No bannable offenses? That’s a banning

Okay but if there isn’t a guy living out of a car with three doors, one hauling shopping carts, and an assistant trailer park supervisor/cheeseburger prostitute then I don’t even care.

I think it’s psychology. When people make politics or certain stances their entire personality, then by disproving those items it’s literally tearing apart their own identity. They are so unable to actually confront this that their brains will believe wild crazy ideas like conspiracy theories because even if it’s insane, they are able to keep their worldview.

Their minds have been so warped to protect their identity that they will believe whatever they need to to be able to keep these views - to the point where it must be true, because if it weren’t true the house of cards would collapse. So when you are arguing with them, you’re not actually going to ever be able to penetrate this, because they will build up whatever they need to in their mind to protect it.

An interesting way to think of this (to borrow from the video below), is that as if becomes it is. Feelings become facts.

Take gay marriage. To a conservative white christian, it means nothing to them logically. 2 separate people are getting married which in no way effects them. However, gay marriage makes them feel as if their straight marriage is less important and the meaning of it has been deluded. To protect this worldview, since it’s impossible for any fact or reasoning to back up their worldview, that as if becomes it is. To them, now gay marriage is diluting their straight marriage and it is less important. It must be. It has to be. If it’s not… then what is their worldview? Their entire personality, their identity is based around these core beliefs. If it’s not actually affecting them… then what is their identity? So their view isn’t based on fact at all, and thus no amount of facts will ever persuade them.

Philosophy Tube did a great video essay on this, and I think it’s completely worth a watch.

No, I disagree with that. It’s always been perfectly normal to have ultra graphics a bit out of reach so that the game will look great on future graphics cards, and 120fps is a ridiculously high number that should never be expected even with top of the line graphics cards for a brand new release. (Assuming 2 or 4k)

However, a 1 generation out of date graphics card should be able to easily play most things on High settings at a decent framerate (aiming for 60) on 4k settings, which Borderlands failed at horribly. Medium to low settings on a 4000 series card sounds like a gutpunch to me.

They’ve released some updates, I’m not surprised if it’s gotten better

Don’t you know that gamers demand hyper realistic graphics? Even when there is a defined art style it doesn’t matter. Realism.

It’s famously why comic books failed to captivate anyone, and cartoons are never successful.

I’ve read reports that people can’t get more than 30fps on low settings on 4000 series cards. I’m definitely not one to expect sweet 120fps on ultra on launch day, but a 4000 card not even getting low settings? They failed. Hard.

Ah, the forum equivalent of vaguebooking.

This is a company that will sue you if you even watch this press release incorrectly, but they’re still coming at the bit

I think it depends on if they retain their memories. I often think about how sad it is that we only have one life to live, that so much of our existence is based on where we happened to be born. It live a completely different life, a different childhood, a different continent - I think we’d gain so much empathy as a species.

Oh completely agree - but if forced to choose between those two types of trucks I know which one I’d say is more reasonable.

That’s neat you found a girl like that, but it is not the norm from my experience, as it looks like it’s yours too. I usually see a lot of angry men who are too eager to swerve lanes and show off how cool their truck (and by extension they) are.

Insulting me doesn’t make it untrue.

Trucks are for hauling things and towing things. Again, the vast majority of truck drivers, and I’m not saying all, but the vast majority of people do not need a truck.

Most truck beds now are only a few feet long. Minivans and old school station wagons can store more in them then most modern trucks can. Why do you think Amazon and UPS use vans instead of pickups? Because they’re more efficient at hauling things.

Then even if you need to haul things and you choose to disregard the whole thing about vans having more cargo space, I ask how often? How often do you actually roll up to the home Depot and grab a while pile of lumber to take home that wouldn’t fit in a van? If it’s not once a week or more that you fill the truck, congrats you’re losing money on your truck. Truck rentals are about 20 bucks and haul my stuff just as easily back to my home, with the added benefit of them I’m not paying for gas and maintenance for this giant thing as my daily driver nor a huge car payment either.

Oh and proof of all of this? Crew cabs. The stupidest invention and absolutely proof it’s just marketing. “Hey we convinced you that you need a truck even though all you really need is a rental truck every once in a while, but oh no you have this family, where do they go? Don’t worry now you have five seats AND a shortened bed!”. They already solved that problem. Vans and station wagons. Can haul minimum 5 people and if you needed to haul shit you just folded down the seats, could fit an entire sheet of plywood in there.

Same goes for towing. If you own a boat I might get it, or again a trailer if you’re towing something regularly, then sure, you need the torque.

I would wager that 95% of truck owners do not actually need a truck.

Uh, nope. Lived in rural America. Most truck drivers are pavement processes who haul something maybe a handful of times a year. The vast majority.

There was not a shift from 30 years ago everyone driving tiny cars and hatchbacks to now where everyone became blue collar and needed a truck for work suddenly. It’s corporate marketing. Corporations can get around fuel standards by making trucks instead of cars, so they convinced everyone that having a truck was somehow necessary, and the good people of the USA gladly ate it up making the f150 the most popular vehicle on the roads followed by the other truck models.

Also, “most people on these forums live in major cities”. Ftfy. It wasn’t until I left my town in Iowa did I realize how many people there are. The entire population of thestate of Iowa lives in my one city.

That small red truck is a truck of a man who truly is masculine. Doesn’t give a shit what other people think, needs it to carry supplies, and didn’t want to waste any money.

Giant lifted trucks are the opposite of masculine. They’re for showing off, desperately trying to get people to notice them, they arely if ever haul anything (if they even can anymore with the lift), and they wasted huge amounts of money.

I used to be one of those people, that good and bad movies were black and white. I was stupid for thinking so.

Movies can be good for different moods and audiences. Sometimes I want to watch a heart wrenching drama, Oscar style, and I can get up after it and think wow that moved me. That is a good movie.

Sometimes I’m feeling in a funk and I don’t know what to watch, o I want to watch giant robots punch aliens with minimal plot. That movie is also good, just for a different mood.

I’m aware, we aren’t going to make a massive dent. However, for this 2 million dollar settlement, how many people would need to be swayed to not buy a switch 2 to make the settlement more expensive? In other words, how many sales would need to be lost because of us not buying the console to make the settlement moot?

In the case of 2 million, that’s about 4,500 switch 2s, not counting the loss in games bought or accessories.

If just 4500 people were convinced not to buy one because of this settlement, then the cost to their brand being tarnished is worse than the loss of potential sales due to the chip.

There’s a dozen other factors too, legal costs, what drives these potential sales, etc. what I’m trying to say is that if they’re willing to be this litigious over a few thousand console sales, then that means that even small groups like us not buying consoles can actually be noticed. It may be a simple dip in sales on a chart, but they’ll notice. To a greedy corporation willing to go after a single guy in a garage, they’ll notice a couple thousand people not buying consoles.

I continue to not buy Nintendo devices or software because of their continuing nonsensical litigation like this. Whatever value they think they lost because of these chips I say compare that to their continued tarnishing of their name.

If your drm can be altered with a chip some guy made in his garage then it’s your drm that’s at fault. Financially ruining the guy only hurts the Nintendo brand.

I have not… but I will now!

Spouse is on Linux, but because one by one her devices started to switch. Setting up a new gaming pc, oh that’s weird it has Linux. Setting up the new gaming console, and it has bazzite. Suddenly they’re only using linux