Brooksie359

As far as I understand I thought those were only in the 250 dollar version not the 150 version.

For people who like the game alot and play it alot 150 edition is a nice way to support the game and didn't really have any elements that were scummy. The issue is that they retroactively changed it so the 150 dollar version wouldn't get the new game mode to force people to buy the 250 dollar version. That is super scummy and likely false advertising based on previous marking of the 150 dollar version. Not only that but the new 250 dollar version has pay to win elements which is huge deal concidered the game had none prior to that.

Honestly I don't know anyone who refers to Facebook as meta. I think the meta rebrand was just as stupid tbh but I guess that's just me. If anything whenever I hear meta I am reminded of the metaverse demo they had which is significantly worse than VR chat even with a stupidly large budget.

No they 100% mislead customers. When they said that the 150 dollar version would receive all future DLC an example given was a new PVE mode. I'm sorry but clearly they had originally planned to have the PVE mode be included and then changed their mind so they edited the marketing on the 150 dollar version retroactively so it no longer referenced the PVE mode. Good thing internet archive is a thing so people can see the original. Honestly I don't know why they wouldn't just do more premium skins and other cosmetic stuff to make money. Clearly they have a good game with a dedicated fan base but nope gotta do the dumbest monetization model around.

Keep in mind enterprise AI trains on data from a whole lot of companies internal information with the expectation that the information wouldn't be used in any other capacity. So combine all the companies that were used to train the data and Microsoft or other large companies that own the AI and I don't see how that would have any less money behind it than say Disney. Granted I think you could add something about not needing to list data that was used with permission.

I could see this being a huge issue honestly. I know alot of commercial AI trains on data that people wouldn't want as public information. Not sure if this would apply at all to that information but if it did then you would see huge issue crop up especially because it's retroactive so the only way to prevent disclosure would be to scrap the AI tool trained on the data.

Just put it on its side and instantly get rid of gpu sag. That said if you are running an AIO or liquid loop I guess that might not be an option.

Yeah this seems like a stupid decision imo. This gives China one more reason to take over Taiwan and in turn tsmc which produces the majority of the world's high performance chips. Also not sure how much such a ban is going to slow down china's AI infrastructure realistically.

Like I said it's mostly about making it difficult not impossible. Maybe it was different when I was a kid but for the most part the ones who were on social media the most were girls that weren't the most tech literate. Just stopping them would already be doing alot especially because they are the ones who likely are negatively effected the most.

Alot of social media websites have photos already so it's not like they could simply use an ID that is totally different than what they look like. Also they figured out a way to do some sort of verification on dating apps to make sure you are who you say you are. Really I am not sure why you are so sure that there is no way that these companies could reasonably make it difficult for children to get on social media and more importantly ban those that do somehow get on but are later found out.

You just need to make it hard enough. Also just having it restricted allows them to ban when people are found out for violation and you can do something about the social media usage. Really you are more so trying to dissuade the use rather than make it impossible. I mean you need to be 21 to drink but really determined kids still figure out ways around that too but I wouldn't say we should just get rid of the restriction.

Depends on what you want it for. I personally bought my blackwidow tournament edition just for the wrist rest. That combined with a sit stand desk for perfect desk elevation totally got rid of my wrist issues.

Honestly it would be fine if this verification only was required for social media over a certain size because the real issue is big social media websites. Small forums aren't what's really having a huge negative impact on kids.

Yeah I don't see your point. It's just ID verification not that you would have your ID publicly tied to the social media account that anyone could see.

We are talking about age requirements on social media usage. Social media is very well knows to cause mental health issues in young people. Well it probably causes mental health issues for all people but it's worse for children. If you think this is about immoral information then you are wrong. There are very legitimate concerns that this would address. Also you are not getting the point. You have an issue with the law you linked not the law about social media usage. If that law you linked didn't exist then the issue you have wouldn't exist which is my entire point. It would be like saying they should get rid of cps because they can be used in the way you described.

Imagine coming up with a scenario that has little to nothing to do with this age restriction law being an issue. First and foremost you don't know if the police would have access to that info without a warrant or if that information is even stored. Second is that with a warrant or sometimes even without a warrant they cN get this type of info even if there isn't ID verification. Last thing is that you are only saying that this could make it easier for people to get caught breaking the law which shouldn't be a bad thing. The issue you are describing seems mostly to hinge on the law that is being violated being not good.

Yes and are you assuming that police would have access to the data used to verify age for social media websites and could look up all the social media a person uses without a warrant? I would doubt that would be the case and honestly I am not sure what information they would even get anyways. Also do you really think the police are that busy to go stalking you like that even if they did have access?

Yes there isn't a place that records financial transactions that you make that the police couldn't get access to with the proper warrant. I'm sorry but this is stupid because we already have the ability to even use location data of phones if the police have the proper warrant and you are afraid the police know you use social media?

Say that to prohibition or the war on drugs that made weed illegal. We have numerous cases where the source was outlawed and I would hardly say they were effective. Also an age restriction is super commonplace in law so I am not sure why you are acting like this is some bizarre method of regulation rather than a pretty typical age restriction that is used on something that is detrimental to underdeveloped minds.

Banning the selling of a product is basically the same as banning people's right to buy the product. Anyways I will say that I would be on board for more regulation around social media but I think it would be pretty hard to do right and I am not sure I have much faith in lawmakers to do it correctly. I mean restrictions around what age can use a service is relatively easy to make a law about but a law targeting harmful tactics that social media uses doesn't seem nearly as easy.

Letting kids have wine a meal vs Letting kids have unlimited access to social media are way different. Not only that I think parents could expose their kids to social media in small amounts even with this law in place so not sure it makes any sense to not allow the law. Also not sure what would be the healthy equivalent of social media use would even be for a kid.

True why would we ban alcohol and smoking for minors or people under 21. We should take a holistic approach to the problem. Parents should be the one preventing their kids from abusing alcohol or cigarettes. Why have any age restrictions on anything.

The suicide rate had a dramatic rise when kids had access to social media so not really sure the idea that not being able to talk to people all the time is a fair point. Also this is even assuming that kids would be talking to each other rather than doom scrolling or any number of psychologically destructive behaviors. I would even bet that use of social media leads to less social interaction ironically enough.

GTA V driving is pretty good and I wouldn't call it subpar at all. Also I think the biggest reason why alot of people like the GTA series isn't really the story to begin with at least not with the newer releases especially GTA V. I mean GTA V is basically printing money from GTA online is its pretty clear that is what attracts alot of people and not the storyline.

Usually 165hz monitors are going to be pretty good for latency so I would still think you would be much better off with a monitor for gaming. But yeah I agree that at 1.5m 32 inches is pretty small but it sounds like they are already use to using a 25 inch monitor at that distance so 32 will be much better.