gusgalarnyk

I think the problem was their balancing strategy was largely nerf based and their design vision was primary weapons should suck against most things. That's how it felt anyway. Like most guns weren't viable and they kept nerfing the viable ones until they felt noticably worse but still noticably better than other options.

I really don't understand their vision for the weapon landscape - most assault rifles felt bad compared to the laser rifle variant, most shotguns felt bad besides one pump and one auto and then they nerfed both of those so I haven't taken a shotgun in some time, and a sniper or semiautomatic has never felt good as a primary despite being what I'd normally gravitate to.

Half of my play time is taking something like the auto cannon or the Quasar (before they were nerfed) and using them more like my primary weapon.

The slots don't have identity because of this imbalance and the weapons within those slots don't have meaningful decisions because they fit either check some boxes - A) can harm most things B) is efficient at harming most of those things - or they don't.

In a game where part of their business model is releasing a couple of new guns every month I've used 90% of those weapons less than 3 times because they immediately feel bad at the highest difficulties.

So this new patch is, to me anyway, a blunt way to improve all guns and all viability - seemingly because they dont know how to do it any other way.

Ergodox EZ has my whole hearted recommendation. Their keyboards are amazing and the only thing better for ergonomics would be a more custom curved piece.

They're a good company, I would recommend anyone checking them out.

I've read it, I read the discussion around it, idk man. One guy's thoughts on a company and it's founder isn't enough to move me off of something without better proof, better alternatives, and worse crimes than maybe having a bad long term vision.

Hopefully every company outgrows it's founder and becomes a system. We'll have to see, right now I'm satisfied and that gets me off Google and signals to others I'm willing to pay.

Ya, for an alpha game with unfinished assets and lacking polish - it's stupid good. I've been out of the mobs scene for like a year or two and haven't had a shooter register for a while, so maybe I'm starved, but this thing keeps me coming back every night.

I recommend Kagi, I've been using it for about six months now and results - especially small web results like blogs - are so much better. I also have a pretty good time image searching compared to when I was on Google.

Yes it's paid, but that to me is the price of resisting enshittification. Find a company that isn't a publicly traded for-profit world-burner and pay them for their service. Is the idea of paying for email and search an alien concept to me? Yes. But I'm either paying Google whatever €120 a year in eyeballs on ads and an increasingly worse experience, or I'm paying €80 a year and getting a markedly better experience.

Now it's up to Kagi and Proton to not turn into shitty companies while other competitors catch up and we have a thriving ecosystem again.

It's amazing what insulation and proper sound proofing can do. Never lived in thicker walls than here in Germany. Other than the blasted church bells, it'd be hard to convince me I was living next to people if the windows were opaque.

Kagi seems to surface great independent content and I've been loving it.

He's saying what you're attributing to "a specific lack of willpower" now has scientific backing that disagrees. Your take is old school and misinformed if the current science is correct. I personally haven't done research on the subject or read many studies but Adam Ragusea, a YouTube food science journalist covers this concept in one of his vids and several podcasts surrounding food science and (in my case) the drugs coming down the pipeline to regulate body weight touch on the research as well.

I think this is an immature understanding of how free markets work, how they slowly destroy themselves, and the problems at hand. Housing, like healthcare, isn't a market where choice is always possible, rational, or meaningful. And the "government" who imposes density restrictions are in place because of the people who vote in that government - a large portion of those restrictions are not the product of the past and an immovable system but because the owning class actively want them to remain in place. The incentive of the current system is to minimize housing access to maximize investment profit.

No one, or very few people, should profit from housing as an investment. Landlords produce nearly no benefit once a person is in the house and I would argue every other (or most other) benefit they produce only exist because the system caters to housing as an investment vehicle.

Anyone defending landlords is defending their own self-interest at the cost of the greater good, at the cost of their neighbors, and the generations to come. It's a parasitic job meant to transfer wealth from the poor to the wealthy.

It's fuckin crazy that we live in a society where someone is forced to pay into a richer person's networth instead of their own and we think it's okay.

Landlords should be illegal, housing is a right and an affordable one if we outlaw or heavily regulate landlords.

Until I trust my government to not go hard right, until I can own my housing wherever I want to live in a given decade, until work goes/stays full remote and/or reduces total working hours, until I feel like I have too much money that I could lose the cost of a child and not risk being in the danger zone - until then kids aren't something I can guarantee a good life and that's not an acceptable starting place for me.

If housing is an investment vehicle for growing your money, then the people who can participate in that system will work to produce outcomes that fundamentally go against affordable housing. A society that believes in affordable housing as a right or a goal can't allow housing to be used as a place to park wealth so that it grows akin to a stock.

Whatever prices are, they are higher when a landlord is involved. We must get progressively outlaw multiple pieces of land. Owning more than two homes/flats should cost the owner something every year, not generate wealth - and that second one should be nearly neutral.