Katana314 @ Katana314 @lemmy.world

Posts

17

Comments

1,845

Joined

2 yr. ago

Can I confirm whether this outage was affecting downloaded singleplayer games? I didn’t think that would be the case.

There’s an alternative, to make it popular with the American people. Republicans look bad to their constituents each time they vote against policies that would relieve the American people as a whole, such as net neutrality and healthcare for all.

Make some noise about it! Make it known that Democrats fight for everyone, and that a certain sect is very vocally rejecting that fight.

There’s a very good bill for achieving this result by a senator from my state, which requires companies to elect their board members through employees.

https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/08/15/warren-co-determination-capitalism-act

When Bernie Sanders brought forward another fervent request for free healthcare for all Americans, and the only retort the R he was addressing could come up with was a completely fabricated lie about Bernie taking money from pharmaceutical companies, I stopped believing anyone sensible could oppose it.

"Ew, Obamacare? I'd rather have the Affordable Care Act!!"

The short answer is: Yes.

The long answer is: YEEEEESSSS.

Politicians come in varying types, and most want to hold what power they have. It’s all they have - they’re literally at risk of being fired every few years. Many of them know what the right thing is to do, but worry that more domestic issues are their voter’s real concern. So, if they confirm a whack job in Congress while taking a back room deal to boost employment numbers in their state, they’ll do it - perhaps reluctantly.

But that CHANGES if their office is flooded with calls, or even just signed emails. It is a BIG oh shit moment: “Wait, people actually care about what’s happening in Washington as opposed to here??” The biggest problem reps have had, as repeatedly echoed in interviews, is they don’t know which issues are most significant to their voters. The result may be a matter of trading favors to be given table scraps, etc.

It is OUR problem too - we thought it was a common sense, braindead position not to vote for a diaper grandpa that spends 90% of its time drooling over Fox News, but the active voting population disagreed! So don’t think it is a hard mistake to make!

Every time people with experience judge these issues, they have recommended the same thing. Even if you live in a red state that won by 30 points, even if you live in a blue state that won by 20.

I encourage you to watch the movie Darkest Hour. London Parliament did NOT think it would be an obvious decision to oppose Hitler, AT ALL. They insisted Britain would chew them up for pushing them into a “pointless” war against a legitimate machine of progress and industry. It finally took Churchill going nutso and taking a subway ride in public to get a chance to actually see how people felt.

I have found with admittedly sometimes-annoying tools like "Resistbot" it's a bit easier to write my opinions to representatives. That matters quite a bit more if you're in a redder state than mine, but it still helps to send words of encouragement/reminders to reps that are working their asses off as a minority.

I have started to want this to become an extension of hate speech laws - if a lawmaker makes remarks or policy advances that target a specific marginalized protected class (eg, race, sexuality) while also engaged in other policy decisions, they must provide EXTREMELY compelling evidence of those policy advances (just about always impossible) or face extended criminal prosecution for attempting to use the threats as a distraction.

AOC talked about exactly this in her video (it's over an hour long, but when you have time, I'd say it's worth a watch). There was a specific effort to start this madness after Congress adjourned for the week, and there's been a scramble to get back for continued pushback.

And, even for democrats we presume to fight for these issues, there is complacency where people only whine on social media without making themselves known directly to their representatives. That's important both for people in Democrat, and Republican districts, to make it known their constituents are not blind to these problems.

Buddy, I've tried to be more patient with you than other commenters, but that truly crosses a line. Taking someone else's experiences, and selectively quoting them to suit your own agenda, so it fits your definition of discrimination, is disgraceful.

If you'd read on in my comment, I described how literary agents are inundated with thousands of requests. It is literally an industry anyone with Word or OpenOffice can try to enter into. There are probably hundreds of minority authors also getting turned away just like me. This is not an instance of "defending one's presence" the way that minorities need to in their workplaces, the way the current administration is scrutinizing them in Federal offices. This is just me trying to be the one in a thousand shot to publicize a book - which is a rare accomplishment. So, NO. You don't get to "own" and weaponize someone else's hardship in that way. Not ever.

Shame on you.

Can you link me to the specific comment where you've acknowledged negative reinforcement? I checked over each of your comments in this thread and don't see it.

Basketball teams hire white men frequently. So I'm still not sure what point you're making; DEI does not mandate a perfectly smooth ratio. And as far as I've seen, people are not assessing the policies themselves, but making assertions around them directly to individual long-term hires - based on, you guessed it, race. White people, so far as I've seen, have not had to defend their presence under these policies.

This is still diving down a rabbit hole of bad definitions, and devalues both what racism is and how it's affected people in their lives.

Racism systemically prefers one race over another; not just on an individual occasion like one hiring session. I guarantee you, if an organization's entire senior leadership of 10+ people were all black men, any diversity consulting would highlight that as being an issue as well. The fact of the matter is, just about every organization currently hires plenty of white men, so that ends up being many levels removed from reality.

If you're trying to pinpoint statistics around who gets turned away from one particular position, the problem is that companies get so many dozens or hundreds of applicants, you'd be flagging that statistic on enormous groups. Asians over blacks? Women over men? You really can't make a concrete determination there, and when your source cases are singular anecdotes, it fails the critical definition of being "systemic".

You're also disacknowledging the negative reinforcement that accompanies racism, where people are treated negatively a certain way based on no known information of them other than their race. If you're attacked on the street anonymously, specifically for being white, and the attacker calls you a "fucking cracker!" then I would have no problems labeling that racism. As it stands, even in 2024, other races deal with that situation far more often from police or other hate groups. I would absolutely call much of the "DEI" labeling racism, given that the people making these declarations have not been given valid assessments of their target's performance on their job.

Okay. Can you point to any studies performed around performance of diverse hires causing problems in the workplace?

Because a lot of workplaces I know that have had "problem hires" who argue with people or flaunt their position have generally exhibited entitlement that links to being white or male (like myself). Do HR firms ever pick people to check a box, in a rush to avoid an all-white panel? Yes, and they could do better in their practices. Whenever I hear that happen, it tends to be isolated incidents - not a habit that leads to a nonfunctional workplace. I admit, that comes from shared anecdotes, but it often feels common-sense. If you'd like to find proof on that subject, I'd be eager to discuss it.

I'm white, straight, and male. I'm trying to get a book published. Every agent that I've tried to contact, especially ones that match the type of book I'm writing, has been vocal that their focus is on BIPOC, LGBT, and other diverse candidates. I've been turned away at every one. Such racism, right?

Except...most published work in bookstores is still by white male authors like myself. And if I take a step back to look at my whole life situation: I'm not reliant on this book. I'm a well-employed engineer, have my own house and mortgage, and had relatively well-off parents. Little of this is true for these other demographics that have received heavy discrimination even less than a generation ago. All things considered, it is very fair for these agents to champion diverse voices, and they're slammed with requests all over the place.

The scarring effects of discrimination are still felt decades later when we feel them gone. It's still a hard truth that employment is hard even today, but those with experience in staffing can usually only point to the occasional anecdote when someone was prioritized for their race - and usually have just as many stories of inverse discrimination or nepotism.

I just recently saw a video shared of an extremist in Maine who attacked his wife, and then recorded himself during a prolonged shootout with the police.

Given that he finds it possible he may die in the next few hours, there's a sort of honesty to his voice; and it's scary to regard the sort of world he believes in, where vaccines are obviously "lethal", etc. The one bit that stood out to me, and maybe not to himself, was his mentioning that he had been out of work for over a year. It's quite possible any employers saw his violent habits and turned him away, but even if that's a suitable explanation, it's a heavy feeling of abandonment.

Yeah…and they’re being threatened too.

I wonder if they’d ever consider the White House to be a foreign government to topple.

I’ve known about this for a while, but assumed it was still deep in development.

I’m curious if this is partly influenced by demographics on how many people have used their PlayStation as their only Bluray/DVD movie player.

For me it’s rare now, but I’d also rather not brick my old movie collection by discarding my only TV disc drive.

I really like the resource/inventory systems of survival horror games. Often they can force interesting decisions as long as your current state doesn’t starve you of options.

• I can’t pick up shit! Well, I’m not using these three things so maybe I should box them. Or, I could use up some ammo on nearby enemies.
• I’m low on healing items! But I have a lot of ammo. Maybe I could stop conserving nuke launcher rounds to trivialize the next few rooms of giant zombies; try a bit more of this other weapon I don’t use much and stow my normal pistol.
• I’m low on ammo! But, I’ve been saving a hundred healing items. Maybe I can practice tanking past enemies and see just how much it will affect me.
• I’m okay on ammo but these enemies keep coming. But…I think if I make it to this area, it will give me a stationary healing spot. So I’ll just conserve ammo and take hits on the way.
• I’ve been poisoned! But there’s gonna be a bunch of other poisonous enemies before I get through this area. Maybe I can ignore it until I’m through.

I think I’d even like to find more games that focus on that sort of item management without being so horror-focused; helping you feel excited for saving an inventory spot or prioritizing the right things. It’s especially cool when you’re finding ways to shift risk in the right directions based on what you can afford losing. Example in Back 4 Blood: There are tools/resources that retain/add more “possible downs” for a survivor, which may mean you can put off healing for a long time and keep picking each other off the floor. One game has a death prevention item that you can only hold one of; so you’re encouraged to “get killed” before you find another one.

Alright, I’d rather hide this under a similarly cringey top comment, but: Clothing damage. I think it gets a pass sometimes when applied in a gender neutral way, but a lot of games now avoid it for fear of international censorship rules (and, it generates an ick factor for players that are not similarly cringey as I am)

Antifawhat?

I always heard this term and had trouble working out what it was an abbreviation for. Could you fill it in for me? Asking dishonestly.