Super mario bros was clearly about promoting poligamy.

Complaining about “the way it’s included” has been a trick to try to gatekeep minorities that dates back from to the origin of time.

For those people always pretend it’s ok to include X except in “that particular context” or “in that particular way” and unsurprisingly enough it’s never the right context or the right way. Unless of course the context is out of their way.

I’ve seen the same boring argument repeated for every single minorities over the last 50 years.

As an Harvard alumni, I got the joke.

I remember very well bioware games and others in past decades got the same kind of reaction because « omg gay romance, that kind of agenda shouldn’t be pushed in a video game, think of the children ».

So now the new social “battle” is trans right and the game has a gender questioning character (From a review, I haven’t played) that seems to take at most a whole 5 minutes over the course of the whole game. Why not.

Now the game has been designed to cater to 10 year old and not the older crowd who played the original so it doesn’t have the depth you’d want and the dialog is on the nose. Well, too bad. Just play something else.

Nestle and Boeing produces things that you consume. Bezos is a billionaire because of all the shit that you bought from him.

If everyone refused to fly, Boeing would disappear in about 5 years and if they didn’t buy shit they don’t need, there wouldn’t be a fast fashion industry.

You can turn it around as much as you want at the end it’s the behaviour of the masses that matters.

Hannibal Lecter ? (The great)

An OnlyFan channel is not a startup.

Liking ice cream doesn’t mean you have to like every single flavor.

The borderland serie had a story? I just remember shooting at stuff. I had fun shooting at cell shaded stuff.

Oh I agree. Once you already have a PC or a console the added experience of a VR headset isn’t a great value proposition for the price.

It’s mostly the price. If you have 500 or even 1000 to invest to play games, first that puts you squarely in the top 1% worldwide but more importantly a VR headset is the worst choice in terms of breadth of games you can play. So the first choice will always be a PC or a console which leave the VR headset for the people who actually have 2k+ to spend for gaming and actually want one. A tiny tiny minority.

If you add on top of it that you still have a 50/50 chance of getting nausea each time you play and that it’s a pain in the ass (or an additional expense) if you wear glasses, and the space requirement. It’s not a surprise if the market is stalled.

As for useful implementation, my cousin is an orthopedic surgeon and they use VR headset and 3D x-ray scanner, 3d printers and a whole bunch of sci-fi stuff to prep for operation, but they are not using a meta quest2, we’re talking 50k headset and million dollar equipment. None of that does anything to the gaming market.

My though is that the tech need to get a couple of order of magnitude better and be usable as a day to day computer for work. When I can code in one 10 hours a day without fucking up my eyes, vomiting myself, sweating like a pig and getting neck strain it will have the possibility to take over the computer market, until then, it’s a gimmick.

I mean for a hobby project that no one cares about sure. Otherwise the whole CI/CD process was invented exactly to avoid having devs push untested and untrackable crap on production servers. So once there are more than two people in a team and paying customers with access to a lawyer that’s going to be a hard pass.

Anyway the main reason your CI/CD are slow is that you’re using $5 workers with 1Gb ram. There’s a reason the build is faster on your 12 core/64Gb laptop, the issue is usually not the process, the issue is being cheap on the infrastructure. The only good thing about GitHub CI workers is that they are cheap but performance wise they are garbage.

You don’t technically need docker though. It’s just a convenience layer.

Something amorphous talking about donuts.

Elder Scroll Arena 12 ftw !

And I don’t understand why we should care if it’s unique as long as it’s fun.

Oh don’t get me started on modern “CS” curriculum of some schools, it’s atrocious. I see them start learning about react and nodejs in year 1 because “that’s what companies need” but that leaves them with massive fundamental knowledge gaps. I’ve seen people 5 years in their degree who struggled with Boolean logic.

I believe they should start at the bottom of the stack and climb up instead of starting somewhere at the top and being left oblivious about the massive amount of stuff going on below. And the “internship” system we have in my country is massive BS. Basically instead of learning they spend 1/2 of their education time doing menial job in companies. Which means their 5 years degrees is barely 2.5 of actual school time but we still like to pretend it’s equivalent to a normal masters degree.

The “need of the industry” for “IT people” has lead to the proliferation of diploma mill curriculum that churn out monkeys lightly trained on the proverbial typewriter and calls them “software engineers”.

But we still have excellent schools that produce very well trained people, and I do not believe they produce less of them, it’s just that we also produce a lot more that went through bad curriculums.

You make the same mistake as the previous person. You take the exemple of the minority of people who cared to try to understand how computer worked and generalize it to the entire gen.

I have thousands of people in my office that prove everyday that millenial are for the most part tech illiterate and do not care about how thing works. I’ve seen the millenial arrive in the work env and the gen-z and there is absolutely no difference. Millenial were exactly as dumb (or as smart). If anything, I think gen-z are actually smarter because they come in not believing the corporate bullshit the X and the Y drank like cool-aid. But that’s another topic.

In any case, all the stuff we had to go through didn’t make us smarter, for every 10,000 of people of my gen who learned they had to edit autoexec.bat to launch a game, I’d bet that barely one knew what the heck himem.sys actually was. That didn’t make them smarter, just monkeys who learned a trick.

So yeah, geeky gen-Z don’t need to tweak as many parameters, they can directly launch fusion 360 and start designing parts for their 3D printers. Tech has moved on. Gen-Z geeks fiddle with other stuff than shitty windows drivers.

I don’t know how many time I answered the same thing to the exact same argument but here goes:

In short, it’s most likely not true. You’re implying the the millennials were generally more competent but it’s very likely wrong, the vast majority of people in that gen had absolutely no clue what they were doing on a computer most of the time they just knew how to do a few limited things with them.

The apps didn’t make the masses tech illiterate, the app adjusted to the existing ones and removed the stuff they couldn’t never understand, like where to save a file to be able to find it later. (I’ve worked in a support call center and I can tell you with 98.5% accuracy that the lost file is in system32).

The gen-z has quite a lot of smart, curious tech savvy people, and a vast majority of tech-illiterate people, so did the millenial, and the X, and the boomers.

This whole generational superiority argument is just as baseless as it was when my gen was blaming yours for being lazy, not able to learn anything due to a short attention span and an obsession for brunch and avocado toast.

Lots of good game were done under intense soul destroying marathon crunch. I’m all for good workers condition but I’m pretty sure they can’t prove a causal relation between the quality of a game and the workers conditions.

Hell, if exploiting workers and miserable working conditions didn’t actually work fine, we wouldn’t need unions in the first place.

I’m mostly pro NATO but that is litteraly the worst single argument possible anyone ever made. Here’s a one word answer that totally shred its credibility: Lybia.

It’s only for defense until we decide to invade a country… but anyway, the real strength of NATO as a weapon is political influence. It allows the US to impose their security objectives to all the other members, and currently their main competitor is China and that was transcribed into NATO’s official strategy in 2022 with the stated objective to expend into the Indian and Pacific ocean specifically to counter them.

Can’t really expect them to like it.