I don't see how that statement refutes the problem being something to do with kernal level access. It's entirely possible that the 24H2 update changed something that is playing poorly with the DRM in these titles.
Glide
joined 2 years ago
They already do have power over other people, and they like it that way. What they're fighting against is anyone who wants to take away from their fake meritocracy where they can continue to control and abuse the lives of the people who are under their thumbs in the workplace.
This is the part that needs to get repeated over, and over again. What we're fighting against is a group that wants to maintain the status quo because it advantages them. Nothing more, nothing less. If we want to win, we need them to see that cooperation is in their greater interest. Unfortunately, the left-most available political parties have failed to show them that time and time again, so they're turning the other direction.
Jesus christ, that's so many words for boring, circular logic.
Your argument is self-defeating. "We shouldn't do anything, because people are animals that can't understand and react to objective reality rationally" is borderline fatalism, and at the very least suggests that everything you are saying is a waste of breath. If you're right, no one here will accept objective reality, will do whatever they want and you are therefore wasting your time and energy. If you're wrong, well you're digging in on an invalid argument, and also wasting your time and energy.
So, my rebuttal is this: fuck off. Rude, but no less so than a childish laughing fit. Your entire deconstruction of my argument is riddled with fallacies and built from the bias that you are correct to begin with. Taking the time to address it beyond this is to give it more credit than it is worth, and I have better things to do with my night than engage with terminally-online pseudo-intellectualism. Either people are better than you give them credit for, or they're not, and I'd still rather waste my time trying to do the right thing than engage with pointless cynicism and smuggly jerk myself off about how superior I am for being smart while the world falls apart around me.
You are talking about taking a giant shit on everybody who's been saying that 2020 was a free and fair election when you immediately fling the same accusations the very first time an election doesn't go your way.
This is not what is happening, though. I address this in another post, but this is a false equivilency. Screaming fraud because of heresay from a demonstable liar, and then refusing to accept the results even after the audit without just cause is not the same as seeing these questionable and verifiable facts and performing an audit in response, particularly if the result is met with acceptance. To suggest that this response is occurring "the very first time an election doesn't go your way" is dishonest, as there were no widespread claims of voter fraud nor calls for recounts and audits in the 2016 election. By and large, people accepted the results.
Your 2028 hypothesis is predicated on the idea that Democrat voters will deny objective reality the way Trump voters have been. I suspect that would not be the case.
But we're not talking about verifying the results and then refusing to accept them anyway. That, would be chasing conspiracy theories. We're not talking about denial and a refusal to believe in objective reality. We're talking about easily (though slowly and expensively) verifiable facts. The false equivilency you're drawing between the two is delusional.
And that's really the issue here: false equivilency. The last election was challenged, and recounted, based on hot gas and whataboutisms. And we found that it was fair, so we should accept it. This time there is really strange data and openly accepted knowledge that the voting machines were compromised. We have more genuine reason to worry, so perhaps we should check instead of having completely irrational, and I'm starting to think maybe bad faith, arguments about it.
The argument of "oh, but if they DID cheat, it'll damage trust in the whole thing" just doesn't hold water. So what? If the system is broken we shouldn't trust it until visible measures have been made to fix it. And that's a good thing, civil war or no. We do not bend over to bullies when they threaten violence, because it just empowers them to take more and more. And look where it has gotten us.
So, stick your head in the sand? "People are going to lie, cheat and threaten violence, and questioning when it is happening is just going to stop us from ever trusting anyone in the future. We should just let them do whatever they want." Insane take tbh. I get how you reach the outcomes you're suggesting are possible, but I don't think it's as bleak as you've portrayed it, and simply rolling over as literal fascists rig the electoral process of the most powerful country in the world is straight up not a good idea.
Turns out the right was unified in their belief that they should be the ones with the power, but very divided on what they are going to do with it.
It's going to be an exhausting four years.
Why is it not bigger news that MTG is openly stating that the only reason any of these people are in power is because they have paid off all their victims and buried all the bodies. This is a verbal admission that she knows the entire GOP is filled with sex offenders, and the only reason they aren't in jail is that they all cover for each other.
Fucking do it. Release it all. Don't just threaten me with a good time. The people deserve to know exactly how morally bankrupt their representatives are. Not that you even need to see the evidence to know, with these blatant admissions, that they are morally bankrupt.
Weirdly glad to see your experiences mirror mine, even if they make a sad reality.
Idk. Doesn’t bode well for Lemmy long term, they make the entire software stink
This is my concern, too. I do respect what they've created - getting social networking out of the hands of corporations and functioning as a decentralized collective is a good idea - but as I said somewhere else, the ideology that led to this shared goal looks to be problematic. I have no interest in trading capital-fascism for good ol' fashioned fascism.
My experience with GOG is that it is a fringe option, at least in the combined North American (USA+Canada) culture. Plus, the unfortunate reality is that in many cases GOG's principles preclude it from being a genuine competitor to Steam. Insisting on being DRM free means half of released games never go to the platform, so it will always be the secondary "better if" option.
I worry about Steam's functional monopoly on PC game access. It hasn't been an issue so far, because it has remembered that it is, first and foremost, a service, providing consumer protection through a generous refund policy and supporting devs with easy access to simple matchmaking and anti-cheat systems. But without a healthy competitor, it would be easy for Steam to start milking it's users and developers alike.
Funny, I called him out on being more interested in attacking Liberalism and supporting fascist regimes than actually speaking out against human rights crimes, and noted that he has a concerning bias towards political spheres which currently have an approaching/ongoing election. My suspicion became that he's a tankie programmer who happens to just like this space in his down time, but genuine Putin praising Russian citizen/asset was never really off the table.
I can't help but read this headline as, "with climate change and the rise of fascism, the real world is ending, but how is this for a distraction: why can't RPGs get the sense of urgency right?"
And like, this is genuinely an article and discussion I'm interested in, so this is not a criticism of anyone or anything other than the ambiguity of language.