I’m not sure. It’s partly just that Alito is a selfish, lonely, bitter, viciously bigoted person. The progressive justices don’t seem to be having a problem following the ethics rules.
Queer and masc, in my 30s, content writer. Trying to learn the banjo (twang!). In love with the woods of New England. Lots of D&D and other tabletop.
I’m not sure. It’s partly just that Alito is a selfish, lonely, bitter, viciously bigoted person. The progressive justices don’t seem to be having a problem following the ethics rules.
I think it probably has something to do with online play, though, since Fromsoft’s multiplayer model revolves around invasion. Granted you can turn it off, so obviously there should be a pause option, but I have a vague hunch that the two issues are related from a dev/engineering perspective.
Fair enough - I don’t have one. At least not to hand. There has been a LOT of reporting about misinformation, disinformation, and fucked up cultural trends unique to TikTok, but I used that phrase hyperbolically to reinforce my actual point: that it is literally impossible to cite sources on TikTok, making it the only social network where credible, knowledgeable, expert, and authoritative creators cannot in principle be distinguished from hoeseshit.
I stopped playing salt and sanctuary because of the platforming, despite being an ardent lover of souls likes.
I really like minor stat boosting items instead. So rather than giving me an inventory full of potions, give me three or four slots for items that can have a huge range of different bonuses and penalties, and they are pretty minor, but they’re permanent. That way I get to craft a build instead of just being annoyed
This is true for all of the examples of this problem that I’m aware of.
I’ve been whining to everyone in earshot about all the puzzles in remnant 2 hahaha
If TikTok starts allowing standard hyperlinks it would dramatically reduce the platform’s peak harm potential. Tiktok’s single biggest problem rn is that it is literally impossible to cite your sources - that’s why it’s the runaway global leader for misinformation. Adding text would help, bringing it back down to regular Facebook levels of social erosion and election distortion.
The most interesting piece of this for me is that the “gender politics index” is an even stronger predictor of Trumpy support than the “modern sexism index.” The gender politics piece is outrage politics - it’s culture-war, cult of victimhood stuff with minimal substantive claims attached. And that’s what most strongly predicts voting preferences.
What that means to me is that, as with everything that makes the news coming out of high profile republicans, their positions are utterly cynical and calculated to induce fear-based rage voting, rather than a reflection of a sincerely held set of moral and cultural beliefs.
If you want slightly less tactical (but even more fun) turn based combat with a lot more RPG, divinity 2 original sin is phenomenal.
… well, for one thing, your numbers are a little bit off there. The US is sent about $75 billion to Ukraine, not $100 trillion.
The aid check situation sucked, but that was very much a congress problem caused by the most conservative Dems (one of whom has since left the party).
More to the point, I feel confused by your answer: what is it that you don’t buy? You genuinely feel there’s a moral equivalence across all politicians?
I don’t agree. This is a very South Park perspective. Yes, all politicians engage in bribery, corruption, and double dealing. No, the parties are not morally equivalent.
Biden has protected his son, but he has consistently displayed an eagerness to help people and to pass useful, popular laws that save lives and shift money downward in the economic pyramid.
Trump passed a tax cut for people with private jets and GW Bush killed 300,000 innocent civilians. It’s insane to pretend there’s a moral equivalence here.
I agree that cashing in is at least important part of this. As I understand it, however, past a certain point creating and using LLMs is in fact extremely expensive. That’s why GPT4 limits user interactions, for example. I also think that the more restricted these tools are in general, the better for everyone. It’s absolutely possible to use them in positive ways, but as it stamps they are mostly just flooding the internet with garbage at killing low level content jobs.
Good comment! (Sorry, not on here a lot)
An important reminder and a good counter example. That said…this is petty and clearly unethical, and also strikes me as quite a different phenomenon from the kind of open corruption we are talking about with the conservative justices.