Jump to content

TimeOmnivore

Member
  • Content count

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards


This user doesn't have any awards

About TimeOmnivore

  • Title
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Surrounded by Idiots, Please Send Help
  • Interests
    Stories - books, tv, anime, manga, video games, any medium through which a story is told is my cup of tea.

Recent Profile Visitors

159 profile views
  1. This only benefits the large ISPs. No one else. In fact, it will actively fuck over the consumers. And the FCC's argument that "the market will decide" is total nonsense - how exactly is the market supposed to decide anything when many people only have access to one or two choices. That argument works for something like restaurants in a big city - if there are several dozen, yeah, the market can put the shitty ones out of business, as there's bound to be some good ones amongst the dozens. This line of thinking simply doesn't work with ISPs. This morning, my dad wanted me to help him sort through all the different cable packages so he could figure out which one he should get for TV - I really don't want to see that happen for the internet as well. It likely won't happen immediately, but rather over the course of several years of increasing levels of bullshit (see:gaming industry). If this passes, I hope whoever runs the FCC next repeals this decision immediately.
  2. Being that the new folder design for bookmarks looks really bad imo, here's a method of changing it for any curious(from various support/reddit posts): 1. Type about:support in address bar - 2: Click "Open Folder" - 3. Navigate to or create the "chrome" folder. 4. Open or create userChrome.css. 5. copy/past this into it: You can find the Base64 code for various folder icons here - https://www.iconfinder.com/ - I personally used https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/33890/folder_icon#size=128 Just click "Copy Base64 PNG" and paste it there; make sure to leave the ' and ' on either end and remove the /* and */. Then just restart Firefox.
  3. My only problem with it so far is that the tabs are square instead of rounded. The fact that that's my only complaint tells me that this is a fantastic update when you also take into consideration all of the significant performance update, which I noticed about 10 seconds into using this new version. Once I removed the pointless spaces in the address bar, the change in design stopped bothering me, since it's basically the same as before, which I liked. Also, YouTube Subscription Checker by XrXr still works, and since that's the main reason I use Firefox over chrome, that's great, too. EDIT: So, Twitch on Firefox uses about 30% more of my CPU than Chrome, so that sucks. Then again, before the update, Twitch wouldn't work at all for me on FF, so that's an improvement I guess?
  4. I just wish everything went the way of my two gold standard games: The Witcher 3 - $60, with good DLC that is worth the money ($20), no microtransactions/lootbox nonsense. Path of Exile - free, cosmetic/quality of life microtransactions, no way to get more in-game power aside from playing the game more and praying to RNGesus. Also $60 games with cosmetic microtransactions are still shit, you should be able to earn those in-game, but since publishers added "more in-game power" microtransactions, cosmetics now seem reasonable, which is a bit frustrating. Unfortunately, too many publishers only care about making money in the short term, and too many consumers either have the mindset of, "well, they marginally improved it, so it's fine now and there's no reason to ever complain again", or "it's been two weeks already, get over it", or "what about [other game], its economy is way more screwed up, so why are you complaining about [this game]". Oh well, unless the game has a reasonable pricing structure, I either don't buy it, or wait until it's on sale for <$5-$10, depending on if the rest of the game is decent.
  5. -368K... Holy shit that's more than an order of magnitude larger than the previous most downvoted comment on Reddit (24.3K). And in less than 24 hours. I mean, I'm just impressed at this point. EDIT: also has more downvotes than the most upvoted post in Reddit history has upvotes (349K)... amazing.
  6. Terrible ideas from r/civ when this news broke: Oh God, please no. If this happens, I guess the last Civilization game I ever play will be Civ V. Not that that's too bad, since Civ V is a great game, but still. Goddammit publishers, why can't you just not fuck over your customers with needless bullshit? If every game they published from now on was free-to-play, I would be less pissed about it (although still very much pissed), but it's practically guaranteed that they'll still be releasing full $60 games, which basically screws over all of the franchises under Take Two. I'm just sad right now.
  7. Starcraft 2 is now Free To Play 7 years after launch

    What's the issue with their launcher? I haven't seen any issues with it. If its about the ads, you can completely ignore their promotions in the center of the app and go directly to the blue "PLAY" button in the bottom corner - I don't remember the last time I took more than 1/2 a second to glance over them. Of all the things I've heard people complain about in regards to Blizzard stuff, I gotta admit, I've never heard people having issues with their launcher.
  8. I don't understand why Steam won't just create an 18/21+ NSFW filter and allow that kind of stuff on their store to begin with. Let those that want to see it, see it and let the others filter it out - I mean come on, they already have a nudity tag. There's a market for it, and seeing nudity doesn't hurt anyone. And if parents don't want their kids seeing it, they really shouldn't let their kid have an unrestricted account in the first place (though I don't know if restricted accounts exist). The idea that nudity, particularly fake cartoon/anime nudity, is "dangerous" is an absolutely idiotic notion that will hopefully go away in the coming decades as people get (marginally) more intelligent and/or desensitized. At least they still allow you to get these patches off of 3rd-party websites; though if they didn't, that would essentially be banning specific types of mods, which would cause an insane amount of uproar and backlash.
  9. It always baffles me that these companies seem to think they can actually do anything about piracy by trying to take the options away. Don't they understand that as you remove one option, two others become available? Rather than trying to block or take down piracy websites, maybe ask yourselves why people are using those websites in the first place, then come up with viable solutions for people to access the content they want legally. Almost every illegitimate website I've seen has a much more robust feature set with higher quality control, consistency, and ease of use than their legal alternatives. I don't live in Canada, but I still sincerely hope this doesn't become a reality - once other countries see that they can get away with it, they will - it sets a very ugly precedent. And that's just why the basis of their argument is stupid - let alone the fact that asking the government to force ISPs to blanket-ban any potential piracy hot-spots opens up a whole other can of worms, not the least of which being that "What constitutes a piracy website?" becomes a serious question and exactly how dangerously thin that definition may become (maybe a website that shares video of governments committing war crimes becomes "piracy", not entirely likely, but possible nonetheless, and the precedent would exist).
  10. Guess I'll just do what I did for Shadow of Mordor - wait a few years until I can get the "Complete Edition" (whatever it's going to be called), with all DLC included, on sale for about ~$5. At least with Shadow of Mordor, I just did that because I'm a cheap bastard, whereas with Shadow of War, I just don't want to feel too bad if I feel the need to buy those microtransactions, since I (hopefully) won't be spending $100+ by the time I've finished playing the game.
  11. Why not just use Gmail to create a throwaway in those cases?
  12. I thought their entire business plan was to get just enough attention to get bought by some larger company. Which I guess they succeeded at. I don't think it was ever meant to be a legitimate, long-term business.
  13. I'm still questioning why they did it in the first place.
  14. For those that aren't aware, in August 2013, Yahoo had a major security breach that they said (in December 2016) resulted in email addresses, passwords, phone numbers, birthdays, and the like for 1 billion (of 3 billion) accounts being compromised by the attackers. Today, they announced that ALL 3 billion accounts had their information compromised, apparently discovering the full extent of the breach through their recent integration into Verizon. So... yeah. Maybe if you were planning on opening a Yahoo account, don't. And if you had one back in 2013, make sure you've changed your passwords (though, considering it's been 4 years, you probably should have done that already). At this point, Yahoo feels like it's dead in the water, and this just feels like a final nail in the coffin, as I don't know anyone who would be willing to create an account with them at this point - aside from those who are seriously out of touch with tech. If you know any such people, I would advise that you advise them to say away from Yahoo. Their security sucks. Also the fact that it took 4 years and merging with another company to be able to disclose the full extent of this breach.
  15. Let me preface this by saying: I don't use Gab's social media, I don't intend to use it, I don't care if others use it, and I don't care whether it is or isn't on Google's Play Store. But, yeah... seems like Gab AI is really stretching on this one. If Google doesn't want a certain app on their store, they should have the right to remove it. And as for it being competition - Google+ competes with nothing, and, based on Gab's own description of itself, YouTube doesn't seem to be competing with it either. I am not a lawyer, nor do I have anything more than a casual knowledge of the law (particularly in this case), so I won't outright claim this lawsuit has no legs to stand on, but, based on what little knowledge I do have, if there are legs, they are extremely thin and brittle. Also, if Gab's intent is, as they put it, "to bring folks together of all races, religions, and creeds who share in the common ideals of Western values, individual liberty and the free exchange and flow of information”, but people use it for hate speech anyway, I don't see how the company's intent matters at all. If Google doesn't want Gab AI's app to be associated with Google, they should be able to remove it, kind of like they remove stuff like PornHub. Speaking of PornHub, you can still get it and other apps Google doesn't allow on the Play Store (such as Gab's social media app) with extreme ease, so this lawsuit from Gab AI just seems like a huge waste of time and money that could be better spent trying to get more users that will like their platform enough to go get the app elsewhere.
×