nickhammes

It's not that there wasn't any political pressure. It's that the slightest bit of pressure caused them to pull the plug swiftly.

I think the companies who were led by people personally antagonistic to DEI already weren't doing it. They started it when the political winds were in favor of DEI, found that it did something beneficial for them that was worth the investment (ultimately, increasing profits, probably through PR) and reaped what they could. But the slightest headwinds caused them to drop it, for lack of confidence it would be worth the continued investment. For others, it was beneficial enough this pressure didn't change their decisions.

None of this is likely coming from company leaders caring about DEI for some sort of principled reason, just companies who care about only one thing, reassessing the value of DEI in terms of that one thing, $ return on spend. This is a group who needs subtler treatment than the anti-DEI crowd, this is fair weather friends who don't care. What little we can do is reward those who don't give in to the slightest push.

Yeah that's basically why I didn't pull it out as an option in the first place, it's not always practical. A lot of your proprietary code is going to be external dependencies linked/built against, or your own IP reused from the last project. But not all of it, and I can definitely see that smaller chunk causing a lot of problems.

You need a team that does a lot of dependency management and similar things well while building it, that don't actually help them get the game out faster, to keep the problem manageable. Or a team who specialize in open sourcing games like this, which could become a thing if this was more commonplace.

The one MMO I've meaningfully played, RuneScape, has open source replicas of its server from different points in time, that the community has made. I'm not gonna pretend it's zero work, but a developer with the source code absolutely could do these things. It also doesn't need to be perfectly compatible with the original one, you can replace a complex DB backend with something standard and less performant. Only runs on Linux, or MS Server 2k8? The community of people who care will figure it out.

Maybe a source code release would be preferable in this kind of option. EA just did this with a few Command and Conquer games.

Impeachment is easy, relatively speaking. A simple majority of the House can impeach Trump as they did twice in his last term. I believe the number is 7, of 220 Republicans in the house, would need to vote to impeach.

Getting a trial in the Senate to convict and remove, which requires a two thirds vote, would need about 20 Republicans, of 53 to vote to convict. I can't imagine what would need to happen for that to occur. And even if it does, JD Vance is sworn in by Roberts as POTUS? I guess that means we're in a world where Republicans think that's better in some significant group.

If a multiplayer-only game turns down official servers, and you can't self-host within the game, they should owe players a separate server binary they can run, or a partial refund for breaking the game. It should not be hard, especially if it's a known constraint when they develop the game.

If it doesn't work well without the Internet, it's a bad investment. Features that require the Internet degrading a bit is one thing, but if a toilet or toaster can't do its basic job offline, it was ewaste the second it rolled off the factory line.

I've been using Cinnamon for most of the last decade, but switched to Gnome3 recently, heavily customized to work like Cinnamon. Basically because Wayland is finally stable enough to use.

If Cinnamon gets Wayland support working well, that's my choice. Otherwise I've got some Gnome3 configs that make it work pretty well, and I'd happily run it into the ground too.

A crazy, washed-up former reality TV host running for a new term as president while in exile on the moon sounds like the plot of a fun sci-fi political thriller, but not a reality I want to live in.

Yeah absolutely, not providing a good reason is really easy to do when there isn't one

It's good to understand why things have been done that way. Sometimes there's wisdom in the way things have been done, and lessons learned by people who paid real costs to learn them. Sometimes the reasoning is so bad that doing things differently for its own sake is a reasonable decision. You don't know unless you dig deeper, and not digging deeper on things that matter seems pretty dumb

If she was unwilling to break from him because of his wishes, even if she was theoretically able, that speaks volumes about her as a leader.

two billionaires, unfathomably rich individuals, in the last ten years that having a good public image was overrated, but decided they'd rather use their platform to hurt people, and alienate anyone who liked them, but wasn't a raging bigot. is the allure of being mean to people on twitter.com that great?

if Musk had shut up just 5 years ago, he'd probably have more money, more respect, but somewhat less power. instead he's become the guy a lot of people are excited to see have a total breakdown, and hopefully lose everything.