VLADIMIR: "Okay, I'm really going to leave now. I'm going. I'm going now. I am. I'm going." ESTRAGON: "I'm going to punch Godot right in their damn mouth."
rodneylives
joined 2 years ago
Roguelike.
Showrunnners are never absolutely sure how many more seasons they'll get. If a show is popular, they could end up having to continue it after a conclusion. Or the show could be popular but corporate priority could be elsewhere, and they'll be forced to wrap up promising storylines quickly. Even for shows that announce they have plans for a beginning, middle and end, it's possible that they'll be cancelled before end planned ending, or else have to stretch after the ending has been reached. Safer is to try to just coast along, being non-committal about major plot elements, until something happens that pushes the show to resolve things.
There has always been a market for telling people what they want to hear.
Speak's brethren!
Vet: "Capybara Tick! Speak's not a dog. He's a rodent!"
The Tick: "Ooh!"
Vet: "But he's one of the world's largest."
Tick: "Oh, man! Way to go, Speak!"
Not to be a downer or anything, but I feel like the person who challenged the story wasn't really in the wrong here?
It's not that the story isn't true or the person who reported it isn't who they said it was. It's that, they didn't mention their credentials right off. Now that we're living in an era when misinformation is rife, especially now that some people appear poised to flood us with a sea of LLM-generated shit, citations and backing up your information up front are becoming more important.
People make confident and bold assertions all the time. Some of them will know what they're talking about, but some of them won't, and many times they'll look the same until someone challenges them.
Well, that's how I see it anyway.
Maybe? We're fighting anecdotes with anecdotes here, there is no way I can examine your statement when it's entirely a friend-of-a-friend memory. I take issue with your "wildly ignorant" statement (of course), and stand by my point. And it's not learning about a discipline, it's the opportunity to learn about it.
Now it's my turn to tell you basically what a lot of people here have already said, but maybe you can get something extra out of this telling.
Everyone who was mega-successful, in old age or young, has had a huge advantage somewhere that people rarely talk about. There are no exceptions to this, only cases where those advantages are lost to time or secrecy. And nearly every time, family wealth is involved in some way. Usually directly, but even if they never got a penny, being in a wealthy family brings you so many casual advantages.
You're comparing yourself to people who were dealt winning hands from the start. Like, a kid who gets a patent at a young age? Someone was coaching them, possibly someone with an agenda. Invents a new plastic? Uh-huh, at what age did they get into polymer chemistry? Who even told them polymer chemistry even existed? There's something else going on there. Don't let the media gaslight you into thinking you're "behind."
It's okay to be you! It's not a race, and even if it was, the people you're comparing yourself to had a gigantic head start.
How about the flash games of Orisinal? They're a bunch of extremely chill tiny games. With the death of internet Flash they're much harder to play, but one can use Ruffle, which has browser extensions for Firefox and Chrome. (Homestar Runner can be viewed that way too.)
It was just included in the Genesis part of Switch Online Expansion Pack.
I think we're starting to see the beginning of the end of the Windows hegemony, for one reason: the success of the Steam Deck has made gaming on Linux mainstream. The two things that have always kept power users tied to Windows have been games and office, but GAMES were the big one. Suddenly, it starts to look like it might be possible to do without Windows for gaming, if not now, then soon.