Progressive on social issues, regressive/conservative on a lot of economic issues. Neoliberalism is back 19th century style.

They will just repeat what Trump said with a shit-eating grin. There is no original thought going on there.

Define ethically sourced.

I guess it boils down to what you consider worst. Gangs, or a tyrannical government who disappear people without due process. It is like releasing killer monkeys to take care of your radioactive crocodile problem.

Have you heard about asswipes

Lack of important features, no asset store, not as mature (more bugs), no native console support, no low-level rendering access, no texture streaming, and on and on.

Spot-on, this would be my bet too.

It is classic internet outrage complely disconnected from what smaller game devs have to go through. Don’t get in the way of a good internet outrage as a legit, actual gamedev who knows why this is damn near impossible, or you’ll get downvoted.

The whole argument of leaving Unity hinge on the fact that Godot is a close replacement, it is not.

Godot is fine for solo/very small indies and people trying to learn gamedev, but it is not ready quite yet. Most devs still are stuck using proprietary engines.

“Moral enough”, let’s not pretend they’re not thirsting for their own genocide, just read their catchphrase “God Is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam”".

Two wrongs does not make a right.

It is crazy how Steam users seem to interact with the platform exclusively in bad faith. The reviews are filled with memes, joke reviews and drama. You will lose IQ points just by opening the forums. And of course, people troll the awards. Not that I would expect a mainstream gaming platform to attract geniuses, but Steam community is definitely bottom of the barrel.

Style over substance, and a ugly style at that. Of course lots of people are gonna love it and say it is the best thing ever.

I don’t think he’s a lawyer.

Yep! It is kind of funny too because petty insults is all they have, but they seem extremely sensible to them themselves. Trump has a nickname for virtually everyone, and they think it’s the best thing ever, but point out that he’s an insecure man wearing ungodly amount of makeup and they immediately get weirdly offended by it. “OrAnGe MaN bAd”. The funny thing is, as Trump would say, there is a lot of subject matter with his overall presentation, ironically.

A crepe is like 100 calories and you can pour like 5 in less than 10 minutes. But anyway, to reach their own. personally I hate chopping stuff even if it takes 1 minute.

Yep, it is mostly apparent in big companies I would say. I could go on and on, but basically your work is so disconnected from the final output that what end up actually “mattering” is a bunch of made-up bullshit. Putting in quality work and improving your product/service does not benefit most of the people you interact with directly, unless of course you’re working on the popular thing that will get people promoted.

Anyways, I also left the corporate world to start my own business. Life is so much easier when all you need to care about is the quality of your work and not political points. I like my hard work to rewards me, and not just some guy spending his days in meetings claiming credit for “his” “initiatives”. Some of those folks would never survive a job that isn’t a mega corp paying them to improv all day in meetings.

Ultimately they have to decide if he can hold an office, I’d argue this supercede any technicality about the election itself. At worst I guess this could be decided after he won, but this would break the country.

I also think so. You can usually tell who is close to your own level, but anything too far off andthe signals for what is considered smart or dumb tend to blend together.

The one trait which usually don’t lie is the person ability to learn. Fast learners and autodidacts are almost always smart, and people who are slow to learn are almost always left of the curve. Other signals you mentioned are deeply rooted in culture and can reqlly give the wrong impression.

Removing bias from IQ tests is one hell of a challenge, but if we put that aside and only analyse IQ results from people from similar backgrounds, it definitely measure something, and it usually gives accurate results. Meaning your score would not change much by taking the test again.

IQ score correlate with someone general ability in pattern recognition, languages, logic, bias check and etc. It also correlate with grades, salary, lifespan. So, is that intelligence? I don’t know, but it is something.

I’d argue given enough time and effort almost anyone can become a domain expert in specific things and do incredible stuff. What distinguishes smart people from simpler folks usually boils down to them having a very easy time processing new stuff, which includes the ability to filter noise and fact check.

I don’t like the term “stupid”, but there hasn’t been a whole lot of evidence supporting the idea that human intelligence is compartimented. Humans with high IQs tend to outperform in average at most of what they try. Low IQ probably means you will work harder and have to specialize to achieve the same degree of competency. This just my hot take, I’ve fallen into this rabbit hole before and read a lot on the origin of IQs tests. In the end, intelligence alone does not determine a person’s worth anyway.