I don’t need it to be my friend. I just need it to contain human violence by having a monopoly on it. You might see that as a negative, but I see it as a positive and history is obviously on my side as well, because we would have not achieved the things we have without states. You might think I lack imagination, that there are other possible systems but the truth is that all I have to do is look at the beings that are 99.99% like us to understand how we would exist without a state. We already lived like them and decided that giving the monopoly over violence to the few was better and led to more stability.

I agree with the sentiment though, humans will never be truly equal while some hold the authority to exert violence and others don’t. Once we invent God we can hand over the monopoly to it, and then we can be equal.

Hence why I called it gambling.

Yes I agree.

But the notion that no police at all is a good idea is absolutely ridiculous. I can empathize if you live in a place where the police force is fully corrupt but this is systemic, it’s the same thing that causes poor communities to have more crime. Now I could start saying that poor people are criminals and I would be flayed alive (rightfully so), but it is the exact same thing as saying that all cops are criminals or abusers. Some of them are, many of them maybe, and in some places most of them but that in itself is not a problem inherent of the concept of having someone to protect the peace and make sure that rules are followed.

It betrays a real lack of critical thought imo.

All I read here is that there are still 8 too many live service games in development. Are execs addicted to gambling or what? Because that’s exactly what live service game development is. Also I would like to know what kind of research they are doing that indicates that more live service games is what the market wants, when people who play them rarely ever switch once they find the one they like and at this point there are entirely too many of them.

Damn generalizing a large group of people always works out great right?

I really hope you never need an officer for anything, but if you do I hope you’ll remember this conversation and maybe walk away with the right lesson.

I read lots of books. Maybe you should read more books, they help with empathy and critical thinking skills.

Not what I said at all. I said that because you both participate in society and have no option other than to participate in it you should be empathetic towards them. That’s all.

Just because you haven’t needed them yet doesn’t mean that you might need them sometime in the future. Best keep that in mind.

I don’t see any point in spreading vitriol about people anyways. They’re just like anyone else, a cog in the machine, trying to make a living. And just because some are bad, doesn’t mean that all of them are bad, and maybe we could stop more of the bad ones from popping up if we tried to understand what makes them bad. I’m willing to bet that the answer is the same as it is for any other worker that does a bad job: they’re being exploited with terrible working conditions, low pay (for the risk), high stress and peer pressure from others that strayed from their values because of the above. But I guarantee you that most cops don’t enter the force with bad intentions.

Yes surely having no police is a good idea. Leopards will definitely not eat your face.

Be nice to people, that’s all.

But I don’t see what’s productive about demonizing the police when we both know that the first thing you’ll do when someone breaks into your house or whoops your butt is call the police. Or do you think you can bring justice to perpetrators in your own terms with your own hands?

Until someone assaults you and you’re running like a bitch towards your nearest police station. We need to push for police reform, demeaning and treating them like enemies pre emptively will not help any of your causes, it only entrenches them further as tools of the state instead of protectors of the people (would you protect someone that hates you for no reason other than you are a part of the system, like everyone else?)

Oh I know, I’m just not a big fan of sailing the seas these days. But I might just give it a go with the ones I own just to see how they run.

Can they though? Isn’t the responsibility of porting games to Linux that of the developer? They could create a Gamepass for Linux but that would probably entail more money spent on licensing that platform, and funding ports which they certainly have no economic incentive to do.

That being said, they seem really committed to their “everything is an Xbox” strategy so it would not surprise me terribly if they ended teaming up with Valve at some point and created some kind of Gamepass on Steam thing, where you can play Gamepass games directly from steam or something, which would presumably also include the MacOS and Linux versions of the game if they are available.

I wasn’t trying to contradict them??

Would.

Right? I’ve seen a lot of people on Reddit shitting on it and I for the life of me can’t understand why. The only big issue imo is the lack of a proper sleep mode. Hopefully Microsoft addresses this issue when/if they truly build a handheld windows experience.

And yep, I’ll stick with Gamepass until enshitification runs its course. When it does then I’ll switch to SteamOS. But for now the service is still great for me.

It is literally the biggest money maker in the world. The games sell about 3/5 as many copies as COD with a tiny fraction of the budget. And then they sell even more in merch. And there are people (like me in the past) that buy Nintendo consoles just for those games.

Interesting read, thanks for taking the time to make the research.

I don’t want to get behind this type of thinking. I get it, I really do. I would also like to shake sense into people. But as you’ve seen that doesn’t work.

I believe that all people should question authority and they should inform themselves using the proper sources without taking what anyone says at face value. Authorities will more often than not simplify and remove all nuance when communicating information to the masses and this is the root of the increased mistrust in vaccines with Covid came from. Authorities stated as facts things that they did not know were facts and overstated the effectiveness of the vaccines and then tried to silence the fact that in a small number of people the vaccine did cause cardiovascular issues. The government should have been upfront about that and explained why the trade off was worth it, but they didn’t because they erred on the side of thinking that people are complete morons. They may be, but we need to give them the benefit of the doubt.

IMO, and this is maybe off topic but official authorities should have open and long panels in podcast format discussing why they take the decisions they take and explaining the people the benefits and risks, inviting dissenters and proponents so that people can make the most informed decision. Not for every decision of course, but at least for those health related decisions that affect everyone we should.

I know many or even most will not do the right thing and inform themselves properly. But I also cannot stop believing that people are capable of finding good information and making the best decisions with the evidence available if we make that information easily accessible with all possible considerations. Because if I believe that people cannot make good decisions, then I necessarily also have to believe that we should limit the participation in our democratic society to only those who demonstrate this aptitude and I really really don’t want to believe that.

Like I said, somewhat challenging. The new ones are brain dead easy.