There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Primarily0617

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Primarily0617 , (edited )

you need to be able to have vacations and save for retirement and do fun things from time to time

ahem actually people only need to exist and survive until they work themselves to death getting tangled in the gears of my spinning jennys

Primarily0617 ,

oh no then we'll have stopped the genocide for NOTHING

Primarily0617 ,

so biden is currently presiding over and doing nothing to stop two genocides? and you want to reward that with an unconditional vote of support, so that next time democrats are in office, they'll know that people don't care?

Primarily0617 ,

Does this mean that the victims of the next genocide the democrats preside over can blame you for supporting the last one unconditionally?

Primarily0617 ,

Statistically, your one vote is as meaningful whether you vote for a major party or a third party.

You don't vote to get your preferred candidate in. You vote to pull the one that might closer to where you want them.

Voting for Biden is voting for a genocide, whether you want it to be or not. Assuming Biden gets in, all you've done is tell the DNC that their voter base actually don't care all that much about genocide.

Primarily0617 , (edited )

biden's only selling point at the moment is that he isn't trump, so with 6 months of campaigning and biden's endorsement you could probably sell any democrat

me giving you a name now is almost entirely pointless given that you're just going to turn around and say that because they haven't already done that campaigning you can't imagine them being popular

Reward? No. I want to stop the one who will make it worse.

do you or do you not acknowledge that by voting biden you're sending a message to the dnc that their voter base doesn't care about genocide?

Primarily0617 ,

You've literally asked me once, friend, and I explained why me giving you a name wouldn't make any sense.

I fully expect that in the hypothetical world where the DNC decides it doesn't want to lose this election and decides to swap out Biden with somebody else that my gut reaction will be that they're shit, but that's because they haven't done any campaigning yet.

Primarily0617 , (edited )

I know for the sake of pride you aren't going to openly acknowledge this, given how pointedly you're refusing to engage with anything I'm saying, but at least admit it to yourself: voting for Biden is sending a signal that the democrats can allow as much genocide as they want so long as they can convince you the other side will be worse.

If you think that's worth the trade-off, fine, but don't pretend that that isn't the trade-off you're making.

Primarily0617 ,

If the democrats win this election while running a candidate that's twiddling his thumbs over multiple genocides, then the next time they're presiding over one, they're going to have solid data that tells them that they don't have to bother themselves about it because their voter base will elect them anyway.

It's really that simple.

Primarily0617 ,

Similarly your lack of engaging with the point I keep repeating to you past an unsubstantiated "no" is also an answer.

Yet somehow you bear no responsibility in your criticism.

This is just whataboutism. I could be the guiltiest person on the planet, and that wouldn't change the fact that electing Biden while he's failing to stop three (?) genocides is a clear signal to the DNC that the amount of genocide happening on their watch has little to do with their eventual success or failure.

Primarily0617 , (edited )

I know you want to avoid all culpability and put it on me

"culpability" seems a lot more important to you than it does to me

and again, let's presume i'm the worst person in the world and i'm guilty : it doesn't change anything about what i've said

and you know it doesn't matter if you're a registered democrat, right? your vote still shows up in the tally just the same

Primarily0617 , (edited )

A lot of words there to tilt at a strawman.

The inescapable fact is that you're completely unable to provide any justification as to why re-electing Biden while he's failing/not bothering to stop a genocide doesn't signal support from the democratic voter base. (No you don't have to be a registered democrat to count as "part of their voter base", and I don't know why you would think otherwise.)

As I said several comments ago:

If you think that's worth the trade-off, fine, but don't pretend that that isn't the trade-off you're making.

Your one response has been to attempt to put some kind of imaginary guilt on my head, which as I've repeatedly pointed out, changes absolutely nothing about what I've said.

telling me that I’m in favor of genocide

You know full well that at no point have I ever told you you support genocide, but you are inescapably voting in support of it by voting for Biden.

Primarily0617 ,
  • Fallout 3 releases and it's good
  • Fallout New Vegas releases and it's great
  • Fallout 4 releases and it's disappointing but it's okay because it's just a blip. They had some good new ideas in there, they were just balanced out in the other direction by a lot of bad ones. Bethesda's track record is still solid, if somewhat tarnished.
  • Fallout 76 releases and it's disappointing but that's because they've never made (and shouldn't have made) an MMO before. A lot of the coverage is centred around the shoddy launch, which doesn't really matter for a non-MMO title.
Primarily0617 ,

It feels like Skyrim was the game they'd (and by they I mean Todd) always wanted to make, and Skyrim was the first time they had the resources and technology available to make it more or less exactly as they envisaged.

Fallout 4 probably would've been in the exact same situation of the technology finally catching up to their ideas, except they completely botched the landing by adding in voiced characters.

Primarily0617 ,

All the new ideas in Starfield fall into one of two categories:

  • The technology doesn't exist to implement it.
  • The talent at Bethesda is incredibly ill-suited to implement it.

The Bethesda response to fans saying their main storyline was trash was to make a game where the main storyline is the primary focus and draw of the game? That's a bold move.

The NG+ stuff is a cool idea, but again, Bethesda just fundamentally lacks the talent to implement it. You can't hit what they were aiming for with a handful of gimmicks. I wouldn't even trust the team behind New Vegas, or whoever writes at Larian, to do it justice.

Primarily0617 ,

Dark Souls lore seems deeper than it is because it's less coherently presented than in TES.

Primarily0617 ,

I don't even mean I wouldn't trust Obsidian. I mean I wouldn't trust the specific team they had working on New Vegas, which was an absurdly stacked deck that they seemingly haven't been able to re-create since.

Films you can re-watch twice and have it be just as good the second time are rare. Bethesda wanted a film you could rewatch ten times while simultaneously larping as a cosmic god and trying to break everything you could.

Primarily0617 ,

i know but i'm roleplaying a semi-informed fan

i think it's fair to say that at least a portion of bethesda's reputation is built off that game

Primarily0617 ,

if RPGs have done this plenty of times, then it's not a new idea, and why are we talking about it in the context of the new ideas starfield had?

people replay games for the gameplay. bethesda wanted a game you could replay for the story, and then have it still work as a story when the player deliberately sequence breaks everything because of their omniscience

Primarily0617 ,

how would your reputation carry over when nobody in the universe knows who you are? it sounds like you're just inventing a new thing you have to grind

Primarily0617 ,

100 bits to add another 10 volts to the chair

Primarily0617 ,

it's a level 2 meme

meme 1

  • taylor swift use jet lots
  • taylor swift campaign for environment lots
  • taylor swift try sue "taylor swift jet tracker" twitter person
  • funny to make fun of hypocritical person
  • = meme series implying taylor swift uses her private jet in funny scenarios like to cross the road or to go to her private yet

meme 2

less of a meme, more a video that surfaced of a police officer trying to execute a handcuffed man because an acorn fell on the roof of his car and he thought it was a gunshot and later had to resign

meme 1 + 2

taylor swift in private jet drop acorn out of window, land on police car roof, scare police, lead to bodycam video

Primarily0617 ,

From my own sources: Taylor is indeed done, and not just on Twitch.

Primarily0617 ,

you can e2e encrypt emails though?

Primarily0617 ,

we shoot you straight into the phantom zone

Primarily0617 ,

its a long article and i cant read

what do you do about cases where the victim doesnt want to engage in a dialogue with the offender?

Primarily0617 ,

Please provide your evidence of “many people”

even if only one person proved utterly disinterested in rehabilitating themselves, you'd still need some kind of escape hatch built into the system to handle them

getting bogged down in specific frequencies is kind of missing the point

Primarily0617 ,

anything can be a prison for you if you make it one yourself

you need to think more positively

Primarily0617 ,

if that's the argument you're using against prisons, can't i, a dastardly doer of crimes, simply reject any form of consequence for my actions, since you're still going about contributing to global warming through your addiction to being alive and existing in society?

Primarily0617 ,

Right, but if we're going down that route, how do you enact any form of consequence when I decide to go about crime-ing people? Anything you try to force on me I can refuse with "nobody is perfect enough to reasonably judge other people".

Primarily0617 ,

every company has shareholders, including larian studios

you can't set up a company without specifying shareholders

Primarily0617 ,

historical conservation isn't really this cut and dry

sometimes it's better to restore things, or to do work to prevent them degrading further

Primarily0617 ,

but when is the exact point of "how they were" when 4000 years of erosion has already taken place?

Primarily0617 ,

always was bbyyyyyy

Primarily0617 ,

it is and it isn't

they're both bad UX, which FOSS is generally pretty bad at, probably because there's not as much overlap between people who who are really into FOSS and people who are really into UX

linux-centric communities also tend to be plagued by elitism, which i expect stifles a lot of this kind of thing before proper conversations can take root

Primarily0617 ,

Single/double click behavior is a matter of preference.

And defaulting to the preference that most people prefer or are used to is a matter of UX.

Which is why I say they're both UX decisions.

Primarily0617 ,

yet very different

which is why my first words to you were "it is and it isn't"

binning them into the same category is not helpful

both are caused by people in the foss space not paying enough attention to ux

increased attention to ux could solve both

personally i think categorising all work solely through the lens of severity is unhelpful

Primarily0617 ,

or i could argue that an issue 90% of people will run into is a higher priority than one 2% of people will run into

or i could argue than the risk of accidentally opening something you didn't want to is higher than the risk of losing unsaved work

the reason foss sucks when it comes to ux is this attitude of insisting that ux problems are somehow some "other" category of problem, rather than an engineering constraint that needs to be designed around like every other one

case in point, for some reason you're still refusing to acknowledge that they're both ux problems. and if you do, your original reply ceases to even make sense.

Primarily0617 ,

if you aren't refusing to acknowledge they're ux problems, you're saying it's unhelpful to call them what they are, which is obviously nonsense

and again, sane defaults are ux

Primarily0617 ,

if you're just going to take us back in circles again this discussion is a bit pointless, isn't it?

Primarily0617 ,

why is he waiting on you hand-and-foot if all you're doing is sipping a coffee?

Primarily0617 ,

It takes a certain amount of energy for water to exist as water, a certain amount of energy for oxygen to exist as oxygen, and a certain amount of energy for hydrogen to exist as hydrogen

The amount of energy it takes for water to keep being water is less than the sum total of the energy it takes for oxygen and hydrogen to keep being themselves.

When you burn hydrogen, it combines with oxygen in the air and makes water. But that requires less energy to exist, so where does the excess energy go? It's released as heat.

To split water back into hydrogen and oxygen, you have to re-add that same amount of energy again.

Hydrogen as a fuel isn't so much a source of energy as a store of energy. A battery doesn't make energy. You charge it with energy so that you can retrieve that energy later. Similarly, a big power plant electrolyses a bunch of water and makes a bunch of hydrogen. Later, you can use that hydrogen in your car without having to be connected to the big power plant that made it.

this is all probably largely wrong and you should ignore it chemistry SUCKS

Primarily0617 ,

that's not boobs that's boob

Primarily0617 ,

it's next to the time ghost, to the right of 3 tuesdays ago

Primarily0617 ,

a fairly significant portion of the population are always going to come down on the side of "the law is the law"

Primarily0617 ,

cool, but plenty of people are going to disagree with you, and what's the point of protesting if your goal isn't ultimately to affect change?

Primarily0617 ,

your argument is that the police need to be allowed to act with as much malice or incompetence as they like because if there was more oversight in the system they could choose to not arrest rapists?

you're saying that more oversight would lead to the police having more freedom to enforce the law as they see fit?

Primarily0617 ,

you're the one attempting to reframe "there should be more oversight on the police's actions" as "the police should be granted more power to interpret the law as they see fit"

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •