azertyfun

Hopefully not... Otherwise someone is literally boofing microplastics.

Given the prevalence of forced mutilation of intersex babies as well as medically unnecessary circumcisions, I humbly disagree that these procedures are "weighted on total outcomes". Unnecessarily cutting off (part of) a baby's penis is not comparable to being unaware of a new drug's side effects. Every doctor who has performed that procedure was fully aware that it was medically unnecessary and did not have reason to believe the baby would not come to regret not being given a choice years down the road. I'd argue these procedures are institutionalized medical malpractice.

No shade on you personally because you seem to be approaching the topic rstionally, but I think it's critical to acknowledge that the field of medicine still has very strong biases in these matters and is not nearly as Cartesian as it is sometimes made out to be. Especially on sensitive topics such as gender identity or reproductive rights doctors have a lot of latitude to be bigoted and to unilaterally deny necessary care.

I looked it up because I already forgot, but you need to do half of the puzzle I'm talking about to do the big one. And that one is annoying as fuck to do because even if you immediately understand how it works (it is very neat) you'll be looking at it for literal hours getting tiny details right with zero feedback from the game, and the "this is neat" feeling quickly turned into intense frustration for me. Doubly frustrating because I was not in the right headspace after being forced to do a bunch of content filler puzzles to even get there. I just can't find any joy in the tedium of figuring out a bazillion very similar puzzles over and over again to solve a bigger puzzle I already know how to solve. I figured out your trick, game, where is my damn reward? I guess that's why I could never get into Rubik's Cube...

Outer Wilds approaches this very differently, I definitely spent hours wandering because I misunderstood one very specific thing. But once I did understand that thing, everything clicked into place and the game revealed itself to me. Late-game Tunic instead punishes discovery with more grind.

The combat was fine, I never touched the difficulty either. Though I will say the difficulty scaling was a bit all over the place, most of the regular enemies were barely a threat, while the bosses were pretty all over the place in terms of difficulty. But overall the combat progression was quite enjoyable.

It's more of a "souls-lite" meets Outer Wilds for sure. You gotta be relatively on top of things mechanically to beat it, and on top of that in the second half of the game it switches to puzzles that are (IMO) infuriatingly grindy and will take hours to complete after you've figured out the mechanic.

Which is perfectly fine for those who like that, but I was sold "knowledge base game like Outer Wilds" which doesn't accurately capture how disgustingly grindy Tunic really is IMO. That's like saying Elden Ring is an "open world walking simulator with gorgeous graphics and compelling combat". I mean, yeah, it's all that and it's a great game. But that's kind of underselling the fact that if it's your first Souls you'll probably break a couple keyboards after meeting Margit.

For me the end-game was the wrong ratio of grind-to-payoff. Everything after unlocking that one secret ability got quite repetitive. I watched a video essay from someone who praised it specifically because they're a hardcore gamer who loves the grind and pouring sweat into it and the accompanying feeling of accomplishment, but after I discovered 90 % of the secrets of the world it felt really annoying to spend the second half of the game scouring every nook and cranny of the game for the remaining 10 %. Some of these puzzle have very long solutions with absolutely zero feedback if you do even one tiny thing wrong and that's absolutely infuriating. I think I would have preferred it if credits had rolled at the halfway point.

However I loved Outer Wilds because while it's huge and full of sometimes very difficult puzzles, it never gets grindy. Either you get it or you don't, the game never presents you with a "congratulations you understand the mechanic, now go stare at every wall in the game for the next 3 hours". I get that some people love that but it clearly wasn't for me.

Doesn't HP end up a literal magic cop at the end of the series? The whole caste system is also upheld throughout, at no point is revealing the wizarding world to muggles even considered an option despite the fact that little kids are dying from cancer all over Britain/the world that could be magically healed in an afternoon. The whole SPEW thing is just profoundly racist and always has been. "Cho Chang" – nuff said. The whole point of Hogwarts is that it's a boarding school, which proudly inherits all its real-world British characteristics which are intrinsically linked to the more problematic parts of the British class system.

Rowling has always been a bigot and I will die on this hill. Any progressive messaging that people read into harry potter is at best performative (for instance yes she explicitly denounces "blood purity" pretty early on, but that's super performative considering her entire worldbuilding is built on the premise that some people are just inherently magical and others are inherently not invited to the party. "Blood purity contests" are only bad when wizards to it to other wizards.).

I don't think she's a good enough writer to have done most of the racist/classist/misogynist messaging intentionally, but nonetheless her reactionary poorly thought-out world view transpires through every bit of her writing.

EDIT: Trying to expand on my own thoughts here. I've always despised HP as a franchise so to try to be fair to HP let's contrast and compare with the piece of shit author who did make a book I like, Ender's Game. I pirated it a couple years back, and I won't pretend it's not obvious at times that he's a homophobe and a religious nutcase with some obvious cognitive dissonance with some of his (at least at the time) progressive views. I guess the good thing about that particular IP is that there's no new stuff coming out besides one awful movie, so everyone can agree Orson Scott Card can get fucked and move on with their lives. But it's important to acknowledge that his religious zealousness did impact his writing and to take a step back even if we decide to still appreciate his work.
The problem is that HP fans are in a much tougher situation because the writing just isn't good so if you drop the flimsy pretense that 2000s Rowling was a champion of liberal ideals, then you really don't have much left besides a profoundly flawed worldbuilding with shitty characters who only work to uphold the wizarding status quo. Yeah I'd get pretty mad too if I had spend my teenage years obsessing over that heap of trash.

I love Dune but that game is so powerfully unappealing to me... I didn't play it so maybe I got the wrong impression from a few minutes of gameplay but it read to me like every generic crafting-survival-base-building live service game from the last 15 years since MC and DayZ. Does it do something subversive or is it really just Rust on Arrakis?

I will argue there is something very different between Rowling and Bezos.

Both are rich beyond measure and can fund lobbying efforts indefinitely. But Rowling has something that Bezos doesn't have, cultural capital. When she says something, people listen, from journalists to citizens to lawmakers, and not just because she's rich.

Truth is social capital matters. A lot. Which is good because it's the only thing we, the people, can hope to have that most billionaires don't. But a corollary of this statement is that giving social capital to Rowling is, in fact, worse than giving actual capital to Bezos, all else being equal.

Now I can't tell you how to live your life and we all have our vices. Just giving food for thought.

That song is very hard to coordinate with a crowd of untrained singers. It was written to be sung on stage in a theater, not by a rowdy crowd. It can be (and has been) used as a dub over videos of protests though.

The reason why La Marseillaise and its offshoot L'Internationale were so successful is that they're slower songs, meant to be absolutely belted by a crowd of belligerant drunks. La Marseillaise is originally a literal revolutionary marching song.

Plus La Marseillaise just goes harder lyrically. It would actually have been pretty scandalous if it was written in 1980 for a play.
"To arms, citizens! Form your Battalions! Let's March! Let's March! So an impure blood can water our furrows!"

Maybe one of them Angelino theatre kids should do a partial English and/or Spanish translation focusing on rhythmic accuracy.

Opposite statements. Either they follow orders or they are loyal to the constitution. Can't do both right now.

I can't fathom the industrial amounts of pure propagandium that Americans must have been huffing to think the military will ever be on their side. Blind and unconditional obedience is literally the only way militaries can function properly and everything about them is organized to promote that.

US military apologists (even before Trump) will say "but soldiers are legally obligated to follow the constitution first and must refuse unlawful orders" like Abu Ghraib didn't happen in my lifetime. We all know that 90 % of soldiers will wipe themselves with the original copy of the declaration of independence if Trump orders them to. And those that refuse will be dishonorably discharged, or worse.

Mathematics articles are the most obtuse I come across. I think the Venn diagram of good mathematicians and good science communicators is very close to non-intersecting.

Wikimedians discussed ways that AI/machine-generated remixing of the already created content can be used to make Wikipedia more accessible and easier to learn from

The entire mistake right there. Look no further. They saw a solution (LLMs) and started hunting for a problem.

Had they done it the right way round there might have been some useful, though less flashy, outcome. I agree many article summaries are badly written. So why not experiment with an AI that flags those articles for review? Or even just organize a community drive to clean up article summaries?

The questions are rhetorical of course. Like every GenAI peddler they don't have an interest in the problem they purport to solve, they just want to play with or sell you this shiny toy that pretends really convincingly that it is clever.