251–260 of 272 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paying them for their tactics aren't going to change their decisions, only reinforce them.
Well. It’s literally the only game on epic I’ve paid for. And I’ll be giving their competition equal dollars. So game theory wise it’s a wash. They haven’t earned me as a repeat customer and I do what I can to avoid them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's crazy that, according to people like you, we've always been doing merit-based hiring and still the computer workforce is disproportionately white and male. Nothing fishy there at all.
do you find it fishy 88% of the nursing workforce is female?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And kill Steam Deck just like they did with Netbooks, why get Proton translation of the real XBox experience. Gamers that reach out to handelds in Nintendo Switch numbers don't care about what OS their consoles use, and won't be buying Steack Decks "because Linux!".
They might not care which OS their consoles use but they probably care about whether their games cost $10 (Steam/PC on very frequent sales) or $80 (Switch 2), and whether they need to buy all of their games again with every generation.
As someone that was part of game development community (Flipcode, Gamedev portals, IGDA), demoscene, before FOSS became mainstream, my point of view is that both communities don't really overlap on point of views towards software and consumer experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's crazy that, according to people like you, we've always been doing merit-based hiring and still the computer workforce is disproportionately white and male. Nothing fishy there at all.
"People like you" So prejudiced, maybe get that looked at. It's a complicated topic, but no we have not always been doing merit based hiring. However, merit based hiring does result in imbalanced race and gender distributions due to long term societal issues and demographic distributions at earlier stages. Basically, there is a skewed class distribution at the source. You have to fix it at the source via equality of…
I have a question for you. Is there anything humanizing about the hiring process? Or is it one of the most dehumanizing things most engineers experience?
I look forward to you and your army of white men marching on me saying they're tired of racial discrimination in the workplace. I'll send you guys right over to HR, and tell them that you're tired of me hiring so many black people. I'm sure it'll go well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"People like you" So prejudiced, maybe get that looked at. It's a complicated topic, but no we have not always been doing merit based hiring. However, merit based hiring does result in imbalanced race and gender distributions due to long term societal issues and demographic distributions at earlier stages. Basically, there is a skewed class distribution at the source. You have to fix it at the source via equality of…
I see nothing wrong with prejudice against those working and arguing policies that, inadvertently or purposefully, keep minorities out of tech. I have a question for you. Is there anything humanizing about the hiring process? Or is it one of the most dehumanizing things most engineers experience? I look forward to you and your army of white men marching on me saying they're tired of racial discrimination in the workp…
> I look forward to you and your army of white men
We know, the secret is out, you and all the other racist lunatics never saw anything wrong with prejudice. It's the same type of thinking that fought against civil rights in the 70s that just moved straight over to the hot new forms of racism and discrimination just because you think it's socially acceptable.
> Is there anything humanizing about the hiring process? Or is it one of the most dehumanizing things most engineers experience?
You are saying this in order to defend racist hiring practices. Whether or not the base hiring process sucks is not part of the discussion on whether or not we should allow racial discrimination in said hiring process.
In the end it's always individual innocent people that get hurt, not broad identity groups that you think deserve it.
It truly is, and it's the culmination of a long history of development to get to this point. Back in, I want to say 2016 or so, we had Steam Machines, which were a series of hardware partnerships with various vendors for a console-style form factor of essentially PC hardware running on the first version of Steam OS. It was an incredible idea, but at the time rather frustratingly, I think some people came down with wh…
Valve should acquire Framework and have them do Steam Machine 2.0.
I think perhaps that's the goal is that there's any number of companies that we feel are pretty great that are phenomenal at serving a specific vision of gaming and computing that's oriented around Linux and that are quite happy to talk to each other in effective ways and so I wouldn't necessarily say that the culmination of that should be a merger between those companies but an ecosystem that thrives with deeply compatible hardware and software.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well. It’s literally the only game on epic I’ve paid for. And I’ll be giving their competition equal dollars. So game theory wise it’s a wash. They haven’t earned me as a repeat customer and I do what I can to avoid them.
Is it a wash, though? From their perspective, they ended up getting a sale from you they weren’t getting otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems you’re conflating financial success with all types of success. There can be engineering successes and artistic successes in this context.
Indeed. I can name quite a few of both kinds of success and the end result was unfortunately a shattering of a studio who did get a chance to iterate on the potential. As a business, it's clear what kind of success valve prioritizes.
Further, I wouldn’t call the Steam Deck itself a financial priority. Hardware is famously risky. Obviously, they want to continue their financial success, but they don’t seem to pursue that at all costs like other companies that run their IP into the ground to make more money. Having their financial success allows them to keep their integrity and continue pursuing artistic and engineering successes to diversify their income stream and build goodwill. Their work on Proton is a crowning achievement for their pursuit of engineering successes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see nothing wrong with prejudice against those working and arguing policies that, inadvertently or purposefully, keep minorities out of tech. I have a question for you. Is there anything humanizing about the hiring process? Or is it one of the most dehumanizing things most engineers experience? I look forward to you and your army of white men marching on me saying they're tired of racial discrimination in the workp…
> I see nothing wrong with prejudice against ... > I look forward to you and your army of white men We know, the secret is out, you and all the other racist lunatics never saw anything wrong with prejudice. It's the same type of thinking that fought against civil rights in the 70s that just moved straight over to the hot new forms of racism and discrimination just because you think it's socially acceptable. > Is ther…
How would you go about these "consequences" as you put them? Do you actually think anyone will take you seriously when you complain about not enough white people being hired? Surrounded by too many women? Sounds like a personal issue to me.
It's natural for you to feel attacked, as you're used to living under a white-supremacist system. I guarantee you would have been one of the MLK haters back in the 60s.
Also, on the prejudice thing. You actively make the decision every day to have shitty, racist opinions. Black people do not have the choice to become white, but you can become a better person. You simply choose not to. There is a huge difference, and your lack of ability to see that is telling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder whether this kind of discounting is healthy. It's surely healthy for Valve's bottom line, but it introduces an element of unpredictability into pricing, creating an inconsistent reinforcement regimen, which is the kind that most effectively reinforces a behavior (namely the purchase of games). Discounting also debases the perceived value of something, which, in addition, I suspect, to reducing the joy of own…
It's a trickle down effect for sure. Where indies suffer the most. You have games getting away with $70 price tags, but your indie game you spent 2+ years on better no cost more than 15-20 a pop and better have a 50% launch discount. You really can't sustain yourself even as a true solo dev in western countries (let alone if you need to commission/hire an artist/composer). And when I say "sustain in western countries…