rwhitisissle @ rwhitisissle @lemmy.ml

Posts

0

Comments

343

Joined

2 yr. ago

it alleged that local developers cannot compete on Steam with international developers, because those do not have to apply the local regulations:

That's not really contrary to the point, but orthogonal to it. Steam is outcompeting on the basis that it receives special privileges on the basis of its international status. It's still outcompeting because of a resource advantage. But that advantage exists because domestic developers are disadvantaged by virtue of national regulations over domestic developers.

what is my opposition that doesn’t encompass a de facto defence of free market capitalism? The damage to the users. What about all the Vietnamese people losing access to Steam’s online features, which are arguably necessary nowadays for many games, especially multiplayer ones.

Your argument is the same kind of "consumer rights" argument that I've seen everywhere on the internet, because you are implying that there is material harm to the people of Vietnam caused by Steam's banning. Which is a fairly specious argument. It's the loss of a luxury item. No one is materially harmed by it. It's not like Vietnam banned insulin. And while you may not use the same language, you are effectively saying that every consumer on the planet should have free access to the best products available for whatever "thing" they want. In this case, video games. It's a de facto argument for free market economic policies.

Everyone has accused every workplace of toxic culture. At this point I’m pretty sure going to someone and asking them to do their fucking job is toxicity.

We have reached levels of bootlicking with this comment that shouldn't be physically possible.

It is impossible to criticize any actions taking place by any entity against a capitalist entity without defending capitalism yourself.

It depends on the purpose and shape of that criticism. If you criticize a communist nation banning a particular corporation's marketplace from their country on the basis that doing so is a part of a grift that seeks to engineer a national-level monopoly over a particular corporate sector by banning external competition, then, sure, that's a valid criticism because the intent is innately unethical. But if the Vietnamese video game industry is actively harmed by Steam, an American company, using its vast resources to outcompete Vietnamese publishers, then what is your opposition to this that doesn't encompass a de facto defense of free market capitalism?

I hate capitalism. And Valve. Because it's a capitalist institution and I'm at least consistent.

For anyone curious, it's around 150 million USD.

Valve has faced criticisms from former employees in the past for its toxic work culture. And Gabe Newell, being the CEO, has a lot of power over that.

Just because the places you frequent on the internet don't shove criticism of Valve down your throat the same way it would do so for, say, Epic Games, doesn't mean there's nothing wrong with Valve as a company. All the pro-Valve/Steam information you get and the general sentiment towards Gabe Newell from people on Lemmy and Reddit are pure, undiluted corporate propaganda. That it comes from Steam users rather than being something Steam directs and pays for doesn't change what it is.

you’re seeing different posts by different people and conflating the two

This ignores the reality that Lemmy is, at least in the part of it consisting of lemmy.ml, lemmy.world, and others, overwhelmingly leftist. This comment also attempts to dismiss the underlying criticism that Lemmy as a whole has a culture that, much like reddit, seeks to pick and choose its targets under capitalism and actively engages in corporate apologia, like in this post, while collectively professing a broad ethos that is outright hypocritical when viewed in the light of that other behavior. And if you think Lemmy is amenable to a diverse array of economic opinions, then maybe you should try posting a "Capitalism Appreciation Thread" on a major lemmy instance and see how that goes over.

Lemmy: "We hate capitalism! Companies aren't your friends! Down with corporrations! Down with billionaires!"

Also Lemmy: "Except Steam! We love vidyagames! Valve is friend! Gaben is bae! No, we don't understand irony."

python guidelines

Do you have a specific PEP you're referencing or is this one of those "I assume this must be the case because of how common using try/except statements for flow control are" kind of things?

I've heard similar from the worst first year CS students you could ever meet. People talk out their ass without the experience to back up their observations constantly. The indentation thing is a reasonable heuristic that states you are adding too much complexity at specific points in your code that suggests you should isolate core pieces of logic into discrete functions. And while that's broadly reasonable, this often has the downside of you producing code that has a lot of very small, very specific functions that are only ever invoked by other very small, very specific functions. It doesn't make your code easier to read or understand and it arguably leads to scenarios in which your code becomes very disorganized and needlessly opaque purely because you didn't want additional indentation in order to meet some kind of arbitrary formatting guideline you set for yourself. This is something that happens in any language but some languages are more susceptible to it than others. PEP8's line length limit is treated like biblical edict by your more insufferable python developers.

I get the feeling a lot of our more vocal free speech absolutists are going to be conspicuously quiet on this one.

Edith Finch is more of an interactive short-story collection thematically and narrative centralized around a single family and their almost comical level of intergenerational neglect.

Sounds like a hell of your own making. Always change the background to something generic. Like a nice tree. Always. Nobody gives a shit about trees.

Yes, we should ban all those, too. Or just enforce EU style privacy laws in America.

Yeah, but it's still a Ship of Theseus problem. If you have a ship and replace every single board or plank with a different one, piece by piece, is it still the same ship or a completely different one, albeit an exact replica of the original. It's important because of philosophical ideas around the existence of the soul and authenticity of the individual and a bunch of other thought-experimenty stuff.

You would have to functionally duplicate the exact structure of the brain or its consciousness while having the duplication mechanism destroy the thing it was reading at almost exactly the same time. And even then, that's not really solving the issue.

I always hate whenever someone criticizes a work of art and then there's some smoothbrain response to the criticism that essentially says "just let people enjoy things." This happens a lot with contemporary film and television. How about you let people engage with something and critically think about it, even if the things they have to say are mostly negative. If you like something, great. Another person not liking something doesn't mean you suddenly aren't allowed to like it, either.

You mean how he goes to see that play?

It's "y'all" - as in a contraction of "you all."

As the internet gets scarier

How the fuck is the internet getting scarier? This isn't the random gore and porn filled, go to a forum and immediately get targeted by a sex-predator, internet that I grew up with. The internet is a corporate walled garden of mega services that feed disinformation and bullshit to people, but your odds of getting genuinely victimized as a child are so much lower than they used to be.

The Mayflower brought the Pilgrims to America, not Columbus (which is also, for some reason, misspelled in the title of this post). I'm guessing OP didn't pay much attention to their history class this year in what I'm going to assume is middle-school.