Kichae

People spending more time with fewer games is not a reason, in publishers’ minds, to reverse course. It’s the intended outcome.

Having the same number of people (or near the same number) playing fewer games, and filling those games with monetization features is cheaper and easier to maintain than having a broad and growing library of titles.

Remember, the ideal for publishers is to have one game that everyone plays that has no content outside of a “spend money” button that players hit over and over again. That’s the cheapest product they can put out, and it gives them all the money. They’re all seeking everything-for-nothing relationships with customers.

It’s litigation around what a machine can freely use in its learning model.

No, its not that, either. It’s litigation around what resources a person can exploit to develop a product without paying for that right.

The machine is doing nothing wrong. It’s not feeding itself.

Here’s a google prompt for you: “raspberry pi police”

Now do 1985.

Never mind, I’ll do it myself: NES games were $50, which today is about $185.

Are they still playing apologetics for the cops? Because if so, no thanks.

Accurate. I’d like to go home now.

just someone using the term to mean “young people”

Rude. How dare they stop using “Millennial” to mean “young people”. They weren’t supposed to recognize that some of us are in our 40s now!

Negative utility is still utility, right?

And that turned out for the best, too.

I started playing Pathfinder.

This is especially true of publicly traded companies.

A publicly traded company’s customers are it’s investors, and it’s product is shareholder value. Everything else they do is just the manufacturing process.

That’s just the system. This is what happens when people confuse commerce with capitalism: They think that capitalism is being rewarded for doing commerce better. Instead, capitalism is about leveraging ownership of property and underpaying workers in order to get money for free.

And the thing about money is that it’s really just a proxy for power. When you only have enough of it to eek out a comfortable life (or less), you don’t really notice, because all of your power goes in to achieving or maintaining that acceptably good life (or hanging on for dear life trying to survive), but once your needs are comfortably and handidly met, money is entirely about being able to make other people do whatever you want. And the more money you have, the more things you can get them to do, or the more of them that you can get to do what you want.

And if you’ve managed to be one of the lucky ones who just get free money for owning shit, then you have the power at your fingertips to try to grow your power over others exponentially, while still doing no honest work in your days. And if you’re a shitty person who gets off on all of this, that’s exactly what you’ll do.

The wealthy are insufferably greedy leeching assholes because one does not become wealthy without being greedy, leeching off of others, and being an insufferable asshole.

Also, Oblivion just wasn’t amazing. It was fine. More than good enough, even. But it was also just unmitigated and completely ubcofused sidequest sprawl. In my attempts to experience all that it had to offer, I ended up feeling like I experienced nothing of value.

Wait, this is a Bethesda game. I assumed that that was the explanation.

Here’s the thing, though: Whenever you have a position like “Person for Group”, that Group is being singled out for a reason.

And that reason is lack of representation.

To put it another way, so have a Minister for Women is a tacit acknowledgement that the others operate as if men are the default person. All of the other ministers are Ministers for Men.

Once you have enough money to meet your needs, all money is is power.

Maybe it depends on the specific field, but I’ve had no issues mentoring people remotely, and even when I was in the office I was doing it via Teams half the time.

In many contexts it isn’t that hard if you have the tools. The fact that many workplaces skimp on the tools is a them issue, not a mentoring issue.

working in the office is important so that younger/newer employees can recieve mentorship

That has real “I can’t mentor someone unless we’re at the strip club” energy.

Yeah. I doubt they can have debates in person, either. But getting 7 people in a room so that the 2 highest paid ones can ideate all over each other while the other 5 nod along as a paid audience just feels better for those 2 than looking up to see the glassy-eyed stares of people who are trying to get their work done while sitting in on a pointless vanity meeting.

New consoles don’t come out in response to new technology, though. They never have. The next console generation comes when people stop buying the last one.

Yeah. One of my favourite restaurants closed a couple months ago because they just couldn’t justify charging more for food, but their suppliers sure could.