Grangle1

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 21 hours ago

So the first two seem to deal with throwing a capture item at a creature (wild pokemon) and/or releasing a character's own creature to fight it (essentially first seen in Legends Arceus, tossing a ball at a pokemon to aggro it and then fighting it with your pokemon). The third one is, as others have said, Mount transitions (at least in pokemon, also first seen in Legends Arceus if you only count ride pokemon; if vehicles are included I believe the first would be Sword/Shield). Though if vehicles are included Nintendo would have a hard time fighting that one. Vehicle transformation, especially in racing games, has been around forever.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 21 hours ago

The posted text could be translation. Kinda reads like it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Good luck arguing it here. I wonder how many here are 16 or younger, or close enough to that age where they grew up with the technology constantly in their face and couldn't POSSIBLY imagine having lived without it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I know a lot of people here are/will be mad at Musk simply for personal political disagreement, but even just putting that aside, I've never liked the idea of self-driving cars. There's just too much that can go wrong too easily, and in a 1-ton piece of metal and glass moving at speeds up to near 100 mph, you need to be able to have the control enough to respond within a few seconds if the unexpected happens, like a deer jumping in the middle of the road. Computers don't, and may never, have the benefit of contextual awareness to make the right decision as often as a human would in those situations. I'm not going to cheer for the downfall of Musk or Tesla as a whole, but they do severely need to reconsider this idea or else there will be a lot of people hurt and/or killed and a lot of liability on them when it happens. That's a lot of risk to take on for a smaller auto maker like them, just thinking in business terms.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 weeks ago

Well, no shit, that's what the rule is SUPPOSED to do! No more impossible-to-cancel subscriptions, please.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Anti-Semitism is indeed a problem, but given the situation it should be 100% allowed to criticise Israel's conduct in its handling of the war. The modern state of Israel =/= the Jewish religion. Many on both sides of the argument forget that.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

I'm sure we remember not too long ago when rather than go with what the sponsors, advertisers, etc wanted and rein that shit in, they loosened the rules and Twitch essentially became a straight up porn site for two days. And it was already bad before then. It's probably only the plausible deniability preventing them from going back to loosening the rules and raking in the camgirl money. Disappointing but absolutely not surprising that Twitch would probably make more money from that than from the ads, sponsorships and so on they get now.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

IIRC Mozilla doubled down on their v2 support when Chrome announced the shift to v3. But then the Chrome monopoly judgment came down and with it a lot of speculation on Google dropping their funding of Mozilla, so maybe Mozilla could be changing its tune to either protect or find a replacement for that funding? Nothing of substance is happening yet, it's still all speculation, but I do hope nothing like that does happen.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A great privacy focused client for YouTube is FreeTube. Uses a native API or Invidious for playback, and you can download and share videos from it. Doesn't give any identifying info to Google/YouTube and I've never once dealt with an ad. For mobile, Grayjay and NewPipe are similar apps.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Falkon is better for privacy than stock Chrome or Firefox, but I still find Brave or LibreWolf better than that.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Basically my stance. Do I like all the anti-competitive crap they pull? Absolutely not. But they do still make and/or publish most of my favorite franchises. This isn't like, say, Microsoft or Google who bake their evil directly into their products.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

Seems even more odd because to my eyes Nintendo probably had a better (but not super-good) chance of winning on copyright for some of the models used on the Pals than anything patent related. Stuff like riding/transforming mount animals and vehicles are basic exploration gaming functions. If they failed to defend the patent on other prior games that used those mechanics, they don't really stand a chance here.

view more: next ›