• 0 Posts
  • 247 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle

  • It doesn't though. At best, it messes with the boot record (which has been mentioned) which isn't deleting a partition. Windows can't delete a partition it doesn't actually use.

    You can continue your inability to understand the actual details of what you're talking about. I'm not defending Windows. I'm defending telling the truth about PCs. You can continue your fanboyism and inexperience with operating systems and hard drives.


  • Not everyone here is a Lemmy user. I just don't like people making idiotic comments. There's plenty do criticize about Windows without having to make stuff up due to lack of IT knowledge. If you claim calling out someone's incorrect IT knowledge as a defending Windows, that's just you being an idiot and knowing nothing of IT.

    It's amazing, bro that you expose your woefully inadequate knowledge. If you want to troll, don't pretend to be anything else.







  • I mean, your given example isn’t actually an example of your previous points. Its not a “every cloud has a silver linings” statement, it’s a “I still believe in God even when bad things happen. This isn’t proof of neither his non-existence or his non-caring.” Eve your example is a poor thought experiment because it assumes a limited power god who can only break your foot, but can’t actually prevent the drink driving accident in any less painful way.

    It’s a “I’m going to pretend this was supposed to happen and is a good thing regardless of whether good things come from it.”

    It’s the response to “earthquake kills 1000s”.

    The other, less religious reasoning you provided is much more clear and less stretches with a lot better phrases. Even your descriptions would work better than providing the phrase itself to someone who is currently hurting. This phrase ultimately defends the bad thing as a good thing instead of telling the person shit happens, play the cards you were dealt, you can still win even when you’re coming from behind.


  • I’m not denying that buggy games exist and that some big mistakes exist, but there’s a lot more games that are bug-free enough to be playable (I don’t believe any game will ever be fully bug free as they get more complex) than are unplayable. That’s all. I’m not defending the ones that do get released either. Though I’ll say it’s the fault of executives and not the actual developers. At the same time, there are specific scenarios where I get it and would defend it, but they’re rare and don’t really apply to AAA games (needing to release the game to stop from going out of business, and it’s only defensible if they still fix the issues after the fact. This obviously doesn’t apply when the decision to not push back release is for shareholder revenue instead).

    Edit: my point is Cyberpunk 2077 is not the norm.







  • It doesn’t come across insulting at all. It comes across as naive.

    Like, it literally has a Wikipedia page and doesn’t mention anything else.

    I mean, literally isn’t used to mean just figuratively. It’s actually an exaggeration to mean that the concept is so strong that it literally triggered the figurative comparison for real. Context is key there. And context is important. That’s the great thing about that though is you rarely need extra information to show which definition you mean. If I said it’s so hot outside that I’m literally on fire, you don’t need to question the meaning.

    But here? Let’s be honest. The word usage has exploded on Lemmy. They wanted so badly to use the term in the cool way. No one would have used the word that way before. No one uses its ‘literal’ definition now really. Because it’s generally not how humans in society have discussions. No one describes the enshitification of something as a clinical description. If it were used as a joke? Sure. But now it’s either someone so divorced from reality that they don’t even know how to communicate or it’s just folks who heard the word, thought it was cool, but didn’t really understand it. That’s all that is. I can’t believe folks are trying to defend the “evolution” of language on one hand by describing a loss of accuracy and clarity in language, but then on the ither hand defending it from some weird historical perspective. It’s honestly entertaining to see people come at this and argue with entirely contradictory points of view. “Words change meaning and this is it’s new meaning” vs “that’s been its meaning forever”. Like, let’s try to at least coordinate the defense of the person who wanted to sound cool. No one says “enshittified” in place of “it’ll go to shit” or “get fucked”. But instead you expect me to believe this is some ole-timey bastard saying, “sir, it will be enshittified.” Come on buddy. It’s weird you even thought all those words you spoke would sound insulting. Like you actually had a good point or something. See? That last bit there. That’s what something insulting sounds like.