I guess if the affected users are keeping their phone and TFA method you could target their phone numbers to try to intercept new codes, although that’s not doable at scale.
Having phone numbers associated to accounts out in public is pretty bad in general, though.
I disagree. We are looking for a generalised measure of harm because… well, because that’s what all politics does, but also because we’re measuring very different interests against each other.
There are people who will argue that while individual choices in sex work are neutral the system in general is patriarchal and harms primarily women with few resources or in vulnerable positions, so right from the jump you need to decide how many babies you’re going to throw with the human trafficking bathwater. Others will argue that sex work carries a moral harm, which I disagree with, but we’re not basing political choices on what I, personally, find acceptable (unfortunately, because I’m good at this).
There are the interests of online platforms, the interests of pornography producers (both mostly financial), the interests of people working in the industry, the interests of consumers of porn and other sex work… There are aguments about the impact of the sex work industry on sex education as online distribution weakens age limits, so by that channel you now also have to weigh online privacy against the ability to distribute properly targeted adult-only content.
It’s a complete mess of interconnected parameteres. Which is exactly why it’s a prime vector for conservative elements trying to attack it for ideological reasons to overlap with left-leaning feminists objecting to it for other reasons.
And if you come at it from an online bro “here’s an easy solution to a complex problem” attitude you’re almost certainly making the whole thing worse, so I’d caution against it.
I get what you’re going for, but as presented this is a terrible take, or at least a poorly worded one. Systemic harm isn’t a zero sum game. It’s not about putting the harm on the bad people, it’s about reducing the harm of the system overall without ever crossing the basic ground rules and limitations of the system in the process.
Not all harm to “the right people” is justified and it’s extremely difficult to determine the limitations around that. You are right that deciding what interests, legitimate or not, to affect when making a decision is the entire point of politics, though.
That’s not a measure.
If two people involved in a process feel that the other is harming them, then you need to weigh one harm against another. Similarly, if both an action and a lack of action cause harm you need to know what causes most harm.
I mean, if we stop beating around the bush and cut the socratic bullshit, the point is this: in all political action there are multiple interests that often, if not always, have conflicting positions and perceive the results of that action differently. The idea of the entire system is that a representative govenrment controlled by checks and balances will broadly align their choices with the interest of the general public, or at least do so more consistently than the available alternatives.
You can’t measure harm objectively. That’s not a thing. The world isn’t made of discrete actions where each either harms or doesn’t harm. It’s a web of interconnected interpretations, preferences, interests and benefits. Some are physical, others economic or moral. There isn’t an equivalence between them and there isn’t an objectively optimal solution. That’s the entire point of politics in the first place.
Bit simplistic, that.
Hey, my approach to engineering is “if machine moves, machine works”, and I’m sure there isn’t any more nuance than that, so… call it a tie?
The problem with “harm” is it’s hard to measure or qualify. What is “objectively less harm” in situations where you’re trying to regulate the use of narcotics or, indeed, sex work. Is it more harmful for it to be illegal because there’s some harm associated with it or is it more harmful to criminalize it? And if you don’t criminalize it but harm does come to pass how do you mitigate that?
What do you do when two people identify harm in opposite actions? How do you measure which harm is more harmful if you can’t have a zero harm outcome? What is the unit of harm?
Hey, you thought TERFs were a weird wedge between European and US feminists when they first got a foothold in the UK?
I have terrible news about how that process has been running again regarding sex work and surrogate pregnancy.
Surrogate pregnancy is less controversial because there the traditional US stance is in the minority and bans have been expanding relatively unopposed. Sex work, though? There are outright porn bans being advocated in left-leaning circles all over Europe. The fact that they’ve been calling themselves “sex work abolitionists” should be sobering.
Expect the global right to try to deploy the same strategy on this issue going forward. There are already similar proposals in the US and they are very aware that they can recruit some segment of nominally left-wing feminist activists and voters with these issues, just like they did with transphobic policies.
Yep. It got reported a while ago and ater leaks suggest that the “smaller size” that was initially reported is the key cart itself, so that’d leave the 64GB as the sole option to store game data.
Nintendo DID offer multiple sizes of Switch 1 carts, and they were all relatively expensive, ranging from 1 to 16GB (and higher options were technically possible but very rarely used, as in once or twice in the system’s lifespan).
I get it, if you have to sell people a full-on high-end SD card on top of the cost of the game things get weird fast. Storage stopped getting cheaper a long time ago. It still sucks, though.
Dusty, too. Washed jeans went from white to blue, unwashed from blue to brown.
This was already true of a number of Switch 1 games, where the partial data in the cart did not include access to the full game. Some gave you access to only a demo (in the line of the “play before the download is finished” feature in home consoles), others not even that. And of course it was true of the “code-in-a-box” products they were selling on retail that you couldn’t even resell or return.
The real issue isn’t how the key carts work, which is an improvement on those.
The issue is that the cost of carts with actual storage has gone up. Nintendo’s change of memory spec means they’ve given up on the low-storage carts, which used to come in a bunch of sizes, some of which were relatively cheap. They’ve gone for a single 64GB SKU, which means the type of game that can afford the physical storage will be significantly restricted.
This may well make technical sense (the new storage standard is based on a SD card update that may not even exist at lower sizes by default), but the practical effect may be that the cost of physical carts makes no sense to anybody but the largest games/publishers, which is a travesty. Nintendo should have found a way around this, even if it is to subsidize the cart cost with their cut of the game’s price to some extent. I get why that’s not the case, since it’d effectively mean giving their cut of each game straight to Amazon and other retailers, but man, does it suck as it is.
I think what we’ll end up seeing is a lot more Limited Run-style expensive collector’s editions being the only physical media releases of many games. And even that only if people do get used to paying extra to subsidize the card out of their own pocket. If I was Nintendo I would have considered making it a standard to have every physical game in both formats as a rule and have people pay an extra tenner for the full storage version. Instead, they chose to try to push the top end of the price range anyway with no guarantee that the cost of media is part of the increase. They’ve been indecisive and the outcome is going to suck.
Of course people would be complaining just as hard if they had done that, which is one of the examples where gamers’ default position being antagonism can yield worse results.
Neat. This was the best possible outcome of the whole mess.
Whether it’s viable or they will do interesting stuff is anybody’s guess. I’ll be honest, I haven’t been following much GB stuff since the original team left.
There’s a history of these things turning basically into semi-successful Youtube channels, and who knows if that’s good enough when you also have a website to maintain, but I do wish them the best.
Joke’s on you. I have multiple spindles of blank optical media I use regularly. I am not putting a ODE on my Saturn unless I absolutely have to.
Yeah, but… they do.
It’s just it’s always going to be a mix of new and old things. Just like you got into Batman form the 1930s and Mario from the 80s they’ll be into Spider-Man from the 60s, Minecraft from the 10s and Astrobot from the 20s.
That’s how culture works. Some things stick around, others phase out, new ones come in.
Yeah but… the only reason you had new heroes then is that videogames didn’t exist before.
We also got games with Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck and Bugs Bunny. It wasn’t depressing to my parents that I was watching Road Runner cartoons from the 50s. They were new to me.
There ARE new games, too. I mentioned Astrobot, you mentioned Minecraft. Just for as long as I’ve been alive kids have gotten into Pokemon Ben10, Splatoon, a bunch of Lego games, Animal Crossing, Spongebob…
But why would it be invalid for them to discover Sonic and Mario and Crash and Spyro in the 2020s? It’s new to them. They can be nostalgic about the same stuff you and I are, just like I am nostalgic about Daffy Duck or Star Trek even if they were technically before my time. Spider-Man is as popular with kids now as it was when I found out about it, and the whole thing was 20-30 years old when I got around to it.
…
I mean, the last Crash game came out in 2020. Ratchet was 2021, Spyro 2018, Rayman all the way back in 2013, but… you know you can still buy it. Sonic was 2023, just like Mario. Zelda starred in a game in 2024.
And of course Astrobot was last year’s GOTY.
Consider the possibility that you aren’t as aware of the characters that will stick with this generation because you’re not playing the games they are.
Although it’s entirely possible you are. Kids in my life are quite obsessed with Minecraft, Animal Crossing and Pokemon in extremely familiar ways. I semi-successfuly introduced Professor Layton to some of them, but I may have jumped the gun on that one, as they found it a bit too hard still.
True. I wish my app had better space for spoiler tags.
But also, I feel these are covered by the title of the thread. If you don’t want the best gaming moments of the last decade spoiled maybe don’t click on the “What are the best gaming moments of the last decade?” thread.
We have distinctly different ideas on how this works. Both hypotheses are untestable, though (at least to us).
Or, you know, to put it differently, “agree to disagree”.
You’re thinking of neofascism as a compound form of neoliberalism there, which I think is a mistake.
The people migrating from US-style neolib views into protofascist veneration for a strongman aren’t stacking one thing on top of the other. They are breaking with a neoliberal scheme that didn’t do much for them and into a fascist mindset that presents itself as revolutionary.
Had the left done a better job of channeling that disaffection they could have broken leftwards. They didn’t, so they abandoned neoliberal views for neofascist ones.
I am very skeptical that the conversion path for those fascists is back to neoliberalism and then from there to a more leftist stance. The left isn’t competing for the people already radicalized right, they are competing for the people that keep shedding off the husk of the liberal establishment.
And they’re losing.
Yeah, but people don’t make movies about that.
They do, however, sometimes notice that and use it to build an elaborate metaphor about family’s place in society and the emasculative nature of suburban middle class life.
That happens to have some objectivist undertones sometimes.
But… you are not saying everyone is special.
You are saying some people are. Fundamentally.
I mean, not to be too real, but superpowers aren’t a thing, they stand in for other stuff in the movie. Talent, ambition, creativity, whatever. If you’re going to push me into the dregs of hermeneutics I’d point out that the two “good guy” non-powered characters, Edna and Kari, are both women defined by providing a service to the talented ones. There is a very specific difference between them and the supes.
They may be special, but they’re not… “special”. And there are definitely people who are fundamentally not “special” who definitely benefit from what the special people do. In the movie, that is.
That is a very specific framing. If it’s not Randian Prime Movers it’s certainly adjacent to it. It’s hard to watch that movie and come out of it not thinking there is a fundamental impetus in Bob and Dash especially that drives them to doing something specific and great and makes them miserable if suppressed. Either the powers are presented as a metaphor for that or as a manifestation of that.
I cut Steam some slack because they were early to that particular party, so they got grandfathered in. Plus the QR signin is fairly useful (not that they couldn’t do it regardless, but still).
Their app is pretty ancient, can be kinda buggy and it’s not great overall, though.