ExFed

I hate headlines like these. It feels like they’re intentionally ambiguous.

Honestly, I’m a bit skeptical of StopKillingGames. It feels like a good thing, but it also comes off as naive. Like the whole “just distribute the server” requirement is impossible with the way modern games are developed, and may be cost-prohibitive to implement for most developers well into the future. Besides, some games really are less like a painting and more like a musical; performance art necessarily has to end at some point, so it’s all about the experience and the memories. Nobody complains when the actors take a bow, because that’s the expectation.

Louis Rossman sometimes rubs me the wrong way, but he usually makes really good, nuanced points: https://youtu.be/TF4zH8bJDI8?si=m4QGHfHY1fOtITpw

Keep the debate alive, because we all love playing games.

The challenge is that requires creativity. Creativity isn’t a stable investment.

Viva La indie game studio!

Didn’t they give out refunds? That seems like the right thing to do when a massively multiplayer game is dead on arrival.

Ugh, don’t get me started. By “American Christians” I assume you mean “Christian Nationalists” … Christian Nationalism is about as Christian as the moon is made of cheese:

But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ…

I work at a father son activity centre…

That’s great!

…you would be shocked at how few women I see spending time with their own children!

I’m not at all shocked. Selfish behavior isn’t exclusive to men. Women are also deeply flawed humans.

These are US based and based on separated parents.

I provided non-anecdotal evidence, and you shit on it? What are your priorities?

Selectively observing statistics doesn’t give a good representation of real life, but shitting on other people for selectively observing statistics doesn’t help, either.

If you’ve been alive for more than 30 seconds, it’s not just anecdotal. But to appease the challenge, anyways: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-269.pdf There’s a massive imbalance between custodial fathers and custodial mothers. Even worse is the imbalance in child support negligence.

Can we please just admit that there are normal biological/social/economic/perceived/identity differences between men and women? That’s not to say all of those differences are good or desirable, or that they are without variation, but can we at least recognize the state of our world without shunning those with different viewpoints?

Harsh words. After all, Rankine is best.

You’re right that keeping European Honey Bees (Apis mellifera), even though they are introduced/invasive to North America, isn’t usually detrimental to native pollinators. However, Apis is in no way in danger; they are an agricultural livestock.

Point is, saying you’re “saving the bees” by keeping honey bee hives is like saying you’re “saving the birds” by keeping chickens. Weird flex, but okay.

Neat article. It’s a bummer pumped hydro doesn’t get the love I think it deserves. Hopefully it gets a bit more soon.

But now I have a new pet peeve: when an author defines initialisms that are never used more than once outside of their definition.

Fair enough, political definitions are rarely well-defined.

I guess people often use it to mean the more internet-savvy, meme-posting, trolling right wing.

Yeah, that’s how I understood it… Not really something Eich seems to do much.

I’m not sure why anybod would think it’s not connected.

Just because Eich has awful views doesn’t give license to also be awful by throwing around random other accusations or connecting him with trolling skinheads. Remember, even the Nuremberg Trials had defense attorneys, so let’s stick to the high road of justice, not the shitty cesspool that the far right wants to drag us into.

Please, go back and carefully read what I wrote. I’ve said nothing about whether I find Eich’s donation morally acceptable or not, let alone anything beyond that. You seem quick to condemn on nothing more than circumstance. The far-left is just as illiberal, regressive, and unjust as the far-right.

Beware of groupthink. It makes for smooth brains.

Congrats! You’ve made a formal fallacy while sounding antagonistically patronizing!

In my experience, anybody who claims morality is “clear cut” is probably naive, otherwise they’re selling a cult. The fact that you think my line is questioning is suspicious without knowing anything about me or anything beyond this thread makes me suspect it’s the latter, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt for now.

Yes, it’s a philosophical debate. That’s why I’m here, on the Internet, asking philosophical questions, to spur debate.

I agree, it ought to be a hard line.

Question is, though, where’s the line? We don’t all come with the same exact moral compass, and we’re all perfectly capable of rationalizing evil, so you can’t just say “be a moral and non-bigoted person” and expect the desired outcome. Plenty of slave owners worldwide were convinced that slavery was not just morally admissible but even admirable.

No matter where that line is, it needs to be well-defined and agreed-upon, or else it’s arbitrary, and thus open to abuse and corruption by demagogues.

Sure, but “alt-right” means something specific, and I was missing the jump of reason … but this thread has gotten pretty heated, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised people were weirdly upset by what I thought was an innocent question.

Oh well, it’s the internet, after all.

So, not trying to sympathize with Eich here, where do you get “alt-right” from?

I switched to Duck Duck Go and Firefox and have never looked back.

Brave always seemed kinda scummy to me, like they’re robbing Peter to pay Paul.