“We are looking into a way to turn this into multiple subscription services focused on getting you to gamble that will be allowed in our primary markets.”

• at my own expense

self deprecating humor is supposed garner laughs by exposing relatable vulnerabilities that people can laugh about. It is not supposed to actually make you a loser everyone is just laughing at.

It has been a long time since most of those places have been cold enough, long enough, to have a lake become that solidly frozen. It has been 30+ years since I have seen this happen in the mid atlantic.

A law doesn’t have to be effective for its stated purpose. If the law allows them to have more control over the internet, bypass rights, etc. it is an effective law for them.

Probably didn’t have them on the app profile. She liked how he looked, and he may have approached her profile/responded to her message, in a way that socially acceptable to her, and nothing on his profile was a red flag to what she was looking for, so she agreed to meet him for coffee. Then, upon being told his hobbies are watching anime, and he has playing a video game, she lost interest, not what she was looking for though he was otherwise acceptable.

If you have been watching, the courts have been making rulings to liberalize gun ownership, and carry/use laws. Simultaneously they have been making rulings that have been making it easier, and easier, for cops to basically use this liberal state of gun rights as a reason to treat everyone as a lethal threat, and basically disregard a lot of your rights, like the 4th, and 5th, if they even think you have a gun. There is a blanket reason to disregard constitutional protections being crafted here.

That is the lesson their investment board learned. It caused strife in the company because of the divide it showcased between those who made the company, and those who own it.

And every person in a comment section saying “don’t feed the troll” are probably far worse at spotting trolls than they would like to think.

A launch that taught companies they can in fact release unfinished games and still outsell everything they have previously done

I just looked a bit more into this. There is a whole history of scrutinizing Nexon’s material and then screen capping single frames of animation to “prove” they are sneaking in this “misandrist” hand gesture. Looking at a back log of these this is on the level of those people presenting a single frame of someone like Beyonce on stage, and claiming what they captured clearly shows she is making satanic hand gestures.

I mean, if you’re gonna use a hammer for building IKEA furniture, instead of hamming, like hammers are clearly designed for, it’s your own fault.

man, imagine thinking having friends has no survival value, if you didn’t know Lewis’ family was well off, this would make it obvious.

Any point of origin is going to introduce its own biases, whether they intend to or not. The solution is to have AI development be decentralized, and have as many points of origin as possible. After introduction most of the bias seen will be a result of the majority of the information it is encycloping.

I wish

I don’t. I watched a breakdown from a lawyer on youtube when it was first posted, but I have searched and not found that video. It was just a recommended. Though I can’t imagine there is no record of what is going on. Basically, when they are shutting down the servers, they are patching out the ability to host, which is lame, and they don’t even have the tenuous argument of it really being competition like WoW did.

Yes, this is the Far Side

I mean, maybe

I would buy it just for the free kid-shippil

looks more like one of the hypersonic test aircraft from the 70s and 80s that the US had developed

they aren’t just turning the servers off, while there is part of the suit due to advertised promise vs what happened, the second point is they literally pushed an update that made running the software on your own, private, server, impossible. The point is that the game companies are making it so you are not able to do what you want with it. This is just one suit that is fighting for structures that protect you owning what you buy. It is multifaceted, from right to repair, to right to use software you purchase in any personal way you like. there is a broad, multi-industry, movement to make all products a “service”. Software was one of the first, and currently the largest, set of industries that do this. From single player video games needing to contact a company server just to start, to features of your car, house, and appliances requiring continuous payment schemes, where they can just deny access, even though you paid for them. It has gone on for along time, and now the mainstream population is being affected, and some are fighting back.

I am clearly on the side of you own what you pay for. They don’t owe you servers, updates, etc. They owe you being able to do those things, for your own purposes (ie not commercial), and not disabling everything when they no longer feel like putting resources into it.