Mine comes up in conversation a bit more often, but mostly in relation to travel, because I got to see some cool places while floating around on a boat.

The thing with those is that, while it was a small amount of content, it wasn’t just a mission, each was about an hour of repeatable content that was fairly fun to farm. At $2, they actually still felt worth it with as much fun as B2 was. If they had asked for like $10 each, people would have flipped out.
I’m not a Starfield player, but I would bet this is not even close to as good of a value proposition.

Lol, my weekend is fine, though my shoulder muscles were acting up and giving me a headache which may have made me slightly grumpy. I did not mean to come across as though I’m in a bad mood. I do hope you have/had a good weekend, and I think we likely agree on much more than we disagree. Have a good evening!

You’re now being hostile which is quickly souring any chance of productive conversation. You’re accusing me of saying things I’ve not said, you’re blatantly ignoring anything that’s inconvenient to your point of view, and You’re making attacks/accusing me of “helping the enemy” because I disagree on how to deal with them. Not only are you not making any manner of argument on how you’re NOT engaging in “No True Scotsman”, you’re becoming actively hostile at an ally because I only agree on 99% of the topic.
I’ve not once called them “far left” - I’ve called them the “farthest left (at least at a surface level) party with national exposure.” That’s not exactly a high bar. It also ignores the fact that there are genuine leftists that identify with the party. They operate WITHIN the leftist sphere, and they are grifters. You can’t dismiss it out of hand and say that “well they are really leftists” - yeah, no shit, that’s what grifters fucking do. Fucker Carlson doesn’t believe in 1/10th of the shit he spouts off, but it doesn’t make home not a far right grifter.
I’m not helping them, I’m trying to make sure that allies, both to my left and to my right (I wouldn’t call myself “far left” but would call myself “leftist”) keep some level of guard up against grifters that operate within our spaces.
My POV is: we are not immune to grifters in our spaces, you should maintain guard. Here’s one example of a grifter within our space. (FTR, I could have also pointed to ML tankies that defend the actions of Russia and China in spite of the fact that neither are remotely Communist, socialist or leftist of any form). Your POV as it comes across SEEMS TO BE: Well, they’re not REALLY far left (unclear if you only mean to exclude from “far” left or leftist in total), so no we don’t have grifters on the left. If this is not your point of view, then far more time has been spent arguing about minutiae and leftist in-Fighting than explaining why you don’t believe that grift is not a problem within this space.

And look, I really do not want to be hostile here, because I do Believe that we are largely allies (I don’t know that we would agree on policies exactly as this is a narrow discussion, but we’re so far from what either of us would likely want that it should prevent us from wanting to work together). I am however, not interested in engaging further if the discussion is just going to be hostile. I ain’t got time for that shit.

Edit: Sorry, there is a point that you mentioned that I want to touch on: you mentioned that I am “just calling people what they want to be called” while you Believe in looking at their actions over their words… The thing is, we can only see that their actions are inconsistent with a leftist ideology because they have visibility and have been around long enough that we can now know that they are grifters. A decade+ ago, we did not have that information, so as far as most people could know, they were “leftist”. I’m not including them to exist their actions, I’m using them as an example of our space but being immune to the grift. They may not be “true leftists”, but they ARE “left-wing grifters.” Because it’s not about who they are, it’s about who they target. There are farther-left grifters (likely including some who are state actors of foreign governments), but it’s not as easy to identify who is and is not a grifter because we don’t have as much info on them.

So I think we largely agree on the situation, but the contention here is that we seem to disagree on branding and terminology. I am referring to them as “leftist” (though I don’t mean to say that they’re actually “far” left) because they present themselves as such. Their grift is centered on being the group for people that care about climate change, universal healthcare, UBI (IIRC, they may not advocate for that…), Unions/labor and other policies that are broadly considered “leftist” (even if the views are largely mainstream at this point.
I could see not calling them “far” left, at least in the international sphere, but they at least present as leftist, and have many people convinced that they are as such.
I’m the same way, Joel Osteen and the other “prosperity gospel” are grifters and charlatans PRESENTING as Christians. But when enough “Christians” believe them and support their policies, a simple dismissal of them as “not Christian” falls into the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. Doing so allows you to hand wave away more and more things that others within (your group) that you disagree with. Westboro Baptist Church? No True Christian. Church has an opposite opinion as you on LGBT rights? No True Christian. (And the Christian you’re talking to will have arguments on WHY they’re not really a Christian).
That issue is not unique to Christians, or to right-wingers, or to other groups that you and I are likely not a part of. But we must acknowledge that OUTSIDERS will regard them as leftist whether or not you or I do. And dismissing them out of hand tends to shut down dialogue and ostracize those who may be caught up in said grift. I myself used to be interested in the Green Party until I saw enough of their bullshit to realize that they were not a group I would want to represent me (probably around 2015-ish). But there are good people with good ideals that do identify with the Green Party either because they haven’t looked into enough of the problems surrounding the party or because they’ve been convinced of the bullshit after agreeing with good points the party has made.
They may be wolves in sheep’s clothing, but they certainly TARGET leftists, which is the point. That’s what grifters do.

I agree that the Green Party is a grifting party, but they are the farthest left that has a national stage / ballot access. There are also decent leftists within the Green Party, because they want to affect change at a local level and that’s the closest thing to a party that would represent their views if the DSA doesn’t have a presence.
But I think it’s too dismissive to simply write them off as “not left” because at a surface level, they represent several leftist viewpoints, and they’re, unfortunately, a lot of people’s first exposure to leftist politics (especially back in the 2000’s and 2010’s before the DSA started growing). Like yes, they are at this point a grift, but they weren’t always that way and a lot of people aren’t aware that that is the case. They’re “not left” in the same Sense that the Tea Party was “not libertarian” - which is to say that they’re not good-faith proponents of the ideology, but are good at attracting people who don’t know better and have a corrupting effect on the movement.

Dr. Jill Stein is, I would argue, a scammer. I was interested in the green party, but the more I read about their - and particularly her - positions on some issues and some of the things she claims, she’s either an educated idiot or a grifter. She certainly has some good positions, but also pushes a number of pseudoscience ideas from anti-vax and anti-gmo to scares about “Wi-Fi hurting our kids” (not Internet usage but electromagnetic waves from Wi-Fi). She also pushes Russian propaganda, especially around the Russia-Ukraine war, and has met with Russian officials (including Putin himself) on a number of occasions.
So unless you’re going to “No True Scotsman” the Green Party as not being leftist, then yes. There are grifters on the left as well. Further, you should avoid assumptions like “there aren’t any bad actors in OUR camp” because grifters and charlatans will find a place in any community should they figure out an effective method to do so, and letting your guard down because “we’re the good guys” is the fastest way to let that happen.

The way to actually make progress in this regard is to start at low level. City, county, and eventually state positions have to be the focus if we want to get a broader range of parties into the conversation.

Man I Loved the Strike games when I was young, definitely going to be looking out for this one.

I do find it odd that it settled into ADHD-I, ADHD-H and ADHD-C; the one that is primarily expressed through hyperactivity literally is called “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder - Hyperactive”.

Removing the H and using the subtypes would add clarity for sure.

Is the token not keyed to a specific source? I would have expected it to operate similarly to an SSL cert, where part of the verification process is that the source is the correct origin that the token belongs to - so if someone just lifted a valid cert to put into a malicious one, it would catch anything from changing a single character in the project name to changing the repository host (i.e. GitHub to GitLab)

Bart Bonte’s games are really satisfying. The only one I didn’t personally care for as much is Sugar Game, but all of the colors are fun little puzzle games.

Yeah, this is one scenario where the principles in F2P games like MOBAs applies to the business world. Focusing only on the top X companies and losing that market share has a cascading effect where it’s harder to find competent administrators, it’s harder for those administrators to find support online (which then means they have to call for the support they pay for - which while good in the short term for VMWare, is frustrating for the customer, and means that the extra money they’re charging has to partially be used to cover techs to provide said report). The little fish in a market like this help to provide what is essentially free troubleshooting online via stack overflow etc. And giving that market share to competitors gives them the cash flow and experience to build a support system online and improve their product, and then win over the big fish.

Olives exist to be pressed and processed for oil. Olive oil is delicious, but I can’t stand olives themselves.

As another millennial… you’re not wrong, but you basically put the bar on the floor there. The funniest thing about most boomer humor is that they actually think they’re clever.

I think you’re confused. The men’s lib community is a progressive, feminist-supporting space focused on giving men an opportunity to discuss matters of vulnerability and struggle. They try to help people struggling with mental issues hard times, and discuss how to counter toxic masculinity type shit.
I’m not involved in the Lemmy community but I used to check out the Reddit one back when I still got on there. The toxic neckbeard shit that’s up in arms about the overblown man v bear shit is the MRA (“men’s rights”) group.

That game was way better than a clear product placement game has any business being.

When a company stops supporting devices like this, the devices and their documentation and code should be required to enter the public domain. It should not be allowed for assistive devices to become e-waste stuck in a patient’s body.

This is also why regulatory agencies have been systematically crippled over the last 40 years or so. Damn near every sector has had their regulatory agencies crippled by some combination of reducing authority, underfunding, and understaffing. When the agencies work, the message is “see, we don’t need those regulations anymore because we’re taking care of things fine on our own,” and when they stop working, the message is “we shouldn’t be spending money on these agencies! They don’t do anything anyway!”

I think some portions of the company do want to buy these studios to make games. Mostly because they need a regular funnel of titles to put on Game Pass, and the best way to do that is small- to mid-budget games that can generate hype. But then other portions of the company want to chase that big AAA paycheck because big numbers look good, even if ROI isn’t as good for that one game versus 3 or 4 smaller titles. And others still only care about what will make the balance sheet look the best for the quarter.
Even smaller companies end up with various “factions” within the org as far as vision and how to best create success (or even how to define success); a company like Microsoft is so fractured that different divisions are unaware of each other’s goals and have competing interests.
I’m not trying to defend Microsoft here, I just think this is a consequence of an overly large organization that doesn’t have unified goals.