Oh no, they gave indie developers guaranteed money and helped finance the completion of their games!

Thankfully for Taiwan it takes more than 4 years to build and bring up a state of the art fab at a new tech node.

How long do you think fabs take to build and upgrade? Intel was working on fixing 10nm for years, this isn’t a software situation where turnaround times are measured in days or weeks. Going from tapeout to silicon for a single line is a 6 month process after the technology process is solidified, forget if you’re doing it while trying to figure out yield problems.

This is a pretty dumb take, honestly. Intel for basically forever operated using their own fab exclusively. After failures to maintain good yield rates at their 10nm node, they had the option of continuing to delay new product lines and be eaten by the competition in AMD, or give in to TSMC temporarily while they worked on fixing their fab in parallel. In fact, they were criticized greatly for not switching to TSMC much earlier.

Because the point of this is to force friends and adult family members to purchase extra copies of games. Do yall actually think Valve is giving away free game access?

To those who are saying it’s not IP locked: people on reddit are all saying that the newer sign-ups are locked but they didn’t clear older sharing from early beta.

Musk is definitely one of them.

Musk is a rich trust fund baby whose fortune started off the back of Apartheid. It’s not a shocker that he’s a mask-off racist. He’s done nothing to prove himself a genius, just a skilled grifter and financier.

Hard disagree. The district system of Civ 6 was half-baked, and the new one for Civ 7 seems way more interesting with districts growing more organically. Civ 6’s world congress was garbage. The eras system needed serious work as dark/golden/heroic eras just didn’t feel impactful enough aside from getting a monumentality era early. The new map generation with navigable rivers is a huge plus as well. The climate system in Civ 6 was a dud too, not nearly impactful enough. I think they could’ve made a Civ 7 which fixed all the broken Civ 6 systems and made a great game.

The crisis system, the era system, and the changing civilizations system all feel especially game-y to me. I get it, Civ is first and foremost a video game. Still, the idea that there are pre-defined eras, and that you have to hit a crisis at the end of each pre-defined era, feels artificial and unnatural. Why can’t I lead my civilization through into a new era unscathed? Why is that disallowed?

Don’t get me wrong: I like the idea of eras and crises. If, instead, eras were triggered by hitting certain milestones or accumulating enough points (e.g. hit some combination of weighted tech/cultural/religious/economic development) - I would be down for that. Different civs would hit those at different times and you would strategize around hitting your new era at the right time. Crises are also totally valid: if your civ is too large and there’s too much corruption you could have a civil war. If too much of your civ is following another religion there could be unrest. Those are all interesting and fun ideas, but the important part is that the goal is to avoid/mitigate them and play around them - not that they’re some kind of inevitable occurrence that you’re forced into even if you play otherwise perfectly.

It feels like Firaxis decided to lean hard into “Civ is a board game focused around balance” and completely away from “Civ is a game about growth and optimization”, and I don’t know if I’m here for it. I guess we’ll have to see.

Google will take a hard right turn and SCOTUS will welcome them with immunity as long as they stay in line.

Great, lmk when there’s a regular train from Boston to my office in Boxborough, which currently requires it’s residents to drop off their own trash at the facility. I’m sure that’ll be frequent and efficient right?

I mean we’d all kill Hitler if given the chance, wouldn’t we?

No, it’s shocking that the destroyed evidence after being explicitly instructed not to.

Anti-BDS laws exist (you can look them up on Wikipedia). Are they constitutional? Certainly not. Is our legal system going to fight them? Doubt it.

Harvard makes more money from it’s investments than from tuition. I can’t even imagine what their land holdings are netting them.

The thing is: Biden is pro-Israel but also pro-Palestinians. He’s providing aid to Gazans and pressuring Israel to minimize civilian casualties. It’s not great, or even good, I agree - but it’s a whole lot better than Trump who would be pro-Israel and anti-Palestinians. You’d see humanitarian aid end and the US support total war instead of the (slightly) restrained version we’re seeing now.

There’s a reason the Black Panthers were armed when they distributed free food to poor black children.

[One way of reading the comment you replied to is that] the point is that the media is both-sides-ing this instead of truthfully reporting that the violence was directed against the protestors. This allows the protests to be portrayed as “radical” and feeds into the false “pro-terrorism” and “extremist” narrative being portrayed against Gazan and Palestinian sympathizers.

Well the police didn’t step in to stop the violence against the protestors, and the news outlets are all reporting this as “both sides” - so it sounds like the attackers got what they wanted.

Columbia journalism students are reporting live: https://www.cc-seas.columbia.edu/wkcr/story/online-streaming-and-running#

Yeah there certainly wasn’t any loss leading or intentional undercutting being done to get below profitable prices to drive current players out of those markets /s