, in spite of that policy difference. Because they will find other policy positions that they strongly support are also supported or championed by Harris. Better a flawed candidate that one which is diametrically opposed to the policy positions which one holds most dear.

The thing which seems to be forgotten by folks who wonder “how can Evangelicals support Trump?”, is that this same problem cuts both ways. The people who hold GOP aligned policy preferences hold those beliefs just as strongly as Liberal/Progressive folks hold their own. That they would fall into a “vote Red, no matter who” mindset should not be surprising at all. And for Evangelicals, I’d argue that this mindset may be even stronger. These are folks who believe that, not only does this life hinge on their actions, they also truly believe that the here-after does as well. As much fun as we might make of people for believing in an invisible sky-wizard, they really, really believe all that stuff. And their entire self-identity will be built on the version of that belief system. And let me stress that it’s specifically “their version of that belief system”. The various versions of the Christian Bible have a lot of ambiguous and contradictory stuff in them. It’s easy enough to dig out justifications for nearly any positions one wants to take. And Trump’s messaging has been pretty well aligned with the mainstream Evangelical version of policy positions on all the major topics. Harris’s positions, on the other hand, are in direct oppositions to those positions.

Why does that matter so much? One of the deeply important policy positions to Evangelicals, for several decades now, has been overturning Roe v. Wade. And for all the shit one might say about Trump, he actually got that done. Nixon, Regan, Bush, and Bush all failed in that one, paramount goal. Trump, did it. Stop and imagine for a moment, a politician whose personal life you find distasteful, yet they managed to accomplish the one single policy goal you hold above all others, would you go vote against them? Especially when their opposition is loudly campaigning to undo that major policy win for you? Oh, and that opposition is also campaigning against just about every other social policy position you hold. Anyone saying “yes” to that question is bullshitting themselves.

Now, is Trump going to get anything else done for the Evangelicals? Who knows. But, Harris certainly isn’t and she’s actively hostile to their worldview. And Trump already got “goal number one” done. It seems like a reasonable bet that someone who already won the top line fight might win a few of the other ones as well. And all that “fascism, threat to democracy stuff”? Ya, that’s just liberals whining because they are losing. It’s Godwin’s Law in action. The lawsuits and criminal convictions, that’s just liberals weaponizing the DoJ to stop Trump, since they can’t stop him legitimately. And Trump’s past as a horrible person? A personal turnaround story of a “lost soul coming to Jesus” is damned near a foundational myth of Evangelicalism.

No, Evangelicals supporting Trump is neither surprising, nor unexpected. And you can bet they will latch right onto the next GOP candidate to come along. And it’s not all that hard to understand. If you have ever bought into any version of “vote Blue, no matter who”, then you are intimately familiar with the same logic. From their perspective, the US is in the grips of an existential crisis which is being perpetrated by Democrats. The very foundations of their self are “under attack” as society moves further and further away from their central truths. And, from my own perspective, I don’t see that there is really any way to convince those folks otherwise. Trump isn’t the Devil in the desert tempting Jesus. To them, he’s the flawed man who is going to save their version of the US the only way he can. He’s a vigilante, bending or breaking the rules, because the rules are stacked against “the righteous”. That’s the mindset you are up against.

Even worse that acquisition links back to the Embracer Group. Hopefully KC:D 2 makes it out the door before Embracer full fucks up Warhorse.

Ya, in fairness to MS, Windows XP was a good release (post SP1, like most “good” MS releases). But, the fact is that MS is going to push the latest version, regardless of how ready it is for use. MS was hot for folks to switch to Windows ME. And holy fuck was that a terrible OS. MS also did everything short of bribery to get folks to switch to Vista (anyone remember Windows Mojave?). The “upgrade, or else” mantra has always been their way. Not that I blame them too much, it does need to happen. It just sucks when the reason for the new OS is more intrusive ads and user tracking.

Many years ago, I attended a Windows XP launch event. The Microsoft presenter had the perfect line to describe how MS views this:
“Why should you upgrade to Windows XP? Because we’re going to stop supporting Windows 98!”

This was said completely unironically and with the expectation that people would just do what MS wanted them to do. That attitude hasn’t changed in the years since. Win 10 is going to be left behind. You will either upgrade or be vulnerable. Also, MS doesn’t care about the home users, they care about the businesses and the money to be had. And businesses will upgrade. They will invariably wait to the last minute and then scramble to get it done. But, whether because they actually give a shit about security or they have to comply with security frameworks (SOX, HIPAA, etc.), they will upgrade. Sure, they will insist on GPOs to disable 90% of the Ads and tracking shit, but they will upgrade.

It’s a mobile game, with Tencent involved. Was there ever any question it was going to be a soulless cash-grab?

Someone is trying to re-create the virus from Snow Crash

Probably worth noting that, if you are using an employer owned system to watch said porn, they likely have software on the endpoint which will let them see what porn you are watching, regardless of HTTPS/VPN/Tor. Depending on how much your employer cares about such things, that may or may not come back to bite you. I’ve worked at places where we regularly reported on users watching porn on work computers, and I’ve worked at places where we only reported on users getting malware while browsing porn at work. But, never assume your activity isn’t being monitored on employer owned systems.

I’m glad to see them trying and I really do want to see competition in the digital game storefront space. However, I have zero trust in EA to not try and fuck me as a customer at some point. So ya, no matter how good of a fee structure they offer devs, they will continue to lack the one thing devs actually care about: customers.

Also, as a Linux gamer, it’s really tough to consider a store front which doesn’t offer a Linux client. Sure, I might be able to get their app running in Wine. But, at that point, maybe I should just go support the company which is supporting me.

What Im observing though is more and more indies filling the void with smaller and cheaper games due to easy access to digital distribution. Not exactly a new take as its been hapening for over 15 years now. Interestingly, Epic seems to not take the same stance as Steam does in this space. Where steam gives pretty much any shovelware the same chances, Epic wants to be super picky about these low budget titles. Where is Epic’s Balatro?

This reminds me a lot of the days of the original PlayStation (PS). Nintendo was the large, dominant company. But, they were also really, really picky with the games they let on their platform (still are). Along comes Sony with a better physical format and a willingness to let just about anything on their system. And there were a lot of terrible titles on the PS; but, there were also some real gems from smaller devs and lots more choice for people to find what they wanted to play. That openness and plethora of options drew people to the system. Sure, Nintendo is still around and still a juggernaut, but they gave up a lot of market space to Sony.

Sweeney and many of the big studios seem dead set on trying to replicate lightning. They keep churning out Fortnight clones, live service games and lootbox infested grind fests. None of this is because they want to make a game for players, it’s all a bald-faced money grab. And it comes across so clearly in their games. Yes, big budget games cost a lot of money and I don’t begrudge studios trying to make money. I’m more than happy to throw money at devs who make a great game (I just pledged ~$250 at the Valheim Board Game project, based mostly on the fact that I fucking love Valheim). I’ve also bought into way too many Early Access games, because they looked like they had the bones of good games. But, the big budget games seem to get lost trying to pump every last dollar out of your wallet and just quickly become a turn off.

I remember one particular instance in Dragon Age, where an NPC had a “Quest Available” marker floating above his head. When you talked to him, you quickly discovered that you could buy his quest and the game was happy to kick you over to the EA store so that you could buy his quest right there. Fuck that noise. I’m not against DLC, but that sort of “in your face” advertising pisses me right off. Hell, I’m one of those weirdos who likes the Far Cry series. I put tons of hours into Far Cry 5 (seriously, the wing suit was just good fun). Far Cry 6 was ok and I did finish it, though the micro-transaction spam grated on me hard. After that experience, I’m not sure I want a Far Cry 7.

And I think that points to the elephant in the room. Big publishers, like EA are so focused on making profits, they have lost sight of making a good game. Give me a solid, complete experience. Give me good controls, enough story to hold the action together and just a general sense of fun. Once that is in place, then maybe throw hats for sale on top of that. But, when lootboxes and micro-transactions are core to the gameplay and the game is balanced to force you in the direction of buying that crap, fuck your game. If the core gameplay is designed to suck so much that I want to buy cheats to bypass that core gameplay, I’ll save myself a bunch of money and just skip the game entirely. There are way too many options available out there, which don’t suck, for me to waste my time and money shoveling your shit.

writes Nestler. “We want to hear from you when you think Reddit is making decisions that are not in your communities’ best interests. But if a protest crosses the line into harming redditors and Reddit, we’ll step in.”

Translation: We don’t really give a shit what you think. Now shut up and generate that content for us to sell to AI companies.

While I don’t agree with the criminalization of marijuana, it’s really rough when it comes to a prosecutor and a law they may not like. Step back and ask the question, “should an Attorney General (AG) be allowed to not prosecute laws they don’t agree with?” You might be willing to say, “yes” for laws you also don’t agree with; but, what happens when it starts to cover laws you want to see enforced? Should “prosecutorial discretion” effectively allow an AG a complete veto power over the laws as passed by the State and Federal legislatures?

As much as it may suck for the person in that position, it would be really bad for democracy to allow that sort of power. We empower an AG to enforce the law as written. But, we also expect that they will enforce the law as written. So ya, I would expect that Harris (or her office), as AG, prosecuted marijuana cases. That’s really what the whole “rule of law” thing means. It means the laws, as written, being enforced on all people. And it’s up to us, the people, through our representatives to get that law changed.

And hopefully, this will work out to be more than an empty campaign promise. Though, I don’t plan to hold my breath.

Some employees have accused Dell of trying to shrink its workforce with this policy

There’s the real goal. Cut headcount without directly cutting headcount. Of course, the headcount which bails first will be the highest performers with the greatest ability to find other employment. But, that won’t show up on the bottom line for a few years.