It wasn’t a genre I enjoy, so I don’t really know much about it beyond the stuff about how badly it sold. I have to wonder though, just how bad does a game have to be to sell this badly? Whenever I see people complain about something in gaming, I inevitably see people talking about how people should vote with their wallets, but then whatever the thing in question is seems to be quite profitable despite the complaints and calls for people to stop buying it. What was so wrong with this one that actually caused practically nobody to buy it?

The time of entertainment per dollar is probably a bit different too I think. Depending on the replayability of the game in question, one can buy a game and get enjoyment out of it for hundreds or in some cases over a thousand hours. Meanwhile, even if you really enjoy a movie and rewatch it like 10 different times, that’s still only like 20 hours. Movies tend to be cheaper to buy than games individually, but I suspect that buying enough movies to make up the time difference would make the movies significantly more expensive.

Stick it to a garlic farmer by buying their garlic? Even if selling it again means that they dont get the sales at that event, thats still garlic sold at previous events above the amount that they might otherwise have sold. Maybe growing more changes things, but unless one is a farmer oneself, I doubt one can so easily grow more garlic that a professional garlic farmer, because of the land and tools needed.

And that’d be reasonable for you to do. However, having a network choose to remove something, or cut ties with servers in the network that don’t in an attempt to persuade them to remove that thing, isn’t exactly the same as a government ordering a thing be removed. The former doesn’t give much avenue for a malicious actor to suppress something that isn’t in their interest, because they can hardly control the collective actions of users on the network, but the latter does by creating a single point of decision making on the network’s content from the outside. Not that the motivations in wanting that video gone were bad, but there is an element of risk to making it possible for a government entity to remove something from a social network, even if the thing they want gone this time is something that really shouldn’t be there.

hypothetically, I suppose it could alternately be done by instances just federating the number of votes from their instance and only storing who voted what internally. Though then you might get issues with very easy vote manipulation if a server just says a lot of people voted a certain way without needing to make accounts to “justify” the fake votes.

Under a few specific circumstances comments can make sense, like if it’s a community for drawn stuff of one variety or another, that’s used by newer artists looking for constructive feedback.

Default search engine on their browser?

By selling pet insurance, I suppose? Though I guess that requires that the puppies be owned by someone fortunate enough to afford it.

It sort of counters itself to some extent for me, in that I can use my aversion to spending much unnecessarily to force myself into doing things, or avoid overindulging in things that my poor self control might otherwise make an issue, it just creates more stress than if I would just function in a more healthy manner.

On the contrary, its been one of the bigger issues in my life, I just have such anxiety over spending money on one use things like food that I cant stomach buying frozen pizza

honestly, frozen is pretty unnecessary for easy pizza though, the hard part of pizza is making the crust, so if you want personal pizzas, get a cheap pack of pocketless pita breads to add sauce and cheese and whatever else to, and then its basically the same as making a piece of toast with a bunch of toppings. takes about the same time to cook up as a frozen one and probably will end up being cheaper. Make it in a pan with a little oil and the crust will probably turn out nicer than frozen pizza, even.

I dunno, there is some minor utility in that you can gauge how major an event is, or at least is perceived to be, by how many posts are made about it shortly after happening and how long they continue to appear or persist.

this reads like conspiratorial thinking tbh. Its easy to grab at the idea that this is somehow Trump’s doing, but things like this do sometimes happen

Here’s the thing: Trump’s politics do not stop with Trump. Killing him does not kill the fascistic movement he’s contributed greatly to, it has a life of it’s own, and even had he died today, whoever replaces him would still be peddling the same kinds of things, except they’d now have a martyr to rally Trump’s old fanbase around, one that, by virtue of being killed, many people are going to feel reluctant to criticize. As such, I feel that this attack, assuming it was politically motivated (and I figure the odds that someone shoots at Trump for reasons unrelated to his political agenda are quite slim, so it’s probably a safe assumption) was a mistake- I fear that it will have helped Trump’s agenda more than hurt it, and would have done so even if it was successful in killing him.

Now, Im not saying this to be one of those “violence is never the answer” types, I do recognize that there are situations where the only hope one has to survive an openly hostile political force is overwhelming violence; but it must be recognized that such an effort is extremely risky, it has significant drawbacks even if successful (such as setting a precedent legitimizing political violence, which anyone else may use, or causing collateral damage), and carries a significant risk that when the shooting stops, you’ll be on the losing end. As such, it really should be a last resort, and seeing as Trump isn’t even president yet, hasn’t even been voted in, and doesn’t yet have a legislature stacked up to ensure he can actually carry out his agenda, we’re not yet at the point where it is the only option left to stop him. Employing it now makes it more likely that we reach that point.

Id say yes to that statement, but for reasons that dont have to do with AI as I dont really view AI training as piracy.

Would this even be necessary for automated ordering anyway? Given that every company under the sun wants you to use some app of theirs these days, including fast food companies, Im kinda surprised they dont just get rid of the speaker/microphone system, and just put a sign with a qr code in front of the drive through telling you to download and use their app to put in a drive through order

What if it’s a multiple of 5?

I’ve long wondered if a species with a high reproduction rate (or maybe artificial womb tech) and little regard for losses could do some kind of cyberattack against the borg by either making them assimilate a lot of junk data, harmfully incorrect information, or an overwhelmingly large number of members of some desired ideology so as to shift the entire collective towards that way of thinking

Maybe we have the radio equivalent of a Boltzmann brain

Maybe it could be for the psychological benefit of the person wearing the uniform? Like, if youve got a post scarcity utopian society where people dont need to work, but youve got some job that needs doing that can be a bit dangerous or tedious at times and therefore might be inherently unattractive to many, like ship’s crew, and you cant just pay people a bunch to do it because you’ve done away with money, one incentive you might have to offer is social status and a sense of personal achievement. In which case, you might use bright flashy displays of rank, because it gives the person that has attained it a bright flashy reminder of “hey look at you, you’ve achieved this fancy rank that everyone that didnt join the fleet or didnt get as far as you yet doesnt have”, and gives any regular civilian that sees you a blatant reminder of “hey, this could be you, if you’re willing to put in the work for it”