these are not totally serious thoughts, altho they reflect my kind of feelings about it

but IP should be periodically put to a vote, maybe a year or two after a major release, in which the public decides if they should retain ownership of the IP

if not? it’s released into public domain. obviously the original company / creator can still do something with it, but others can, as well. but if they do a good job keeping people happy with it, they can keep it

obviously this has some problems, mostly about constantly polling people and probably only dealing with IP that’s popular enough

but the idea gives me some deep satisfaction after seeing some companies ruin their IP, and i like the idea of consumers having some power to punish them for being shitty lol

this take in the article was really funny

My guess at the real reason for all this grave dancing is that it feels like a victory over FOMO. If the new $40 game sucks and no one is playing it, I can safely go back to whatever I was playing before without worrying that anyone’s having fun without me.

i don’t know what most people’s reasons for deriving enjoyment from concord’s failure are, but there’s no way FOMO cracks the top 3 lmao

seeing the trailer, i definitely thought it was a bandwagon hero shooter that might have had some creativity if a bunch of suits didn’t say “make it GotG”, but realistically, it launched with little fanfare, in competition with valve’s first new game (beta) in ages. not that it was fated to fail but it didn’t have a lot going for it

water in noita be like:

what a blast from the past

it’s an interesting article, but i think the authors are conflating friction for wanting genuine human interaction; its easier than ever for me to make friends because i can instantly connect with and message back and forth, quickly and in real time, over various platforms e.g. discord, the depth of which is only limited by our interactions and how we treat them. forcing us back to sms/email/paper mail doesn’t make our interactions deeper, even though it adds friction. it means we can easily choose what the depth of connection we want is

that isn’t to say that there aren’t examples where less friction leads to less interaction. dating apps are a great example. but i think the authors are conflating the friction for the interaction. yes, you could add friction that would encourage interaction, but you could also add friction that doesn’t. i think the more salient point would be, encouraging interaction often includes friction, but one shouldn’t shy away from that, as a UI/UX developer

which, granted, isn’t as catchy of a title. but they could have gone into greater detail for that in the article, too

regardless of this critique, i enjoyed reading it and the perspective it offered, even if i don’t strictly agree

nein

can they just please make a lower budget game for the sake of branching out instead of pushing millions into a game expecting it to explode in sales? no? too much to ask? ok…

lmaoooo believe it or not, some people around here ALREADY had that idea. which is INSANE when people are paying >$100 a month in HOA fees 😭 which i discovered by talking to someone i (mistakenly) believed was getting paid to pick up trash in the area

it’s shit like that that makes me want to organize people

this is interesting to me. i recently met, and subsequently turned down, a local communist party. after some interrogation, i realized that, much like organizing folks in my workplace, i wanted the work i did with them to directly benefit the people of my community. they were very much about recruitment (“waiting for the next event where capitalism radicalizes a bunch of people”) and learning theory (… which i respect to a certain extent), with a distinct emphasis on doing things other than community building / mutual aid / etc. they’re also mentioned as one of the not-great groups (RCA)

i guess i’d like to know which groups are doing that important community building / solidarity building / organization education outreach? there’s a mutual aid group in my area i’d like to become involved with at some point, at least

to a certain extent, i also want to know if my criteria for judging a group is good (or, if you agree, i suppose) - i’ve always thought that the worth of a group (here, meaning, a group meant to change things in the world for the better) is measured in the lives they’ve changed. but i can’t prove that, obviously, it’s just what i’ve arrived at based on my experience of the world, and i’m curious what others think

a friend of mine discovered the tip to add “before:2025” (or, the current year+1) to your yt search to improve it. i have no clue why that does anything but it reverts it to pre-enshittified functionality

it’s crazy how those comments are aging like milk precisely because google/web search is going to shit (in addition to being dickhead comments ofc)

just weird to look back and think about how we thought it would never change

fwiw you’ve conveyed the same general question i have about the situation, albeit far more eloquently than i would have been able to

i am totally down to stop using words that disabled people find offensive, but i need alternatives to express that someone is being needlessly / purposely ignorant or otherwise harmful and is generally worthy of scorn and contempt

which isn’t to say that providing that is the onus on disabled people (it’s really not, their only real obligation is to express their experiences)… but it does make it a lot easier to action on the request

it’s also kind of interesting to approach this conversation both as an outsider, but also as someone who these words do apply to in some capacity

hate speech (of which nazi speech is a subset of) isn’t political either. it definitely should be banned because it demonstrably causes people to get hurt

insane stance to be advocating that nazis should have free speech in 2024

oh that’s crazy, i saw that syntax (from my client) and went, no way that’s correct (bc of the empty square brackets). but it being alt text makes it make sense, thanks!

looks like my alt text is breaking it for me tho (it’s removed in the above embedding)

https://beehaw.org/pictrs/image/717d18ed-533a-461b-975f-e2e1dc26b720.webp

i don’t know how to embed pictures but hopefully this works ^^; i’ve been seeing this one around lately and i think it’s very funny

preach sib (i do not know your gender identity)

i also love testosterone

i do it weird and put it on before bed, but it’s always a high point of my night

also it’s making me so big and strong!~

✊🦎

and that’s just the wage theft that’s explicitly illegal!

thanks for sharing this information with us, i think it’s important to discuss this stuff on the fediverse

i notice that beehaw doesn’t have a similar clause in its TOS, as far as i can tell. without the expectation of you answering this question, i’m wondering what the difference is between the two such that cohost has such a clause and beehaw doesn’t. maybe it’s because one is run by an individual and one is run by a small company?

i did a search on cohost itself to see if anyone else talked about this and found this quite extensive thread: https://twitter.com/rahaeli/status/1588769277053739010

so based on what you’ve said and what’s in that thread, i’m gonna update my post with some qualifications about cohost. thanks for piqing my interest in the TOS

is there a way they could protect themselves (“still legally be able to function”) without that clause?