I don’t know if you have a wife but I’m now going to imagine you have a wife. You’re now married. Now I’m going to imagine having consensual sex with your new wife. Now I’m imagining you’re killing your wife because she cheated on you. I guess you’re a murderer now, it’s true because I thought of it. Actually I thought about a lot of way worse things about you but I’m not going to go into detail about all the vile shit you’ve done, I’ll just sum it up as you being the worst human being who has ever lived. Since that’s what I thought it must be true, right?

I think you might’ve missed my point. Policy can be taken as “always as issue” in the same as taxation is “always an issue”, because people will always have opinions on how to do things. But my question was more along the lines of there being an actual problem with the current policy or did people just start complaining about immigration because the right wing complains about immigration.

My experience was that people didn’t really mind immigration until the right wing started complaining how the current policy is bad and we’re letting freeloaders and other questionable individuals in.

Genuine question, is immigration really an issue or just something right-wing tries to prop up as an issue? Where I live the right-wing also campaigned heavily on immigration issue claiming that immigrants are coming and ruining the country. Year after year the average immigration was less than 1% of the entire population and in the special occasion where it went above 1% was when we took in Ukrainian refugees. But right wing kept propping it up until some people started to believe we actually have an immigration issue.

With that I mind I think we should always question whatever right-wing presents because they’re not above making shit up. If some right wing politician says the sky is blue I would get a second opinion before believing it.

At best it proves the concept of gods exists and I doubt anyone disagrees with that, you can’t really argue that a thought can’t exist. What it doesn’t prove is that God exists as some material or immaterial entity and that’s what atheists claim, that there is no existence of any entity that could be considered a god.

Why it doesn’t prove the existence of gods is simple. If the proof is that it exists because we thought it then dragons exist, faeries exist, even flat earth exists because there are people who think it exists. I don’t think I need to bring more examples to show how ridiculous the premise is. Just because we can think of a thing doesn’t mean that thing now exists.

I know that reading comprehension isn’t your strong suite but please do try and come back when you understand what I said before.

This war would’ve never even started if NATO didn’t keep expanding eastwards as Stoltenberg openly admitted

Except NATO isn’t expanding east because NATO wants to expand east. NATO expands east because the countries next to Russia want assurances against Russia. Poland and the Baltics know since MRP that you can’t trust Moscow. Finland and Sweden didn’t join NATO until Russia threatened them. In Ukraine the polling data correlates with Russia’s annexation of Crimea because the month before annexation Ukrainians had no desire to join NATO and the month after annexation majority Ukrainians wanted to join NATO. NATO expansions happen in response to the bullying by Russia. The whole “NATO shouldn’t expand east” is Russian talking point so Russia could continue bullying it’s neighbors. Your link says that exact same thing.

Being easily brainwashed by propaganda is not a sign of having a functioning brain.

You don’t need propaganda to see what shit demands Russia has. Let’s give them a third of Ukraine for a botched invasion and leave the door open for another invasion by not allowing them to join NATO. What sensible demands where Ukraine gains nothing from it.

This war would’ve never even started if Russia hadn’t done a full invasion. And everyone with a brain knows the peace demand from Russia are bullshit. You talk about millions dying but then are willing to subjugate millions under Russian occupation. But I guess when you and your lemmygrad pals believe “Russia did nothing wrong” it’s also pretty easy to believe Russia has every right to fuck over Ukraine.

Paul Rudd is so charismatic you feel like you’ve met him even if he’s only on your TV screen.

there’s something’s highly suspect about someone not understanding the difference between art made by a human being and some output spit out by a dumb pixel mixer. huge red flag imo.

Translation. I can’t argue your point so I’m going to try characters assassination.

if the original Mona Lisa were to be sold for millions of dollars, and then someone reveals that it was not the original Mona Lisa but a replica made last week by some dude… do you think the buyer would just go “eh it looks close enough”? no they would sue the fuck out of the seller and guess what, the painting would not be worth millions anymore. it’s the same painting. the value is changed. ART IS NOT A PRODUCT.

Pretty ironic to say art is not a product and then argue that its monetary value would decrease, which can happen only if you treat art as a product.

Imagine if instead of a physical painting Mona Lisa was a digital file and free on the internet, would people think Mona Lisa is less impressive as an art piece because anyone could own it? I think it’s artistic value wouldn’t decrease, only its value as a product would decrease because everyone could get it for free.

As a thought experiment let’s say an artist takes a photo of a sunset. Then the artist uses AI to generate a sunset and AI happens to generate the exact same photo. The artist then releases one of the two images with the title “this may or may not be made by AI”. Is the released image art or not?

If you say the image isn’t art, what if it’s revealed that it’s the photo the artist took? Does is magically turn into art because it’s not made by AI? If not does it mean when people “make art” it’s not art?

If you say the image is art, what if it’s revealed it’s made by AI? Does it magically stop being art or does it become less artistic after the fact? Where does value go?

The way I see it is that you’re trying to gatekeep art by arbitrarily claiming AI art isn’t real art. I think since we’re the ones assigning a meaning to art, how it is created doesn’t matter. After all if you’re the artist taking the photo isn’t the original art piece just the natural occurrence of the sun setting. Nobody created it, there is no artistic intention there, it simply exists and we consider it art.

Steam deck feels like a product people at Valve would use while the competition is making products they think would sell well. Turns out the product that feels good to use is much better than the product that looks better on paper.

But what’s the distinction? I’m not saying there isn’t but I would put those two examples as pve/coop and their difference comes from the fact that they’re in very different genres.

Ah checked the wrong version of NV, no updates for the CIS version (or however it’s called) but the regular version had a update in February.

When exactly? I can find game updates for FO4 but not for NV.

Pretty sure that was FO4, Bethesda wouldn’t touch NV with a 10 foot pole.

Just last month I was wondering how I would get Vortex working in Linux and decided my backlog is long enough to not bother. Guess it’s time to start another playthrough of New Vegas.

So tell SCOTUS either they reverse it and add that they’ll never do it again or they get “executive ordered”. If they refuse you “executive order” them, after all that’s what they thought wouldn’t be illegal. Continue until you get a SCOTUS who won’t refuse. If the SCOTUS wants to throw their lives away for their own stupidity, let them.

If he has practicality no limits what’s preventing him from getting the decision undone and making it so that the president could never have such power?

If he has all the power in the world he should also have power to undo that power.

Valve didn’t invent lootboxes. The concept has physically existed for decades, they’re called trading card packs or kinder eggs or gashapon. The latter is the inspiration for what became known as lootboxes. The first “lootbox” was actually in the Japanese version of MapleStory in 2004 and it spread in eastern markets (because pay to win is more normalized there) and in mobile games. It wasn’t until 2009 when EA added card packs to FIFA. Hard to say if they were inspired by the lootboxes from the east of the insane football trading card market in the west, or by both. It was only after a year and a half later in 2010 when Valve added loot boxes to TF2. So Valve definitely didn’t invent lootboxes, they weren’t even the first in the west to use them. You could argue that they popularized loot boxes but even there is an argument to be made that Overwatch was a much bigger cultural hit than TF2 or CSGO or EAs FIFA games and normalized lootboxes.

I don’t mind the “Valve is bad” narrative, but at least keep your facts straight. The “strongest DRM” is also BS but others have already somewhat covered that part.

And let’s look at music and coding. Since I can speak a bit to both. For music, OF COURSE there are difficulty sliders. When I took recorder back in school, they had 2 different versions of many songs. When I first learned Christmas music on piano, I learned special “simplified” tracks for the songs. I never “Got Gud” at music, but I still got to the end of the book.

Some songs have an easier version and a harder version, but being able to play a Christmas song on a piano doesn’t mean you can demand to be able to play Korsakovs Flight of the bumblebee on a piano. You just can’t play it, you have to “git gud” to play that song. And games are like songs. Some songs are easier, some song are harder. Some harder songs can be made easier, some can’t without losing an important part of the song.

And coding. Coding is the opposite of a Fromsoft game. You’re surrounded by mountains of tools that try to make it easier. When I bring in a junior developer, I’m not giving them some unforgiving code challenge to power through. Maybe they’ll never be good enough to design a specialized cache or optimize queries. So I give them the things they CAN do, and hold their hand so they always succeed. Junior devs don’t ever fail, not because they “git gud” but because I set them up to succeed by this little difficulty slider called “how hard is this ticket to do and how much help do they need from me?”

I feel like that analogy brings in an entirely different concept, the concept of a sherpa. You’re sherpaing junior developers by giving them easier problems and giving them tips on harder problems. But a Junior dev won’t magically know how to build a 3D engine or a compiler or something for an embedded system (just to give a few random examples). They still need to “git gud” to become a senior developer and be able to do those things. In fact I’d argue that software development as a profession is one of the closest professions to Fromsoft games, because you always need to learn new concepts or tools or ways to do things. Software development always challenges you the same way Fromsoft games challenge you. You can’t just take a problem and be “could I get the easy mode version of this problem”. And much like you sherpa junior developers so they could get better, some people sherpa others through Fromsoft games so those people could get better. Maybe instead of demanding an easy mode for your problems you find a sherpa who helps you get over them.