Cyv_

That’s basically the crux of the accusations. Valve says it’s only for steam keys, other devs say they’ve been told not to sell their game for less elsewhere, even if they don’t include a steam key. I guess we’ll see as the case continues.

Yes, it will likely be vetoed, assuming it makes it that far. I still think it’s worth doing though. I’d much prefer we hit over 2/3s to override the orange fuckwit, but it might help sway a few idiots who somehow think it isn’t a war, or that this isn’t entirely maga/Trump’s fault.

That and forcing an actual vote forces accountability from the reps who publicly vote against it, they have to take a position instead of floating in that “well we don’t wanna make daddy angry…” void of ignoring the problem to avoid angering either side. That might help in the midterms.

I’m not gonna pretend this is that effective, but it’s better than nothing. The bar is in hell lol.

“It’s a revolution, it’s the best thing ever, it’s magically the best at AI, it’s a super chip!”

It’s a mobile GPU. We have a lot of those Jensen, keep it in your pants for fucks sake.

Blurry cat pics are the best cat pics

I’m fairly sure you can’t hear enemy voice chat in CS2, so I imagine you wouldn’t hear the theme song. Not sure about the other games tho.

Most of the graphical changes seem… fine I guess. The characters faceplant right into the weird hyperrealistic uncanny valley tho.

I’m not sure them mentioning more dialogue and cutscenes makes me particularly excited. Seeing what they’ve changed and added in the trailer doesn’t inspire confidence, it feels like those joke AAA gaming tutorial things where they state the obvious in a hyper positive cheesy voice and maybe I’m just picky because its different, but here we are.

The multiplayer looks sort of neat, too bad I’d have to buy a switch 2, pay for Nintendo online, and suffer on Nintendo’s shitty servers to use it.

I’ll probably just stick to the recomp. My favorite part of the game is the gameplay, and that looks completely unchanged.

This comment is a decent example of the antagonistic relationship that helldivers seem to have with the devs. I doubt they are actively trying to ruin their own game, but mistakes are very regularly framed that way in feedback, and said feedback is usually very angry, and usually written in a way to insult the developers competence or choices.

I just don’t see that level of anger in most other games, and I really don’t know what’s so different in this case.

The helldivers community seems to constantly be one patch away from burning down arrowhead studios, so there’s that.

Grand total it has 4 extra buttons, 2 capacitive strips, 2 touchpads, gyro, and the fancy magnetic joysticks. $100 did not surprise me at all.

Of course, if you don’t care about any of those features, it isn’t the best deal, in the same way that a luxury sports car makes for a shit commuter vehicle. Not that the steam controller is “luxury” but like, if you don’t want the extra features then the higher price probably isn’t worth it. That doesn’t make it overpriced, it means you aren’t the target audience.

Full disclosure. I’m that target audience. I’m already mentally mapping extra buttons to the left touchpad and thinking about setting the back buttons to my armored core’s shoulder weapons.

I was referring to the (retracted) study by monsanto, saying Roundup was safe. I was actually underestimating though, the study was from 2000, so the study you referred to in terms of roundup is actually from 26 years ago :)

Though there was a study in 2019 bringing up a lot of the concerns, and I think that might be the one I was thinking of. https://www.washington.edu/news/2019/02/13/uw-study-exposure-to-chemical-in-roundup-increases-risk-for-cancer/

Also, just in case you were serious, hard to tell, I wasn’t born yesterday. I’d have a hard time typing if so.

My honest answer, is to do your own research. To be more specific though, read the article. Then the study the article is based on. Then do a few google searches and read a few related studies. Look for a general consensus. How many studies are there. What methods do they use? Sample sizes?

Basically, validating this stuff requires work and critical thinking. It’s much easier to claim the institutions are corrupt, and that you don’t trust anything they say. Doing that also leaves you with nothing but popular opinion, rumors, and whatever you think sounds about right based on a knee jerk reaction.

How can anyone hold a conversation or argument about it when you look at data and go “no actually I don’t agree because spooky unrelated study on a different thing by a different journal like 10 years ago”

Edit: *26 years ago, mb friends

Oo trying this today, thanks!

Edit: mission accomplished, my kindle now has doom (though it did immediately crash lol)

I mean, I get if you wanna use AI for that, it’s your project, it’s free, you’re a volunteer, etc. I’m just not sure I like the idea that they’re obscuring what AI was involved with. I imagine it was done to reduce constant arguments about it, but I’d still prefer transparency.