I guess it depends on the game, extremely so. Two main factors I can think of: Whether or not the game has been picked up as an object of hate by the “anti-woke” content mill, as well as the average age of people who play the game.

Just for kicks I skimmed the BG3 forum and indeed there’s this recent post. Apparently unwanted exposure to Gale’s gayness can be solved by not interacting with Gale, who would have thought and that’s a perfectly valid solution for OP, but some users in the thread are clearly out for blood. Not getting terribly much resonance, though.

EDIT: Apparently OP has changed the “accepted answer” to one of the worst comments in the thread. SMH. Comments proceed to tell OP they’re confusing friendship scenes for romance ones.

And that’s like one thread in pages upon pages of threads. People predictably talk about general gameplay stuff (The Gale thread can actually be considered a gameplay question), mechanics, bugs, the usual.

Bonus: A thread on Musk wanting to buy Hasbro for D&D. Now there’s plenty of stuff D&D players have to say and criticise about Hasbro, them having clear language about the misogyny etc. in the first edition is not among it. Licensing terms are a thing which can get the community riled up, but the “backlash” against inclusivity is, as usual, manufactured, and from what I see the thread is mostly Musk bashing. Thinking of, Shaun recently published a video on the manufactured outrage around Stellar Blade.

Oh, the average age thing. Yeah don’t go to the LoL forums or whatever though without checking I expect them to be full of talk about the current meta. And people unironically using “gay” as an insult in <currentyear>, presumably because they’re too young to even know their sexual orientation.

Overall trying to portray steam like some kind of second kiwifarms falls flat on its face for a very simple reason: Even if (and I don’t think that’s the case) there would be no moderation at all, the majority of users on steam will be talking game mechanics, about bugs, because they’re there to play a game and the reason you find yourself interacting on those forums is because you have something to say, or ask, about the game. That kind of talk will always drown out the angry goblins.

Experts recommend strategies like increasing workforce participation, particularly among women and older adults, and improving migrant integration.

So we’ve given up on making family and career compatible, I see. Test tubes babies it is, then.

Migration won’t help long-term btw the last big countries (e.g. Nigeria) are going to have their demographic transition around 2050, themselves starting to shrink. Ultimately there’s no way around getting birth rates up to hovering around 2, again, and with that I don’t mean “we can’t have fewer or more people on the earth” – both is absolutely doable. The issue is the absolute havoc that too large or too small (net, that is, modulo infant mortality) birthrates have on society: Either you have a young powderkeg, or old, stagnant, gerontocracy. Social stability (as in homeostasis, not stagnation) requires the birth rate to be within a sensible band.

The US dollar is backed up by you have to pay your taxes in US dollar so the US economy is going to accept US dollar, thus, if you have dollars, you can buy shit in the US. In effect, thus, the US dollar is backed by the US economy.

There’s no such mechanism for crypto coins. If you now say “well the Fed can just print money”, that’s US policy. The Euro works differently, there price stability reigns supreme, in any case the policies of both Fed and ECB are well-known and people trust that they don’t change willy-nilly because neither the US nor the EU has any interest in the fallout that would cause. That trust is in no way weaker, less of a guarantee, wrt. giving a hint at the future value of the currency as the collective faith that props up crypto coins as a unit of account.

And gold, btw, is practically useless as a commodity. Jewelry? Literally only used for that because it’s expensive. Technical applications? Do exist, but the amount needed is negligible. The value of gold relies on the existence of a luxury market.

Showing the most played songs and artists is not really a difficult analysis task that does not require any machine learning.

You want to dimension reduce to get that “people who listen to stuff like you also like to listen to” recommendation. To have an idea whom to play a new song to, you ideally want to analyse the song itself and not just people’s reaction to it and there we’re deep in the weeds of classifiers.

Using LLMs in particular though is probably suit-driven development because when you’re trying to figure out whether a song sounds like pop or rock or classical then LLMs are, at best, overkill. Analysing song texts might warrant LLMs but I don’t think it’d gain you much. If you re-train them on music instead of language you might also get something interesting, classifying music by phrasal structure and whatnot don’t look at me I may own a guitar but am no musician. And, of course, “interesting” doesn’t necessarily mean “business case” unless you’re in the business of giving Adam Neely video ideas. “Spotify, play me all pop songs that sing ‘caught in the middle’ in the same way”… not a search that’s going to make spotify money, or anyone asked for.

People are fuckin hilarious

That we can agree on.

why the hell are you calling it queer theory

I’m calling it queer theory because that’s what it’s called. It’s where terms like “heteronormative” come from. Much of it is about the relationship between social norms, or just what’s common, and non-normative individuals, with a particular focus on sexual and gender minorities. And it, indeed, does not look too kindly on gender essentialism because that would mean erasure of non-binary gender experiences. Also because queer theorists don’t like normativity which essentialism boils down to in practice, in one way or the other.

I am, broadly speaking, a huge fan of it. If I were to critique it… well, it isn’t neuroqueer theory. I like the name though, “queer” should IMHO also apply to neurodivergent people. Can we get a letter? N is free, isn’t it?

“gay agenda”, “gender ideology” are terms you randomly introduced into the conversation.

Second part, how do you say all this and not question the current “sTrAiGhT tHeOrY” existence we live

You mean… heteronormativity? The kind of shit that queer theory analyses? Also there’s plenty of queer straights around. Like, aces exist, trans folks exist. Enbies can also be straight.

It isn’t, and it is. As said: A matter of perspective. What it definitely is part of is the theory of praxis.

Queer theory itself certainly doesn’t vibe with the essentialism inherent in stuff like “kill all men”. But that doesn’t mean that the two don’t get associated in a 12yold’s brain if “kill all men” is what he hears from a blue-haired lesbian. I’m talking in caricatures, of course, just vaguely gesturing at broader political/social interactions.

And, also, granted, in a different socio-economic environment that blue-haired lesbian probably wouldn’t matter, at all (might even have been a political lesbian appropriating queerness). But our 12yold is also seeing his parents getting fired from their jobs, denied housing assistance, is getting made fun of for it in school, is simultaneously worrying about how to, one time, get a girl and found a family and the situation looks dire indeed – not a siltation which would be conducive of taking a level-headed look at the situation and conclude “that women was just angry, it doesn’t mean anything”. Instead, it’s a convenient point to project generalised ire at, a scapegoat silencing that overpowering help- and hopelessness.

So, in short: “Why do they hate us”? Probably, almost certainly, not for any good reason. That doesn’t mean that nothing can be done to make em love you, in fact it wouldn’t be hard at all because they’re love-starved and looking for at least a hope of a better future. Take them along for the ride and you’ll have an ally for life. Antagonise them, don’t step in when others pointlessly antagonise them, and you shot yourself in the knee.

You just reminded me of a movie and let’s just say I highly recommend it.

On yet another front, the Greek resistance would kill Nazis. In retaliation, Nazis would kill whole villages. Enraged, more Greeks would join the resistance and kill more Nazis. Net result: Towards the end pretty much every Greek was in the resistance and Greece was the only (IIRC, or at least the first or something) country to free itself from Nazi occupation. (Then they became a dictatorship different story).

Actually I read that as misandry. Especially considering that when it comes to trans enmity TERFs are very much a driving force and those tend to be almost exclusively cis women, not men.

Thinking that posting “kill all men” is a net benefit to society?

My point being: You’ll have to dare a perspective shift to actually understand the issue. No, it’s not about gay marriage and stuff. People by and large, at the utmost, just don’t give a fuck. Live and let live is popular as ever. Hearing, as a 12yold boy, “Men ruled the world for millennia now it’s our turn, you have no problems, men, boys, by definition can’t have any problems, also mutilating your genitals is perfectly justified look at this one random study which says that if you don’t wash yourself then circumcision reduces AIDS rates”… yeah. 12 years is significantly less than millennia, why in the everloving fuck would you blame the poor kid for it and don’t get me started on the circumcision shit the US is cooked.

As said: Dare that perspective shift. It’s not about queer theory, it’s not about emancipation, it’s about institutionalised cattiness and bitter, over-zealous rhetoric creating a particular appearance. It’s also pretty much limited to the US, there’s bits and pieces floating over the Atlantic but our gender relations and politics over here aren’t fucked-up enough to generate that kind of shit ourselves. Also we don’t mutilate genitals.

Or, differently put: Take all the pain you’ve ever seen within the community created by ace and bi erasure, about TERFy enmity, about transmeds, about whatnot, and funnel it onto a young kid who has no letter, not even the “A” for ally they stole from the aces, because why would you give a fuck about ally status when you’re bitter and want to let off steam. Do that in queer spaces. Do that with your therapist, don’t do it in a public political space – the 12yolds are reading – and even more so don’t try to justify it as “part of the struggle”. And actively work against queer spaces becoming self-pity circlejerks of bitterness. Be uppity, be brash, be loud, be fun, be colourful, don’t be aggressive. Hug a homophobe they hate that, don’t spit fire on them their neuroses love that.

There’s some equivocation going on there: On the one hand we have a theoretical model, due to Adam Smith, that says if you have perfectly rational actors acting on perfect information then you get very very nice results and that’s called the free market. Then you have peddlers of institutionalised market failure saying that any regulation that would make people’s choices more rational, or give them more information, is making the market unfree.

In short: While classical liberals and specifically ordoliberals are saying “there shall and must be regulation, so that the real-world market comes closer to approximating Smith’s free market”, neoliberals say “there shall be no regulation because Adam Smith doesn’t like monopolies but we do so let’s poison the conversation by calling inherently unfree markets free”.

Just a heads up while the look might be easy to emulate the feel part will at best be close. Which is actually good because a lot about that is rather shoddy in windows… and focussing on getting what you had with windows might make you miss stuff you didn’t think you wanted. Like MMB click on scrollbars, or dragging and resizing windows with Super+LMB/RMB

They’re all PCs they just aren’t IBM (compatible) PCs. Anything from a Workstation to a Smartphone is a Personal Computer.

I think Europe and Ukraine would be happy with EU membership, or, failing that (because overall complicated and it’s gonna take some time) a way to extend Article 42(7) guarantees to Ukraine. Invite the UK etc. while you’re at it.

Who should be shit-scared of that possibility is the US because it’d sideline them. Worse: It’s bound to come with “buy European” provisions (the French will insist and nobody’s going to bother opposing it harshly) and I’m not sure whether the US can afford its military-industrial complex without exports.

So… did Trump already meet with Lockheed-Martin?

Cologne would take it as testing grounds for their wrecking ball industry.

I’m not contradicting anything, I didn’t even use the word “life”. I’m simply taking the perspective of the genome, and fighting against the notion that viruses would act as mechanistically as prions.

It’s a hostile instruction manual which learns, adapting itself to its surroundings, constantly re-writing and re-inventing how it interacts with the world. Which is more than can be said about most politicians. Forget about physical anatomy, for a second, and consider the species as an organism.

Of course it adjusts to its environment – it even uses it to replicate. Viruses are that branch of the genome which is being minimalist about its seed pods, other branches need all kinds of superfluous stuff like eyes and limbs and brains and whatnot. Complete waste of resources, having pods which can maintain independent homeostasis, what good does that for the homeostasis of the genome? Eh?

Literally the etymology though. 'scape instead of escape is the original “mispronunciation” otherwise it’s just a straight-forward translation of Azazel, the goat which escaped in Levictus 16.

If you want to fix institutional racism in the US you need to fix social mobility because that’s the primary mechanism by which it gets perpetuated. For that you need educational status of the parents and their tax declarations, not skin colour. You need to stop financing schools from local taxes so primary and secondary education is as good or better in poorer areas instead of having quotas lowering standards for people who got a worse education because they live in the wrong neighbourhood. You need free tertiary education.

Focussing on race is a convenient way to ignore actually addressing the issue and instead continue to deepen societal rifts and to breed resentment among non-racialised disenfranchised people.