I haven’t played 4, but I played 1, 2, and a bit of the presequel or whatever it was called. They were essentially all the same game. Run, shoot, run, shoot, hear vaguely off-color joke, run, shoot. Is there any particular reason to bother with an overpriced remake of the same old game? Is there a reason for worrying about 4KUHD textures on a game where the aesthetic is cartoony? If you’re a 9 year old who’s never played, and it’s all on mom’s dime, I could see being tricked into buying it by the advertisers, but why is anyone else excited about it?

Man, it’s been years since I looked at Processing. I forgot it exists. This could be a good option.

No idea. I’ve been meaning to try blender again at some point anyway. I’ll have to look into it.

The difference between ‘leading someone on’ and just being in a relationship is entirely internal, based on the internal states of each person. Partner A is ‘leading on’ Partner B if they present signals to Partner B to suggest they have intentions of a more serious relationship while actually having the intention of forming only a lesser, or even antagonistic relationship. If any part of that is not true, they are not ‘leading them on’ though there are other, similar ways for it to be unhealthy. As for signs, it depends on the ability of each partner to deceive Partner B. If Partner A is good at lying, rationalizing, etc. there may be no signs from them. And if Partner B is good at self-deception, they might fool themselves without A having to deceive them at all.

We can recognise their beliefs as false, but a false belief held by millions of people has too much power to be simply discounted.

There are, broadly speaking, two kinds of people invested in politics. The first has money and power, and uses it to get more money and more power. The other has no money and no power, and somehow believes the first type when the first type says ‘give me your money and power, and then you will have more money and power.’

One of the things to remember is the nazi crimes against humanity trials were essentially unprecedented. There wasn’t much of an international court system at the time. The trials happened mostly because so many people were horrified by what had been done (more or less) legally. The nazis really believed in their own righteousness and the technically legal status of the actions they had taken. A repeated response to ‘how dare you commit these crimes?’ was ‘They were not crimes in Germany,’ or ‘The government was illegitimate, and therefore crimes committed against it were legitimate,’ or ‘Those were crimes of self-defense because [we believed] the victims were seeking our destruction,’ or ‘Our courts ruled that was legal,’ etc.

They were racist loons, but to understand their position, imagine a group of your neighbors, who you know have gotten up to some hinky shit of their own in their own homes, grouped together, kicked the shit out of you, and then locked you in your bathroom until they could set up a courtroom in your home, and proceed to harangue you about how you treated your step-son. If that happened, it’s very unlikely you’d accept the legal or moral authority of your captors. You know you won’t get away, and you know you’re dead anyway if you stonewall, (you also have no 5th ammendment to plead.) so you may as well say your bit and try to sway someone to your side. Heck, your neighbor America has always had some very similarly grim views regarding the treatment of step-sons. Maybe you can get him to help you.

The oft repeated ‘don’t say anything’ response to being arrested is only applicable in places where you think you can trust the court and you think there’s a chance they might not be able to prove you are guilty. If you know they have all the proof, you might as well try to nullify the jury since that’s your only hope.

So you’re saying they’d get so high they die, and the THC will still be in their systems when the human cooks and eats them. Might have an idea why they were doing this ‘experiment’ then.

That’s essentially the thing that makes LLMs as unreliable as they are in everything else; they run on probabilities that have no anchor in reality. The game is just another contained reality to which the model has no direct connection.

When you take Disney movies as a source to understand… anything really, you’re going to be disappointed.

Most common reason for this is thirst.

It takes real, practiced skill and/or quality equipment to hit a bullseye at long range, or to kill an armed opponent at short range quickly and cleanly enough to not give them the chance to shoot you back. It takes no skill to hit an undefended, person-sized object at <10 meters, the distances involved in most indoor locations.

Slightly mixed messaging given the reactionary elements think gayness is going to destroy society.

If you try to make a system that generalizes to any context, it will never be deep enough to truly embrace any context.

A chat app should basically run on a Casio wrist calculator with an antenna. A chat app designed by MS never will.

Morally? No.

Legally? Be careful. Some places have allowances in laws to permit relationships between closely aged young people, even if one is technically a minor. Some places do not. Check your local laws. If it’s not explicitly laid out as an exception, a bad breakup, a bad parent, or even an unlucky encounter with a nosy cop can seriously damage your life.

~0%. Everyone is reliant to some degree on others. Even if you grant a tropical paradise to somewhat ease the physical needs, even survival is a team activity, and no one thrives under forced solitude.

I said before to keep trying and maybe one day you’d make a funny comic, but it really just isn’t happening. This is worse than unfunny, though. You should probably just stop.

B to GGG in a few months? That’s almost a b-movie horror plot.

‘Eggs are really small potatoes?’ Got it. Off to make some potato salad.