Tribalism is literally human nature, though. People have a natural tendency to have a group they consider their own, and those outside of that group. It absolutely is human nature, and has been for thousands of years.
product of a society that demands conformity, hierarchy, and defines community through exclusion
Have you ever thought that maybe those happened because of human nature, and not the other way around?
The files are pre-internet encrypted. Shouldn’t matter who gets the backup file
I mean, I just use the scheduled backups and back it up to a locally hosted server. Though the scheduled backups just go to a folder on my phone
That’s awful for so many reasons. How are business/products expected to be held accountable? Obviously when you let free reign of negative reviews, you’re going to get some nonsensical ones or absurd ones, but people filter those out most of the time anyway. If you prevent (or there’s even a threat) for negative reviews, you’re just letting shitty companies and products get away with being shitty. It’s a loss for both consumers and the country wanting to have good businesses, though a win for shitty companies.
Kick is uncensored Twitch. It’s usually where people go after getting banned for racism or whatever on Twitch
It’s not really shilling since you aren’t benefiting for them in anyway. I got it too. It’s a powerful blower, for sure. It’s expensive, but I got it on sale for like $70 USD and I’d say it was worth it on sale.
Project Farm? Did you get the WOLFBOX air blower?
Hopefully they’re shitty shoes. People will steal shoes too
A multimeter is still more practical for most use cases. Measuring resistant, continuity, amperage, and who knows what else are far more practical for an average persons day to day life. Especially around the house. Not to mention most people don’t have a need to know the exact waveform for their purposes
Easy to do based on their small size, large eyes, big ears, and fluffy fur.
That’s when you break out the tuna can. Try to see them resist that shit
It’d also be illegal to point a laser light into a camera to damage the sensor
MC and Visa go, oh, hey, you’re violating our guidelines
No, that is not how that would work. People cannot buy games that violate MasterCard’s and Visa’s policies using MasterCard or Visa. If someone buys the game using a different payment method, crypto or a direct bank link, it would not violate MasterCard or Visa’s policies because they had no part of the transaction.
Being mad at Valve is shooting the messenger.
Being mad at Valve is reasonable, because they did not have to ban all games that their payment processors disagree with. They would need to remove the option to pay with those for certain games, and the process of filtering them out and deciding would take a lot of time, money, and labor. It’s easier for valve to just ban it outright, but it is not the right thing to do. Valve is not the reason it started, but there is reason to be mad at Valve as well.
As of July 16, Steam’s new guidelines state that game publishers should avoid releasing titles that may violate the terms and conditions of its payment processors. In other words, the storefront is asking creators to not only follow the platform’s rules but also submit to potential oversight from companies like MasterCard, Visa, and PayPal.
and from the petition
MasterCard and Visa have increasingly used their financial control to pressure platforms into censoring legal fictional content
Steam is enforcing MasterCard’s, Visa’s, and PayPal’s policies. From Steam’s Rules and Policies:
What you shouldn’t publish on Steam: … 15. Content that may violate the rules and standards set forth by Steam’s payment processors and related card networks and banks, or internet network providers. In particular, certain kinds of adult only content.
Point number 15 was not there in a Snapshot from February on the wayback machine. If anything, the solution should just be to remove the payment method for those games (which would still hurt the creators substantially).
There is a line that is confusing:
In response to this censorship, some fans have launched a petition on Change.org urging Valve to revert its policies
There may be petitions about reverting Valve’s policy, but it’s not the main petition against Visa and MasterCard (which is the one they linked).
As I already said in my other response, it’s really about the developing child. Jonathan Haidt’s books “The Coddling of the American Mind” and “The Anxious Generation” both talk about the idea of over protectionism. You cannot deny that buy expensive shoes they will inevitably grow out of to avoid some light teasing from the school boys is over protecting them. They should be tough enough to handle comments about the fact they don’t have expensive shoes. If they aren’t, that’s a great parenting moment to help them work through those feelings and how to better handle the social situations.
The goal of childhood is to prepare you for adulthood. It is better to be teased as a developing child, especially for something trivial, and be a well rounded adult. Children have to figure out how to navigate difficult social situations themselves, rather than simply avoiding them. It is becoming increasingly problematic when kids aren’t working things out amongst themselves, or at the very least putting up with it, and instead resort to having an adult fix it for them. If they learn they can always go to an adult to fix their problems, they are being prepared for an authoritarian government. The solution to their problems is a higher power that will fix things for them. This is not quite the same, but it is avoiding difficult confrontation over something as trivial as shoes.
I do think kids should also have the freedom to choose their own shoes. If you give them a budget, and they can find Nike shoes in that budget, good on them. Maybe they even keep an eye on them going on sale. But if they cannot find shoes within the budget, they will have to settle for what they like within their price range. Which is also a valuable lesson for a developing teen.
they feel those problems with the same intensity we do
We cannot protect kids from big feelings. It is vital they experience big feelings. It’s becoming increasingly problematic with over protectionism and treating children as fragile beings. It’s caused higher levels of anxiety and reduced social skills. While you may say them not having name brand shoes will lead to anxiety, if they are always given a way out of their easy to handle middle school problems, how are they going to be prepared for adulthood problems, or the countless other things out of their control. They need to experience the anxiety and learn how to handle it in healthy ways.
something that’s important to a child should also be important to their parents, in my opinion
I get where you’re coming from, but that cannot be universally true (and I think you would agree). A child wanting every toy they ever see, no matter how important to them, obviously is not going to be important to you as a parent. If a teen thinks it’s important everyone they meet loves them, you cannot encourage extreme people pleasing. No kid “needs” name brand shoes. That is very distinctly a want. Perhaps they do some extra chores to earn their more expensive shoes, so you are all happy. But simply giving them expensive shoes they will inevitably grow out of because of a few comments from some school bullies is not a big problem. It is a little problem. Kids can handle little problems without adult intervention.
Kid could toughen up a bit. Having your shoes made fun of is such a small insignificant thing. It’s probably one of the best options out there, given it’s not actually even about you. I can guarantee if the kid did not react to the teasing, they would find someone else to pick on. Who seriously cares about shoes?
Nike doesn’t sell proprietary shoe laces that only work with nike shoes. Or sell gloves that pair with the shoes, so if you wanted to switch shoes you’d also have to get new gloves. Apple is awful for very different reasons
There’s no way there is a connection between the person asking the question and the shooter. It was a debate with Charlie Kirk. Of course gun violence is going to come up. Especially since it started by asking about gun violence involving trans people.