What american genocide is being censored?
Jyek
joined 2 years ago
Well here's another fun fact about steam for you then, you can sell your game on steam and retain the full profit of the sale by selling steam keys on other platforms like itch.io or humble bundle. The only stipulation to this method of sale is that you have to sell it at the same price the game is listed on steam at. Steam does not take a cut of steam key sales and encourages developers to distribute steam keys. They are free to request from steam and you can request however many you would like. No other platform does this.
30% is average for distribution fees across all media industries.
In the games industry: Microsoft (Xbox): 30% Sony (PlayStation): 30% GOG: 30% (used to be 40%) Steam: 30% Epic: 12% (the outlier) Google (Android): 25-40% Apple (iPhone): 30%
Music and film industry distribution deals range from 10% to as much as 60% depending on your contract. Yes it could be as low as 10% for people who just aren't that popular. But it's also not at the upper end of the spectrum for media distribution.
I mean that's just as bad faith of an argument as a Christian saying "it's God's will." You can't argue against nonsense and illogical concepts because they will hit you with more nonsense. But if an argument can be made logically, that's when it is time to meet it with more logic. If evil exists, and is also not a creation, but a facet of life, then to remove all opportunity to choose evil, destroys the idea of free will. Turn the argument on its head. "If God were all powerful, he could create a world with free will and also no good." That doesn't even make sense. If there is no good there is no evil. There is no longer a choice in the matter.
At that point you have to think about things like free will and good and evil as what they are, human inventions of the mind. I know people of faith who understand the difference between inventions of man and what they believe are creations of God. It's silly to say God invented the car I drive. It's also silly to say God invented math or philosophy or science. Only the real fanatical types will argue that way. Instead most people, when they boil it down, will come to understand good and evil are human ideas. For the faithful, I think the smart ones will be able to determine that if we invented those ideas, they don't exist because God made them exist, but because humans chose to invent them with their free will.
I think I'm going to stop defending the Christians now lol. They are capable of their own arguments. As bad as they usually are...
I mean that flow chart fails to disprove god through the circular discussion on free-will. If you want to argue logic in the discussion about if God cannot create a world with free-will but also without evil then he is not all powerful. But those ideas are opposed to each other. No matter the amount of power, making evil non-existent takes away a component of free-will. Could a creation god create a world that does not have a god? The question is paradoxical.
Not a defense of faith but a disapproval of this particular argument against it.
Most places annually through either smog or state inspection. Some states don't have any kind of state inspection though.
It corrupts the training data to recategorize all images generated in the future. It's not about protecting a single image, that's what glaze is for. This is about making the AI worse at making new images.
I run a modded Minecraft server for my friends, PiHole for my home network, DDclient, and a discord bot for my discord server on a RPi4 8GB. I also use another as an emulation station.
Then how about in instances where it is unlikely for the vast majority of people in one of the most populated countries in the world to learn about something like guns and how they work, we just have a registry of firearms that are approved for use in the US. Manufacturers can form fill and submit new equipment to be on that list legalizing them to be sold to the public through authorized dealers and then we don't ever have to worry about the broad sweeping bans on weapons that probably shouldn't have been in the hands of the aforementioned underqualified, less than educated civilians. Especially in cases where those civilians may intend to do harm to other, less than educated civilians.
It should not be a requirement that I know how a weapon works to fear harm from that weapon. I should not have to know the difference between the pomel and the guard of a sword to be allowed to fear being cut apart by one. Telling people to educate themselves does nothing for your argument. All you are saying is "I'm smarter than you and you're wrong." And that's just not helpful in cases where regardless of one's education on the matter of guns, we still hold different views on which guns people should be allowed to carry.
I do not care if it's a clip or a magazine or if it's bump-fire or fully automatic or machine automatic. You know the intention of people's words when they are concerned about these matters and want legal restrictions put in place. It should not be accessible to civilians to fire 10s of bullets a second.
Preventing mass shootings from happening is a matter of restricted and monitored access. There are hundreds of countries where gun violence is a non-issue. Why is it an issue here? How do we be more like countries where it is not an issue? What steps can we take to not fear for our lives? I don't like having to look over my shoulder when I go out.
Forced sale only works if your government has any control over the organizational structure of your company which the USA does not. What they are effectively doing is forcing the American arm of Tik Tok to sell without access to it's technology which China can absolutely deny. If the sale doesn't go through, the US will ban its use. If they do sell, it will be without the technology and a company will be Tik Tok in name only having to essentially build the service from the ground up. This is an effective ban of Tik Tok regardless of the outcome.