Activision

No they added more crappy pve that isn’t any better than the old pve

Oh wait

Well I do intend to ask them to defederate too

Jfc defeate from both, disgusting

I really don’t like that style of interface. But what’s cool is, it doesn’t matter what I think, because both can coexist so people who do like it can enjoy it. Looks good, Rock on!

It’s a balancing act, artistic choice and such. Also depending on the company, it might be designed to increase engagement to keep you addicted

Kill enemy, save, make certain jump, save. Takes a lot of risk out of the game. I like when games let you save anywhere but if you restart the game or load your save you start in the beginning of a room regardless of where you saved from. (Like ocarina of time)

How did you block an instance?

That makes sense until you realize he already made a company called x.com that failed, and it’s the source of his fortune

Always makes me wonder if he’s destroying it for Russia or republicans or something

Thing is, the risks of doing nothing have definite consequences that we’ve already been watching. Should we do nothing and let democracy burn in fear that doing something will be abused in the future?

Thanks for existing!

Not an admin

“we’re losing rights” or some people you don’t like are gaining safety? No rights are lost by combatting disinformation. It’s not like someone is just going to go out with a banhammer and say “I disagree so that’s disinformation, you’re banned”

I wasn’t referring to the case, but turns out I’m wrong anyway. Edited my original comment

That’s why we have three branches of government, a constitution, and state rights. Literally any government in bad hands can be abused. It’s a senseless argument

First off, 50% of the country believes things that actually have no evidence other than people they like saying it. It’s not about different truths, it’s about truth and fiction. All you need to do is try and verify claims from first or second hand sources, and that becomes painfully obvious, but people refuse to accept that or be open to it.

Second, nobody is asking to have a partisan arbiter of truth. The supreme court was once non partisan, and they’re an arbiter of justice. Even conservatives who are actually capable of researching and following truths come to the same conclusions as the left when it comes to facts. Here’s an easy one: Conservatives all over the country claim there was evidence of election fraud. Okay, it’s been years, where is the evidence? No where, they didn’t even fabricate evidence, they literally didn’t submit anything. Any rational person, regardless of their political views, would agree that there is no reason to believe the election was stolen. Trump is going to trial for espionage. Where is the evidence? You can literally listen to some of it on the internet, there are photos, a large investigation with multiple people on both sides of the aisle took place, there were raids and testimony. But there are still people claiming it’s a witch hunt and there’s no evidence.

It’s not even censorship if they just mark things as not true. There’s really no reason doing something about it has to be equivalent to full scale authoritarian censorship, so you’re walling yourself off from actual solutions with a slippery slope argument that leaves us in the hands of disinformation campaigns, which are easily paid for by rich people and foreign governments.

If they take over it doesn’t matter what laws we have. Currently the republican frontrunner plans to expand the power of the president, and previously he packed the court with garbage. That’s how they win, not by the government or companies working to fight misinformation.

I wasn’t referencing that actually, but turns out it’s not true anyway. Edited my comment

Slippery slope to what? We have those restrictions for news already. Only reason you still see Fox and such lie on the air and get away with it is they’re classified as entertainment instead of news. Freedom of speech and press are still in tact.

Edit: I wasn’t referring to the Tucker Carlson case, but I did learn that’s not true anyway. Nobody accredits news channels in the first place, and as it turns out, the FCC doesn’t even have any authority over cable.