Stepos Venzny

Arguments over whether Goku would beat Superman in a fight.

If your free time is required to be spent optimally then you aren’t experiencing the actual freedom of it. If what you want to do is nothing then do nothing.

There was Troll before it, actually. 2 isn’t really a sequel to 1 in terms of creative intent but it was titled as such for marketing purposes because the rights owners figured a movie with no plot connections that didn’t even have a troll in it was still close enough.

The answers you’re getting are backwards, causally. The trend of Japanese games using the rightward button for confirm and the downward button for cancel started on the Super Nintendo, which the PlayStation copied its controller design from.

The four shapes used on the PlayStation buttons were chosen as pictographs representing their intended uses. So O is O because O was already equivalent to a checkmark in Japan, with X being negatory across cultures. Square was intended for menus or references, shaped like a computer window or sheet of paper. And if I remember right, the upward pointing triangle represented the idea of the top of the player character, suggesting head, suggesting eyes, suggesting camera control in anticipation that 3D games would need a primary button for that. But these other two buttons being prescriptive of function instead of reflective of the function that was already there got roundly ignored. Western games, which already favored the downward button for confirm before the PlayStation, ignored all four intentions.

As for your GTA experience, many games localize their menu controls just the same as localizing their language.

Why, since the days of the Super Nintendo, has Japan favored a rightward confirm while other countries favored downward one? I haven’t the foggiest.

First they make their console come in versions with and without disk drives where the disk version is rarer and more expensive, now suddenly there’s not enough demand for physical games to keep manufacturing them.

“Shifting consumer preference” indeed.

discern what’s real from what’s created to play with my emotions and generate money for the creator or advance an agenda.

Not mutually exclusive.

When AI can make a convincing facsimile of something, that thing in its genuine form is already hollow and manipulative.

Even though its spectacle isn’t unique anymore, slow-mo on the prince’s stunts still wins me over. It frankly is very cool that he can flip over guys’ heads and run along walls and more games should revel in their own coolness even when it’s not new. I run along walls in new games and the camera doesn’t zoom out to show me how dangerous it would be if I somehow fell and they make me feel nothing.

Also, Warrior Within’s chase music rules and anybody who thinks it doesn’t belong in the game just hates fun.

Dressing up like a clown, at least, is an established James Bond move.

deleted by creator

It also found a rise in suspensions and a dip in students’ feelings of wellbeing in the first year after a ban as schools adapted to the change. “Over time, however, disciplinary impacts fade and wellbeing rebounds, becoming positive in subsequent years,” the report said.

So it sounds like the winning play is to not give them phones in the first place. Then you skip straight to positive impacts without going through the negative ones first.

I played it when it was new. Spent hours on the demo alone. Killed a dragon with a stick.

I liked 1 a lot better than 2 but apparently that’s an unpopular sentiment.

The claim Nvidia’s making that you can apply it selectively within a given frame kind of makes me want a game where only one character looks like that so as to emphasize their otherworldly wrongness. A Dishonored game where only the Outsider has it, that kind of thing.

All the ads I get are about getting the foreign libraries in streaming services.

Yeah, “you shouldn’t have to learn how to use a house” makes me think of my mom who never learned to load a dishwasher and, even when it’s pointed out that the sprayers are blocked from spinning, refuses not to fill every cubic inch of its interior. I’m broadly against smart anything but thinking any technology requires no effort on the user’s part is laughable.

If there was ever a difference between being far-right and being disinformation, there isn’t one anymore.

The whole article is fixated on Grok being far right and never seems to care that an LLM is citing another LLM instead of an actual source.

As a cis guy, it feels pretty unnatural to say “when I was a boy” because the word has always meant gender more than age to me. Since the variable I’m indicating is my age, I use “kid” or “child” for it.

As to the broader question, my gut tells me to go with your gut. Whether the word “boy” or “girl” is what came to your mind, there is probably some relevant nuance to what it is you’re saying about your younger self that informed that instinct.

Prejudice, no? Not one of the classic examples, granted, but it’s the same logic as them.

I’m a better person than I was in the past because the bully is gone and I am no longer mirroring that toxicity. I’m still seemingly permanently tainted by it but the level is much reduced since cutting ties.

Had I never been bullied, I’d definitely be a better person than I am now.

You asked how to defuse the tension, I’m telling you how to defuse the tension. If that’s not what you want to do then I can’t help you.

EDIT: That was kinda glib on my part so I’ll expand some more.

If my coworker gives in to every entitled relative who yells at her and treats her this way, either my coworker will resign or take leave due to depression, a coworker who was simply doing her job to the best of her abilities managing the 20 something operations that had to be readied for Monday next week. And she gets abused for that? And you condone the karen? This part of your post seems very tone deaf. My coworker didn’t even do her pause. It is her the one who deserves empathy, respect and my support, not the karen.

What you’re asking me to do right now is acknowledge the legitimacy of your grievance. And I do, of course. Nobody deserves to be abused.

The goal here is to make the abuse stop happening, though, right? So the best course of action is the course of action that stops it. If you discount the possibility that she can behave reasonably, there’s no possibility of talking her down from her current state of aggression. Essentially, you both want the same thing: not to feel upset, not to feel hurt. If you can make her stop feeling that, she will stop causing you to feel that. It’s not fair but you didn’t ask for fairness. You asked for how you can produce results.

She has framed this as her on one side versus you (you being a proxy for the hospital) on the other. Option A is you accept her framing and remain in conflict and both of you continue to cause each other pain, option B is you influence her to change her framing into one side being both you and her and the other side being the situation. If you succeed at option B, both of you stop causing each other pain. So you acknowledge the legitimacy of her grievance. Her father was supposed to get an operation that day and he didn’t. Nobody deserves to have their medical treatment withheld, even temporarily, even if it was an elective procedure.