While that’s all a good question and thought provoking… unfortunately it’s literally just word of god that if Qui-Gon won, the light would win.

A common problem in Star Wars- the fans have put waaaay more thought and worldbuilding into it than Lucas ever did.

It could, but the supreme Court and other Republicans would never allow it.

Canonically the actual gamble was qui-gon vs Darth maul. If qui-gon had lived, the universe would have been fine. But he lost, so it was doomed.

The force on star wars is weird, because if you’re strong enough in the force things are basically fated.

Anyway, that’s the long reason why the background music during that fight is called “The Duel of Fates”.

By “people like you” I mean people that see this as a good thing. They’re picking and choosing what laws this applies to and what they let slide. This is just the “easy out” that prevents “people like you” from being outraged at the blatant corruption going on.

It wasn’t meant to be insulting.

Oh, don’t pretend that a Republican measure is going to be put under the same scrutiny. This is just an easy excuse so to keep people like you placated with a thin veneer of respectability.

The administration is going to weaponize the FTC anyway, and the supreme Court will back THAT to the hilt.

As for economic effect… That isn’t something the court should be concerned with anyway! Who cares if it’s profitable if it’s illegal!

Why are you defending the intolerant so hard?

You need to understand, this isn’t “adopting their tactics.” This is “if you do not tolerate others, you no longer are protected by the social contract.”

You can opt out if you wish, but that has to cut both ways, or your contract of tolerance is worthless.

Please look up the Paradox of Tolerance, also known as the Contract of Tolerance.

Yyyyeah. Unfortunately we’re not actually a democratic nation- land and especially money count for more than actual people when it comes to voting. Gerrymandering just reinforces it, and ensures an undemocratic result.

Just to jump in here, git submodules and similar are a terrible design pattern that needs killed, not expanded. Create a library properly and stop cutting corners that will bite you in the ass.

Three seperate companies wanting to do it the lazy, wrong way doesn’t suddenly make it a good idea.

Can’t tell if that’s a message of support or not, but just in case it’s not- trust me, we’re trying to get the republicans away from our table.

And before you say we should leave the table- not all of us have that option.

If it WAS a message of support… well, everything I said still applies in general lol.

1. They sue and go after emulation projects/ROM sites for modern content just as much as Microsoft and Sony do, MS/Sony just get a pass for some reason. Probably because people try to pirate current-gen content less for them, but they do the exact same thing every time it happens. Nintendo (and, it must be said, MS/Sony) don’t really go after the old stuff for the most part. Also, it must be said that several times that emu/ROM sites were shut down and Nintendo was blamed it turned out it wasn’t actually Nintendo. Same thing with that whole streaming copystrike issue- turns out it was some random company taking down gameplay videos, not Nintendo.

2. Sony already does this too, yet again they pretty much universally get a pass for making you permanently lose almost all (if not all) your stuff if you let your sub lapse. Even if you resub, you don’t get it back.

3. In my opinion this is just a bad faith argument. Of course they’re not putting their games on PC, they would cannibalize their own sales. Trying to pretend that you should boycott Nintendo for not actively destroying their own economic model is certainly A Take.

4. Entirely fair. My understanding is that they’re getting better at this, but after the shitshow that was brawl that’s a low fucking bar. I could point out that smash bros isn’t actually Nintendo (it was HAL, then Sora, then Bandai) but like… lets be real here, it’s Sakurai running the show, and Sakurai basically is working for Nintendo even if he isn’t employed there lol.

Because ‘enemies’ has been narrowly redefined to be a country we are at war with. You’ll notice, of course, that we haven’t declared war since ww2. It’s all been ‘police actions’ and similar.

If you’re a Republican, you’re supporting this. You can claim you aren’t on board all you want, but at the end of the day, you’re supporting them.

Maybe don’t, if you don’t like what the Republicans party is doing with the support you’ve given them.

So what are those reasons, that make you think people should boycott Nintendo and not other companies, then?

Because I suspect most of them are not as legitimate as you might be thinking, and now I’m curious.

There’s also just a substantial number of people that were just astroturfers, I think.

There’s been a LOT of crazy attacks on the switch 2 to try to ‘justify’ a boycott. I think my two favorite was that the gamechat button noise when you hit is actually saying saying a slur, or maybe that the rumble turns off after a while not to protect your hands from the rumble (which has been found to be bad for you), but because Nintendo cheaped out on a rumble motor that overheated too easily.

The switch 2 joycons don’t have a rumble motor. Like, it’s a whole thing they’re super proud of, because it’s so precise they just use the rumble really fast to play music instead of having a speaker.

Honestly, the whole idea of trying to boycott nintendo has pretty much always been over astroturfed bullshit, or just outright bullshit.

She’s literally been a major feminist activist and UN ambassador for over a decade.

Trust me, we know. Feel free to hit american companies in their pocketbooks though. It’s the only way they’ll learn. And maybe they’ll fuck off and get out of our government too.

My understanding is that most testers found it’s about 4ms better than the switch 1, and the only tester that found it worse refuses to actually outline their methodology, and nobody can reproduce the 30ms+ number.

Except other testers found it to be ~4ms faster than the switch 1, in tests where they actually give their methodology.

Monitors unboxed just went “yeah it’s 30+ms, source: trust me bro”

So basically, the news here is that the switch 2 screen is better than the switch 1 at 17ms vs 21ms, except for one singular tester that claims 30+, which no other independent tester collaborates… And then they go and compare it to screens that cost multiple times the entire switch’s cost… And this is presented as a bad thing?

Are you kidding me rn