I took his criticisms of the combat as basically saying “this system is not interesting enough to form a satisfying gameplay loop”. That’s a critical statement which I actually agree with, though from my perspective that’s a key part of Persona’s core design: neither the combat system nor the social link system are endlessly enjoyable, so the player is intrinsically motivated to avoid lingering for too long and properly close the core gameplay loop by advancing the calendar. It’s that sort of pendulum-like cadence which gives the series its unique sense of momentum.

I do think that it’s a shame RPS’s Matt was unable to find joy in P3R’s gameplay loop due to disliking the social-link system… but I also see it as an opportunity to better understand the game as a holistic package in a way that can’t be achieved through a more carefully measured, quantitative analysis. The way I see things, the game is the game – I’m much more interested in understanding what’s in the game rather than what’s not, if that makes any sense.

I tend to prefer clicking through the unscored reviews first since I find that it’s generally a mark of a quality outlet. Rock Paper Shotgun in particular is an old favorite of mine, so their’s is the first review that I clicked on and let me tell you guys: it’s a real firecracker!

Matt clearly didn’t have a good time and I had to respectfully disagree with a lot of the points he’s made, but even so… his points are well-articulated and sensible. I’m rather glad for his uncommon perspective on the topic and I do think that RPS ultimately picked the right writer for the job. He hasn’t particularly changed my mind about a day-one purchase, of course – the main difference is now I’ll have a more nuanced and realistic expectation for what’s inside.

It’s a pretty different situation under closer examination. The DnD developers are ex-Nexon employees and they (allegedly) pitched the idea internally before deciding to leave and take the idea with them.

Nexon thought that they had a legal leg to stand on because of how IP laws work (i.e.: employee ideas on company time are company IP). Perhaps more importantly; they probably felt a need to retaliate in order to send a message to other employees who might want to try something similar.

Palworld, on the other hand, is made by a team with no ties whatsoever to GameFreak. If Pokemon were a younger franchise they might possibly have a patent case of some kind, but even the 3D games go back almost 24 years now.

History Youtube gets pretty whack about this because Google’s adsense algorithm freaks out when words like “Nazi” and “Stalin” appear. To name a few examples:

• “The Famine” in place of “Holodomor”
• Jo. [CENSORED] in place of “Stalin”, “The Patsies” in place of “The Nazis”

The second example is particularly amusing, being a video about how Shostakovich circumvented soviet censorship while self-censoring all instances of “Stalin” within the script.

Yes, exactly. The fans have spoken and we want the real Vaporeon!

Ah, yes, just over five attempts for every human alive. I assume they took the reply addresses at face value and have forwarded 45 billion cease & desist letters to Microsoft’s Redmond office?

Could have been MMANAA 😔

I’ve been collecting these, super hyped for February 🗣️🗣️🗣️💨💨💨🔥🔥🔥

• WE MAKING IT OUT OF TARTARUS WITH THIS ONE
• WE LANDING MARIN KARIN WITH THIS ONE
• WE DISTURBING THE PEACE WITH THIS ONE
• WE ENDING THE DARK HOUR WITH THIS ONE
• WE MEMENTO MORI WITH THIS ONE
• WE BURNING OUR DREAD WITH THIS ONE

(You’ve not been good)

No, I am not contradicting myself. Let me say it again with the ambiguity removed:

1. Cox Media isn’t an advertiser, they sell a dressed-up analytics service. Think spreadsheets (that’s literally the service they’re selling in this copy, a monthly report spreadsheet).
2. The “technology partner” selling this data to Cox is accessing it by bypassing the normal and correct operation of the device using malware.
3. What does not “exist” is a shadowy cabal of smartphone manufacturers scheming to hide listening devices in the pockets of their consumers.

I’m sure you still believe this is a load of apologia and frankly you can think what you want, but you should probably know that I’d already read about the Cox story when it first broke and specifically chose my words with that knowledge in mind.

Read the document:

The growing ability to access microphone data on devices like smartphones and tablets enables our technology partner to aggregate and analyze voice data during pre-purchase conversations.

Key word is “technology partner”. They’re buying voice transcripts ripped from someone else’s spyware and selling the service of scraping it for keywords and maybe somehow tying that back to an individual by cross-referencing the hit against data from traditional above-board ad platforms.

Google isn’t buying transcripts, Facebook isn’t buying transcripts. It’s Cox Media buying shady recordings stolen from spyware-compromised devices and then trying to whitewash it into something sellable with their (unverifiable) cross-analytics middleware.

we still have people that do not believe that the phones are always listening when seemingly any website or app you use gives you advertisements about what you were just talking about in the other room with the phone locked.

Oh come on. Don’t bring this into conspiracy territory. Yes, eavesdropping does happen, but it’s not something an uncompromised Android phone will do when locked. Even when it does happen in the case of spyware, the people doing it aren’t selling your transcriptions to advertisers.

People should still opt out of as many of GAPS’s spyware-like features as possible, as you suggest, but not because it’s a special anti-listening-device warding spell.

Mayo, mayo, mayo, mayo. I’d eat mayo flavored icecream if only the frozen dairy industry weren’t so cowardly

I’ll go to bat for Roborock. All common “user serviceable” parts are available for direct order from them and remain the same between generations so even very old models can be easily maintained with first-party parts.

They unfortunately won’t sell you an internal part like a motor, but you can still find new first-party parts if you know where to look and it generally only takes removing ~10 screws to get at the insides (example).

FWIW: Marxists weren’t blind to this obvious omission. The International was what we’d call a “big tent” coalition, so contentious questions were frequently hand-waved away in this fashion. Individual Marxists – including those as foundational as Engels – absolutely had opinions on the subject and they were not afraid to do the 19th century equivalent of Twitter dunking on those who would fantasize over establishing stateless utopias. Quoting Engels circa 1872 (bolded emphasis is my own, italicised emphasis preserved from original translation):

While the great mass of the Social-Democratic workers hold our view that state power is nothing more than the organisation with which the ruling classes, landlords and capitalists have provided themselves in order to protect their social prerogatives, Bakunin maintains that it is the state which has created capital, that the capitalist has his capital only by favour of the state. As, therefore, the state is the chief evil, it is above all the state which must be done away with and then capitalism will go to hell of itself. We, on the contrary say: do away with capital, the appropriation of the whole means of production in the hands of the few, and the state will fall away of itself. The difference is an essential one. Without a previous social revolution the abolition of the state is nonsense; the abolition of capital is in itself the social revolution and involves a change in the whole method of production. Further, however, as for Bakunin the state is the main evil, nothing must be done which can maintain the existence of any state, whether it be a republic, a monarchy or whatever it may be. Hence therefore complete abstention from all politics. To perpetrate a political action, and especially to take part in an election, would be a betrayal of principle. The thing to do is to conduct propaganda, abuse the state, organise, and when all the workers are won over, i.e., the majority, depose the authorities, abolish the state and replace it by the organisation of the International. This great act, with which the millennium begins, is called social liquidation.

[…]

Now as, according to Bakunin, the International is not to be formed for political struggle but in order that it may at once replace the old state organisation as soon as social liquidation takes place, it follows that it must come as near as possible to the Bakunist ideal of the society of the future. In this society there will above all be no authority, for authority = state = an absolute evil. (How these people propose to run a factory, work a railway or steer a ship without having in the last resort one deciding will, without a unified direction, they do not indeed tell us.) The authority of the majority over the minority also ceases. Every individual and every community is autonomous, but as to how a society, even of only two people, is possible unless each gives up some of his autonomy, Bakunin again remains silent.

Few movements self-identify as “Socialist”, at best it’s a taxonomical label. Attempting to talk about the finer points of socialism is akin to debating the pros/cons of “Animals” – it’s an overly broad topic and doomed to spiral into bike-shedding over semantics as soon as the conversation starts to look interesting.

With that being said, let’s talk about some more concrete terms – apologies in advance for wielding only slightly less clumsy terminology in my bullets:

• Socialized Medicine: Healthcare is a human right. I am pro human rights.
• Unions: Mostly positive. Nothing’s perfect, but come on… you’d have to be blind not to see and feel for how exploited lower-class workers are without them
• Democratic Socialists of America: I’m a member – that means I like them. I think their platform represents the ideal incrementalist approach to improving the current status quo
• European Welfare States (e.g.: Denmark): Too fuzzy to have a solid opinion on, but certainly a battle-tested template. I like most of their ideas most of the time
• Marxism: A genius body of economic philosophy, but increasingly out of place as time marches onward. I’d be for a by-the-book implementation (insofar as that’s possible) in 1923, but not 2023
• Maoism/Leninism: Not exactly success stories. It’s easier to appreciate their noble ideas & intentions with the distance lent by history, but that’s altogether different from “liking”
• Communism: As a whole? I think the template holds promise and can be made to work in a modern context, but viability =/= realizability. The world would have to get turned upside-down first and it’s questionable exactly how many of us would live through that… but never say never.

Also worth noting that most companies prefer to treat any given firing as “without cause” because stating a reason is usually a net-loss in terms of legal exposure.

Exceptions to the rule include, but are not limited to:

• States which make it expensive/slow to fire without cause (because money)
• Union jobs (because union)
• Retaliative firings (because worker’s rights)
• Prejudiced firings (because civil rights)

How does one tell if they’re on the road to a with-cause termination? Simple: documentation. If you’re suddenly being put under a microscope it might indicate that a premeditated f-bomb is hiding around the corner.

Rocket Jump Waltz – TF2

It could probably be argued that the board didn’t do what was best for the investors, which is what they exist to do.

Incorrect. OpenAI LLC (the traded company) does not have a board of directors. The board of directors actually belong to the parent company, simply “OpenAI”, which is a nonprofit organization – the only thing that they’re beholden to is the OpenAI company charter.

Here’s a simplified breakdown:

Board of Directors =[controls]=> OpenAI (non-profit) =[controls]=> OpenAI LLC =[employs]=> OpenAI CEO

OpenAI LLC is obligated to act in the best financial interest of their shareholders, but OpenAI LLC does not actually have control over who sits in the CEO chair. That power goes to the non-profit “OpenAI” parent company – a company beholden to their board, not shareholders.

I doubt anyone would list this as a reason, per se, but a common justification for the coffee/tea crowd is that these drinks are rich in antioxidants. The theory goes that stimulants cause oxidative stress, so you want all of the extra antioxidants that you can get.