i think it's very clear now that the lack of unionization in the gaming industry will need to change, or every year or two or whatever arbitrary interval we'll see an astronomical number of people losing their jobs all at once in this way.
"in New Hampshire" is the important caveat here, and this is an outlier-low for Trump poll too. nationally she continues to poll anywhere from 30 to 50 points behind him, and in any case it's not a given that "winning New Hampshire" is capable of catapulting her to victory with a Republican electorate that clearly likes Trump a lot
i mean. what is the right way to deal with a dude whose entire career is literally built on flagrant stealing, plagiarism, and copyright infringement but whose circumstances make it so that it's nearly impossible to bring him to a court of law and, even if you did, whose finances and job make it exceedingly unlikely he will ever be able to financially remedy the damages he's done to said people?
in general, there's a lack of media coverage of comments like this outside of the partisan blogs--which is absurd to me, since this is the most explicitly fascist Trump has been. the debate over whether he is one is basically over in my view.
when they bought out Mediatonic they acquired the publishing rights, which is allegedly when he stopped getting royalty payments here. it also changed what platforms you can get the game on--previously it was available on a few other platforms--but these days you can only get the game on Epic or Steam
FYI replace “blacklist” with “deny list” and “whitelist” with “allow list”.
this is the verbiage used by Lemmy which is why it's used here but also, speaking as a black person: i really don't care at all about the terminology used for this. it's like 2,000th on the list of important things that affect my life. even granting that it was more important: i certainly do not care about the "correct" term to use in this context, where it is a completely irrelevant and unimportant detail and talking about it in any way detracts from actually important conversations. please don't do this, thanks.
past four months of data, for anyone wondering. a wiki page for this should be forthcoming in the days to come
June | July | August | September | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Contributions | $705.00 | $3,870.44 | $1,310.90 | $1,033.82 |
Expenses | $54.00 | $566.98 | $523.79 | $264.50 |
Difference | +$651.00 | +$3,303.46 | +$787.11 | +$769.32 |
Balance | $726.51 | $3,591.33 | $4,347.79 | $4,701.66 |
What is your intent with a comment like this?
they were being quite literal [i got their donation email :)]
this is the latest in a series of abrasive, unproductive, and generally uninteresting driveby comments from you--i think it's time for a week off.
Not specifically about podcasts, but I think there’s a minority (?) of privacy/security enthusiasts who are pretty overtly right-wing libertarians, often because those technologies are anti-establishment.
yeah--the "techno-libertarians", as i've personally taken to calling them. that tendency was also the case on reddit in the early days (and to some extent still influences the site's cultural lean) and seems to be particularly common among stereotypical Silicon Valley types. a big calling card of that group is usually waxing poetic about the need to preserve almost unfiltered freedom of speech even though no website trying to preserve that has ever gone well.
doing some housekeeping this afternoon and yes we have already decided to do this. (if it hasn't been done yet it will shortly, but someone besides me is going to be doing it)
okay but... has it? this seems like an unfounded premise, intuitively speaking