• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2023

help-circle

  • test113@lemmy.worldtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldA small problem
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s a birth defect - Big Ed Brown from 90 Day Fiancé has Klippel-Feil syndrome, which makes his body look different from others.

    I don’t watch it, but making fun of someone for his looks, which he can’t control, is a doozy, so I hope they laugh because of his antics and not his body. Would be kinda cheap otherwise.


  • In other words, media as a “service” makes more money than media as a one-point sale. Why should they sell you a one-point solution when the service model makes more money for the shareholders? I love the shareholder economy; it makes all our lives better and makes us focus on what really matters at the end of the day, which is, of course, profits for people who already have too much money. :) very cool




  • If I’m interpreting the CEOs Post post correctly, the severance package is only applicable if your contract gets canceled prematurely or if you are being laid off. If your contract ends and is not renewed, all obligations are fulfilled, so there is no severance package since the contract simply ends. (Timel/Project based contract). I could be wrong though. It would make sense to have project or time-based contracts - these layoffs mainly affect the “permanent employees.”


  • I agree — some gamers do not understand that the gaming industry is grown up now, or at least old enough to play in the big boy money league. And the big boys are not in the business to make games; they are in gaming to make business. Inherently different decision-making process.

    Also, before someone buys something, someone has to sell out. So why do we always have a problem with the buyers, aka investors, whose intentions are clear but not the sellers?


  • test113@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlYouTube
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Yeah, I know that, XD but why?

    What makes it so that you think you should be able to get creators and their content, server capacity, and storage for free? Who should be paying for it in your mind? Who should eat the cost? The creators, the platform, or the user? or all of them to a degree? And who should be able to profit?

    I think it’s pretty clear that the end-user will carry most of the cost in the end.


  • test113@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlYouTube
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    YouTube cannot do that. YouTube’s content legal system does not allow this.

    That said, I use SponsorBlock and love it to the degree of finding it necessary depending on what type of content I am watching.

    Why do people hate YouTube Premium anyway? I don’t quite get it. I have had it since it was available in my country, and I love it.

    Also, I have to say I use the YouTube Vanced app with SponsorBlock and custom layout (no shorts, no uploads, no etc.) and YouTube Premium subscription. I don’t like the default YouTube app.

    So, I don’t know if I like YouTube or just the model and content/creators behind it.



    1. Why do you care this much about online comments in such a niche community where only already opinionated people are?

    2. Yeah, if I were a moderator and needed to go over 1000 comments in today’s climate, I would delete more than necessary just because you never know. They do not put as much thought into it as you think. It was most likely just like this:

    A mod goes over comments that got reported, reads the first line of the comment, sees it has direct insulting language (the “fuck them” line), and deletes it.

    No political intent or conspiracy, just a mod being a mod. Could be that there is some bias, but then you can do nothing anyway in that case; it’s just a small echo chamber then.

    Hakuna Matata, my friend.




  • oh yeah for sure could be a reaction to the opium wars

    It’s never the drugs that make a society erode; it’s a symptom. If you have a big drug problem in a country, most likely it’s related to much bigger issues at the core. Like in the Opium Wars, it was the British Empire that basically drugged China as a means to get what they want. It’s not like they discovered drugs and then just stopped doing anything else; we humans had drugs and used drugs since we know about them.

    Some argue this tactic is still very much in use today, hence the fentanyl crisis, which seems to be fueled by China. It’s a destabilizing tactic. That’s also part of why China and other Asian countries are so strict because they know firsthand the effectiveness of literally drugging your foe to gain an advantage. This does not mean China and co do not have their own drug market; they have a pretty vivid drug scene.

    Also, as an example, Japan or China, yeah, sure, you can’t buy weed; they will basically curb-stop you legally. But you can drink as much alcohol as you want, smoke as much tobacco as you want, and drink as many caffeine drinks as you want. These are all recreational drugs with a much higher impact on society than weed, yet they are totally legal and accepted by everyone or are even traditional.


  • I know of one person in my wider circle who reacts also pretty bad when children are being children around him. In his childhood, every time he was loud, wanted attention, or just did what a child does, his parents (they did not even want children; he was an “accident”) got really angry at him. So children being children is a trigger for him.

    Talking to a trained professional helped him immensely to handle this.


  • Yes, and you are entitled to your own opinion, but that does not change the facts. No, the influence is not “what if it is there” – it is there, plain and simple. That’s not up for discussion. It’s public knowledge that Tencent owns 40%, and Tencent is a government-controlled entity. It does not matter if they “abuse/use” it actively or not. It sounds like, in your mind, influence is only relevant when you use it actively, which is not true.


  • I never said it was not for profit. I said you invest to gain influence, which is true by fact, not an opinion. If I buy a significant number of shares in a company, I do so because I want more than money; I want influence on decision-making. I do not think the Chinese government is only interested in monetary gains; do you think that’s their only goal?

    And again, do you believe a country/government able to indoctrinate any business that wants a share of their market, like the Steam example, is only invested for monetary gains and nothing else?

    Tim Sweeney can do and decide many things, but opposing the Chinese government is certainly not one. And I don’t know how you imagine influence, but having 40% of a company is something I call influence, wouldn’t you? Even if they can’t tell him how to run the business, he sure as hell will do nothing that could worsen the relationship between him and his biggest investor, aka Tencent. And who is behind Tencent? The Chinese government.


  • lol XD, let me tell you, if someone is financing something like that, they sure as heck expect something in exchange someday.

    So, you believe a government powerful enough to make unaffiliated companies bow to their liking won’t leverage their investment?

    Why do you think they invested? Just for fun?

    You invest to gain influence, not to have less influence.


  • test113@lemmy.worldtoGames@lemmy.worldGrand Theft Auto VI Trailer 1
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think the point is - it’s disappointing to see GTA 5 2.0. I expected something more, something different, less generic, not just another coastal city or a GTA 5 clone. It seems like they just merged the engine update with GTA 5. Watching the trailer bored me, like being forced to watch a mediocre action comedy movie. I don’t know how the majority of the game will feel, but this trailer is just so generic. If this were a movie, no one would care. Maybe that’s the point, but still, my hype is somewhat gone. I at least expected a different scenario than this GTA 5 DLC story or at least set it somewhere other than a coastal city.