Basman

As she confessed to the murder of her three kids, it's just a question if she goes to jail or the psychward. There's a strong argument to be made that she's basically insane but also mishandled as mental patient (IE. her carers are responsible for the incident is the argument they want to make). That said, I don't think being able to plead insanity should relieve one of culpability. It feels like a loophole to get away with murder, and it does get used like that broadly speaking. I also think that because she's a women she gets treated with kid's gloves, as if women aren't capable of responsibility. It's weirdly sexist and infantalizing. Like, they want to make the case that it was largely the fault if bad psychiatry and that she's basically not culpable. Idk man. A man in the same court room would have a much harder time garnering sympathy. Sorry for going there.

The whole case boils down to whether or not she was psychosic during the killing, which basically we only have her word for. There's no conclusive evidence of psychosis. Massachusetts law is rather binary when it comes to insanity as culpability has to be proven beyound a reasonable doubt and that you can be aqcuited just on doubt of one's sanity. Your either guilty or not. Ideally, a sort of compromise would be ideal in my opinion, like guilty but insane, but that's not on the table. This article discusses how Massachusetts law is outdated: https://www.thefp.com/p/law-inadequate-lindsay-clancy-trial

Nordic model is just a progressive twist on when religious states ban prostitution. The goal is essentially the same, to make the problem go away. They don't want prostitution to be a thing in the first place, but with a layer of plausible compassion. It fails because it's wrong on multiple levels. It's impossible to ban prostitution entirely. It's a form of labour like any other. Women are fully capable of choosing sex work. The belief that women can't choose to become sex workers willingly on their own acoord is sexist to a mythological degree. Laughably wrong. Ensuring labor rights is a proven way to tackle fairness, abuse and safety for all types of work in general. There's no reason why sex work should be any different.

Too many fake jobs in game development now. Imagine needing 2000+ people to make a mediocre uninspired remake of a 20+ YO game that took less than 200 people to develop. Office politics and justifying your payroll become more important than making actual art and it weigh down development. No clear decisions are ever made. No one is accountable for anything. That's how you get toxic positivity and lame writing in modern games (see Concord). The budget balloons and safe and samey design rules to hedge the bet. And even when they are successful they will still struggle to just break even. It's like a workout. Over an hour and it's no longer a workout. Over 200 devs and it's no longer a dev team. It's a corporatocracy.

There's some truth to it because the overall market is smaller than if it would be legal. Germany is pretty bad with trafficking I believe. You need to regulate the market itself with labor rights as a start at least. But I always felt that the nordic model was motivated more by puritanical ideas of sex and a woman's worth more than anything else.

Nordic model is just a soft ban on prostitution. On a side note, I've started to really notice this sexist cultural attitude of women not being capable of being responsible for their actions. It's silly. If you don't think women choose to become prostitutes you haven't met any hookers. It's telling when the le feminist are the managerial class HR types in that video.

Anonymity makes you less personable. You have to just about overcompensate to overcome that, which isn't realistic to expect of people.

No it wouldn't 😂 You'd have a nice deep discussion in person and then go straight back to arguing about women on the forum.

I think around 200 is the upper limit. Lots of generational games where made with around 200 devs, like Skyrim and Halo.

Gameplay looks like Uncharted. Nothing to cream your pants over.

Because all that matters is good graphics apparently. Gameplay looks cookie cutter and the humor is lacking from what I see. I'll buy it for a dollar 7 years from now.

Quality posters are generally a minority, so having a bigger glut of overall users should result in more quality postings. As long as general discourse is sufficiently constructive an non-toxic via moderation. Could always consider tightening moderation around low-quality postings. There's no squeezing more juice out of a fruit than there's juice. You need a bigger fruit. That's why promotion is the most straightforward solution imo.

Awards and likes incentivize popularity seeking. Inveriably people are going to give likes based on their biases, not on truthfulness or even quality. It's slopification as you make the discourse here more algorythmic.

I was many years ago member of a Star Wars Facebook group that held a tournament to decide which was the best character in the entire series via votes. The character with the least votes would get terminated round for round (that purple haired lady got deleted after one round lol). The character who ultimately won, best Star Wars character of all time, was the fucking kid from Revenge of the Sith that begs Anakin for 6 seconds.

Isn't like every single sentence in episode 3 a meme? 😂

I'll usually wear the same set of pants at a time depending on the weather/activity but switch out the shirts more regularly. I'll put more thought into dress and color cordination for occassions.

I never had anhedonia, bit I'm surmising from what I've read that progressing your goals will help you emotionally. It's true in general that progress is essentially what makes you happy.

Closing statements

Basically people with no experience telling you how to do your job. All of these lay offs happening aren't surprising honestly considering. Unfortunately it's often the boots on the ground that get axed instead of the parasites in middle management.

Royals are glorified mascots. Great when you like them, but as soon as they are unlikable people start questioning why you even have them. Royals serve no legitimate democratic function. It's bourgeoisie bankrolled by people's tax money. Notice how royals never make statements critical of the government, of culture, or of any kind that could be controversial. King Haakon never admonished Norwegian for drinking too much. Because if they started to be divisive, people would start disliking them and questioning why you are paying for their moon boots and literal royal treatment. Being "nice" is survival for royals. If I remember correct, the king technically has the right to veto new laws, but that never happens as it would basically be elite status suicide. And still things slip through the cracks, especially from the princes and princesses, because of how elite status and decadence corrupts people's sense of reality. Like prince Andrew or the Epstein hoe or the little Rapist prince who could. Given enough reason to, people will realize that they don't need royals for anything.

Because you are a white boy and fuck centrism.

Because of a lack of general users. The community is kind of stagnant. Leo promoting this forum more is the most obvious solution to the lack of users currently. Second best is to create higher engagements yourself.

You can tell which one's his favorite.

Apple does not fall far from the tree.

Almost first thing they used it for was stalking their exes. It's too much power at one's finger tips. It's too abusable and humans are too fallible. Mass surveillance is treating the general populace as suspect as opposed to democratic citizen. Especially during a time of public distrust, there needs to be a democratic support, which I don't think you'll find much of currently.