Was it really as "safe" as the article claims though? They diverted a full episode early in the show to have an hour long homosexual romance episode that completely changed the character paths and storyline for a major section of the game. I'm not really sure what "safe" even means in the context of the article's argument.

It's going to vary by jurisdiction, but generally it's not kidnapping or abduction. There are often State criminal statutes specifically for harboring a runaway though.

Despite overwhelmingly positive critical reviews, Children of Men lost money in its 2006 theatrical run. Most people I knew had never heard of it, and the only person I knew who had seen it was the friend I went to the theater with. It's now generally regarded as one of the best films of the 21st Century (so far) and particularly lauded for its cinematography. It's had a very successful home video run since then and is even more relevant today than on its release.

I'm a casual anime fan so I'm generally not looking for conventions to go to, but I've been to a few with a friend who really wanted to go. They weren't major national conventions, but fairly big regionally. Honestly they were like any other convention I've ever been to except with costumes. Maybe a little more social generally with people taking pictures and complementing the cosplay stuff, but outside of that you could have switched the anime out with just about anything else and I'd never have known the difference. It was always a good time. Don't know that I'd go out of my way, but if someone wanted to go asked me to come along I'd go happily.

The takeaway here is that he's actually received a Target Letter, which indicates a strong belief that there is substantial evidence against him and that criminal charges are being seriously considered. It's a procedural step, and one that many people likely inferred, but it is important and shows a concrete stance on the investigation. It's worth noting that "Target" is a specifically defined legal term in this context, on relevant part:

A "target" is a person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant....

USAM 9-11.151

There was a brief time in the late 90s to early 2000s where you'd just hop into an open server. The lobby would keep the same players as it went round to round and people would just filter in and out as they felt like it. It didn't track scores or stats between games, and there wasn't a leveling or progression system that followed you. You just played through the round as it came. People seemed to care a whole lot less about their record or team--it just seemed like everyone was happy to be able to play online. Maybe it's just because I'm older now and I'm looking back at it with rose tinted glasses, but I wish we could go back to casual modes like that. I don't have the energy or will to deal with people the way it's set up now.

Just another example of the Government's suppression and censorship of gamers' God given right to...

[D]efendant, Jesse James Comer, was “incensed” when the community manager — whom both Bungie and the court declined to name, to protect them from further harassment — spotlighted some fan art by a Black community member. Using anonymous phone numbers, Comer left a string of “hideous, bigoted” voicemails on the community manager’s personal phone, some asking that Bungie create options in Destiny 2 “in which only persons of color would be killed,” before proceeding to threaten the community manager’s wife with more racist voicemails and texts.

Oh.

It would be nice. From your specific wish I take it you probably already know, but for general discussion it looks like they've just filed the Notice of Appeal with the trial Court, which is entirely procedural and required before an appeal can be brought to the Circuit Court. We'll likely have to wait for the briefing before we get the substantive arguments. Reporting on appeals really does give the impression that it's like a second trial though.

Beehaw.org was at war with Lemmy.world. Beehaw.org had always been at war with Lemmy.world.

This is particularly galling as the standard applied originally came from Glucksburg. Glucksburg was a case on physician assisted suicide where the Court applied the "not deeply rooted in and offensive to US tradition" standard being cited here, but also held that the state had a rational and compelling interest in banning physician assisted suicide for the preservation of life and to protect the mentally disabled or ill from medical malpractice or coercion. But in the case of gender affirming care the science and medical practice supports the opposite--gender affirming care drastically reduces suicide rates and provides significantly better outcomes for those with gender dysphoria. They appear to be applying half of the reasoning of Glucksburg while directly going against the second half. That's not even touching the sex discrimination argument, which is compelling in its own right. I'm ashamed to live in the 6th Circuit today.

I'm a lawyer (though admittedly not in Canada!)--this doesn't sound as absurd as the headlines read, and I would hesitate to to form opinions on any case on the basis of headlines or blurbs. That said, looking at other sources it seems there's more here than the posted article conveys:

The judge noted that Mr. Achter and Mr. Mickleborough had had a longstanding business relationship and that, in the past, when Mr. Mr. Mickleborough had texted Mr. Achter contracts for durum wheat, Mr. Achter had responded by succinctly texting “looks good,” “ok” or “yup.”

Both parties clearly understood these terse responses were meant to be confirmation of the contract and “not a mere acknowledgment of the receipt of the contract” by Mr. Achter, wrote Justice T.J. Keene of the Court of King’s Bench for Saskatchewan. And each time, Mr. Achter had delivered the grain as contracted and had been paid.

Looks like they had a long standing business relationship where this sort of communication had been the common understood form of acceptance in the past. It's also important to note the guy only tried backing out of the deal after a price fluctuation meant he'd be taking a relative loss.

I'd want to see all of the facts and arguments, but this seems reasonable from what we can see reported.

In Legend of Dragoon I hit a wall on a Disc 2 boss and was stuck for months. After I took a break and came back I realized you could change your equipment--I'd never upgraded anything equipped and was using all of the starting equipped weapons and armor. This was not my first RPG, nor was I young enough to use age as an excuse.