No impact? Nothing? I mean, they shoud at least notice something, right?

A study published in February by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that among 6,000 CEOs, chief financial officers, and other executives from firms who responded to various business outlook surveys in the U.S., U.K., Germany, and Australia, the vast majority see little impact from AI on their operations. While about two-thirds of executives reported using AI, that usage amounted to only about 1.5 hours per week, and 25% of respondents reported not using AI in the workplace at all. Nearly 90% of firms said AI has had no impact on employment or productivity over the last three years, the research noted.

Well duh, that explains everything. Me getting paid for taking a dump 1.5h a week hasn’t had any impact on my productivity score either. My guess is those 1.5h were mostly used to ask questions you’d otherwise just look up yourself, which also doesn’t change much in terms of productivity.

*while not signed in. Once you do, you’ll get access to the full historical data

Yes, although it is not just about the engine. For AAA story games (think of something like Resident Evil) I couldn’t care less, but anything small scale with great modding potential gameplay-wise, I avoid engines that compile to bytecode like Unreal because they make it insanly painful to create mods. I prefer something that I can easily decompile to look at the souce code like Godot and Unity.

But as I said, that is not just an engine issue, since you can provide official mod support on Unreal or make it harder to mod on other engines using stuff like obfuscation or IL2CPP. But in general, especially on most small-scale Indie games, just looking at the used engine is enough to determine modability and therefore influence my decision.

Something something YouTube’s copyright system is still broken af and easy to exploit. I wonder how much more abuse it takes for YouTube to finally do something

But Factorio has just good gameplay. No hyperrealistic graphics, beautiful reflections, high quality sounds and smooth, detailed animations, which is what makes AAA so expensive. Even Satisfactory, which delivers simlar gameplay with, while not at AAA, at least at AA level, costs 40€, and that looks, sounds and feels amazing. There I can at least see why they charge that price.

I’m not saying it is a bad game, but it is not a 64€ game

Hours played is the stupidest metic ever. Idc if most people disagree, content bloat is nothing worth paying more for, a high quality but short experience is way more worth to me. Games should respect my limited lifetime.

But Minecraft and Terraria do not cost 32€, do not have a DLC costing as much as the basegame and gave us what,15 years of free Content updates? So this is not even close to a fair comparison, if anything, this further proves my point that Factorio is overpriced

I used to respect that, same with them pricing the game at 20€ (not 19,99€, exactly 20€)… until they decided to increase the price over time to “adjust” it for inflation, instead of decreasing it like it is/used to be common practice, and then releasing a dlc that cost as much as the entire game, effectively doubling the price. 20€ was a fine price, give me a 10€ dlc on top of that and I’m still on board. But 64€ for the game and DLC? AAA price for no AAA value? Yeah, I’m out.

I see, I don’t know how I missed that, thanks for pointing it out. I still think that the API itself is neat and I’d love to see that for the sake of comfort, but I also agree that the enforcement to use it even when it makes no sense to do so is just stupid. Let’s just hope that they fix this overshot at least if they refuse to drop it altogether.

Sounds like you’re looking for Nobara.

• Stable Fedora base, optimized for games and creative work.
• WINE, OBS, codecs, and third-party repositories preconfigured.
• Less time in the terminal, more time playing and creating.

Of course, and I will fight the next steps with pleasure, but I welcome a qol feature anytime, even one enforced by law.

Where in the bill does it say that? And where would that make sense? What would Notepad or File Explorer do with my age range? That would make no sense at all.

And yes, as a professional developer I would definetely comply and use this API instead of bothering my customers every time by askIng them to confirm their age, but since I’ve never worked on any age restricted software in the first place, it does not affect any of my products.

I’ll just copy my comment from a similar bill in colorado, I will leave the link to the colorado bill in, but here is the california bill as well if you want to read it yourself.

The title is very misleading. This is the actual bill that they are trying to pass. The link already includes a summary, so I will just give you an even simpler explanation and some practical examples why this is actually really neat.

First of all, this is not age verification. No IDs have to be submitted, no selfies or videos will be submitted to any age estimation AIs, so put your pitchforks away (for now, until they decide to expand the bill to include these measures as well, then it’s time to burn it down). The name of the bill already tells you what it is: Age Attestation. Aka what every piece of software already does before it shows you explicit content.

With the bill in place, every “operating system provider” has to ask you for your age or date of birth during OS setup, which will then be made available to other software via an API. So instead of having to fill in your date of birth or checking “Are you 18+/21+?” boxes, software will use the new API to check instead, saving you the trouble of doing it manually every time for every application that is not made for all ages.

What makes it even better is that the OS does not have to provide your actual age or birth date, the bill has a minimum requirement of just disclosing age-bracket data. So it could work just like age ratings, which also rely on age groups rather than specific years. Also, the bill explicitly forbids asking for more than your age, sharing more than that via the new API and using the entered age data for anything else than the described purpose, like sending it to a server for tracking purposes.

And finally, as mentioned in the beginning, no IDs or anything else as it is with age verification necessary. You can still lie, just enter 1.1.2000 or whatever you want. Nothing changes, except that you will only have to do it once every time you reinstall/reset your OS or buy a new device.

I’ll just copy my comment from a similar bill in colorado, I will leave the link to the colorado bill in, but here is the california bill as well if you want to read it yourself.

The title is very misleading. This is the actual bill that they are trying to pass. The link already includes a summary, so I will just give you an even simpler explanation and some practical examples why this is actually really neat.

First of all, this is not age verification. No IDs have to be submitted, no selfies or videos will be submitted to any age estimation AIs, so put your pitchforks away (for now, until they decide to expand the bill to include these measures as well, then it’s time to burn it down). The name of the bill already tells you what it is: Age Attestation. Aka what every piece of software already does before it shows you explicit content.

With the bill in place, every “operating system provider” has to ask you for your age or date of birth during OS setup, which will then be made available to other software via an API. So instead of having to fill in your date of birth or checking “Are you 18+/21+?” boxes, software will use the new API to check instead, saving you the trouble of doing it manually every time for every application that is not made for all ages.

What makes it even better is that the OS does not have to provide your actual age or birth date, the bill has a minimum requirement of just disclosing age-bracket data. So it could work just like age ratings, which also rely on age groups rather than specific years. Also, the bill explicitly forbids asking for more than your age, sharing more than that via the new API and using the entered age data for anything else than the described purpose, like sending it to a server for tracking purposes.

And finally, as mentioned in the beginning, no IDs or anything else as it is with age verification necessary. You can still lie, just enter 1.1.2000 or whatever you want. Nothing changes, except that you will only have to do it once every time you reinstall/reset your OS or buy a new device.

The title is very misleading. This is the actual bill that they are trying to pass. The link already includes a summary, so I will just give you an even simpler explanation and some practical examples why this is actually really neat.

First of all, this is not age verification. No IDs have to be submitted, no selfies or videos will be submitted to any age estimation AIs, so put your pitchforks away (for now, until they decide to expand the bill to include these measures as well, then it’s time to burn it down). The name of the bill already tells you what it is: Age Attestation. Aka what every piece of software already does before it shows you explicit content.

With the bill in place, every “operating system provider” has to ask you for your age or date of birth during OS setup, which will then be made available to other software via an API. So instead of having to fill in your date of birth or checking “Are you 18+/21+?” boxes, software will use the new API to check instead, saving you the trouble of doing it manually every time for every application that is not made for all ages.

What makes it even better is that the OS does not have to provide your actual age or birth date, the bill has a minimum requirement of just disclosing age-bracket data. So it could work just like age ratings, which also rely on age groups rather than specific years. Also, the bill explicitly forbids asking for more than your age, sharing more than that via the new API and using the entered age data for anything else than the described purpose, like sending it to a server for tracking purposes.

And finally, as mentioned in the beginning, no IDs or anything else as it is with age verification necessary. You can still lie, just enter 1.1.2000 or whatever you want. Nothing changes, except that you will only have to do it once every time you reinstall/reset your OS or buy a new device.

As The Verge points out in their article, Nintendo will most likely not to anything about it. But I sure would love to see them try.

The relevant part of the article:

Don’t hold your breath: The Pokémon Company’s former chief legal officer Don McGowan (who spent nearly 12 years there, as well as multi-year stints at Bungie and Microsoft) thinks there’s no way that his former company would sue.

”Even if I was still at the company I wouldn’t touch this, and I’m the most trigger-happy CLO [Chief Legal Officer] I’ve ever met. This will blow over in a couple of days and they’ll be happy to let it,” he told IGN.

Why? One reason is that like some other executives Trump has previously and corruptly leveraged, some of The Pokémon Company’s leaders personally depend on the US’s good graces: “Many of their execs in the USA are on green cards,” he said. Another reason, he says, is that The Pokémon Company doesn’t want the press.

I guess the most hated man on the internet had a point when he called Randy out for having shitty takes

How so, you ask? Well, according to Ubisoft, they allow for a more unique experience by letting players personalize their characters or speed up progression.

Yeah, just unlocking more personalization options through progression and challenges is such a dull concept. Or simply adding cheats as a way to speed up progession just like it used to be, is such an outdated concept…

Fuck Ubisoft, I’m so glad I stopped paying for their games.

I used mine just a few hours ago while playing Brotato. I’m usually not a controller guy and try to stick to mouse and keyboard but in cases where controllers are just the better choice, I strongly prefer the Steam Controller over any other one.