Yassss.

I think I can see a little bit of hollow knight in there. The color palette seems kinda like a few of Hollow Knights levels. But I also get a very a much more Anime vibe, which I like.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: areamanplaysgameI'm not sure I really understand the point of the "dock" so much. The hub makes perfect sense, but standing the Deck up doesn't seem all that useful. Does anybody use/ plan to use it this way? I've never used my Switch standing up either - it's either handheld or docked and displaying on my TV.

Yes. It's all but necessary for multiplayer. Or at least I can't think of a way to do multiplayer without standing up the Switch.

That use case don't make a ton of sense for the Deck? The controllers don't come off, so you'd have to buy/bring 2 extra controllers that Valve doesn't make instead of one controller that Valve doesn't make, lol.

But standing it up does make perfect sense for a dock to me. One might want the comfort/use of a mouse and keyboard, but not have access to monitor.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This looks kinda cool. Might have to try it out!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: SalvatosAnd just like that, another debate is aborted without consideration for its potential because someone didn't feel like carrying it on :cry:

Debate?? This is just people spewing opinion. No-one is going to change minds on this stuff. Not only isn't this place to do it, I know that words won't change people's blinkered opinions on this stuff.

I mean, half the replies I started reading, thought "christ on a stick", skimmed the rest for personal attacks, then tried to forget. Everyone who has access to this site... they're all (myself included) so unbelievably privileged, we have no right to voice our opinions on this subject. We lack the context and (hopefully) life experience of being able to contribute to this "debate".

Thank you for moderating this. I agree no one is going to change their mind on this from this conversation alone, but the cumulative effect of these conversations all over do have an impact as does seeing people who are (likely) not affected at all by this standing up for those that are; it can mean a lot for others in this community.

Thank you again for moderating it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Maybe they will inspire their students to make games as nice or even better!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: TherinS

Quoting: GBGamesAnd yet the rhetoric keeps getting repeated, and it sounds so innocent and earnestly about freedom when in fact it is often double-speak for driving the opposite outcome.

In a country that claims to value freedom as a whole, it makes no sense to say "And we'll turn it to the states to let the people decide if YOU get to have the same freedoms." We, in fact, tried that, and it turned out to be a terrible idea.

Unfortunately, that is the POINT of free states allowing its citizens to vote how they want thier state run, within the confines of some basic rules set in place at a Federal level. No one is being forced to remain in thier state (there's 48 easy to travel to) or being prevented from traveling to another state.

If one city decides jaywalking is legal and another decides its punishable by jail time, then don't jaywalk in the illegal areas. Nothing is keeping you from walking all you want, but jaywalking is viewed differently in the two cities. If the population of one city wants to make jaywalking legal, then vote into office the officials who will make that legal.

This decision is, in SPIRIT, no different than the example of jaywalking. The people can now vote for/against it as they wish and majority rules.

So hypothetically, what about repealing the second amendment and let each state decide on guns, gun control and even total gun ban?

Up until the most recent Supreme Court Decision, gun control was largely left up to local jurisdictions. Even down to the city level. Some cities banned handguns. Others required registration of firearms or set rules of the discharge if guns. States still set age restrictions, prohibitions, carry requirements, and licensing. What's legal in one city is not in another with regards to guns. If you have a license to carry in your state, it does not mean another state will honor it. If you are allowed to carry in your state without a license, you'll still need one to carry in a state that has a license requirement.

...Not confusing at all....

Over the last 20+ years, a lot of restrictions have been removed, often by courts or legislatures, but it's still very much locally controlled. The most recent decision combined with the ideological makeup of the court does throw into question how many of those regulations will still exist in the future, but for now, each state can regulate guns independently to some extent.

Sorry for the double post.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CyborgZetaThe most I can say is that I am not a fan of states picking which freedoms/rights they want to defend, and which ones they want to disregard as lesser (or just show disdain for altogether); any freedom/right should not end at the border to another state.

Quoting: SamsaiThe "states' rights" argument is basically just nonsense. It doesn't help anybody's democracy when the states that "benefit" from Roe v. Wade being overruled are ones that are horrendously voter suppressed and gerrymandered. We've also seen what this "states' rights" thing has been used to campaign for in the past and it definitely wasn't for something that would lead to greater equality and democracy for all.

I agree with you both, but would like to note a small counterpoint that is often often overlooked. While the vocal "States Rights" partisans over often use it to rail against Federal Oversight, standards, and restrict people's rights, there are quiet examples where states have granted extra rights and protections not found at the federal level. An easy example would be many State constitutions, which offer enhanced privacy protections beyond what is offered by the Constitution. You can also find examples in local laws and local Criminal Rules as well.

I think, in hypothetical government world, modern states might be more efficient if they only existed as administrative entities rather than political subdivisions. Of course, the difficulty would be in determining what local administrative authority would exist.

But, that would largely solve the issues of personal rights across borders. Maybe simplify some other things while we're at it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Hello.

For discussion sake, I noticed several people commenting on the bottom of the States rights in regards to the Federal rights. I presume people are talking about the 10th amendment, which needs some clarification.

The Amendment references the rights of the states from the federal and is largely interpreted to protect states from being forced into federal programs. It doesn't directly have anything to do with personal rights. The Federal government can enumerate rights beyond what is listed in the constitution. There are debating philosophies in judicial circles on this, though. Some favor a strict, literal reading, while others favor something more flexible.

Regardless of what side of judicial philosophy one happens to be on, there are a number of laws and court decisions that have conferred rights Federally over the years. (Anti-discrimination, marriage, education, firearms ownership, etc). On top of that, States can confer additional rights above and beyond what is recognized federally.

It makes for a rather complicated legal landscape that people have to navigate. Some of that is due to the nature of the drafting of the Constitution. It's had a lot of "Compromises" between free/slave states, high/low population states, and some holdovers from the previous government, of which many of those issues aren't exactly relevant anymore. I would agree a stream lining of quite a bit of it would be nice. Also, since we're throwing things at the wall, I'd be really ok with a multi party system. I'd argue, more than design, the lack of a robust multiparty system is the biggest detriment.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Happy birthday!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain Man

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: Mountain ManGreat for Valve and the Steam Deck, but what does it really mean for Linux? It reminds me of the Android situation, where everybody who has an Android phone in their pocket is technically using Linux, but that in and of itself does nothing to advance the cause for Linux.

I think there is a pretty simple, key distinction here: Programs written to run on Android will not run on desktop Linux. But programs written to run on SteamOS, or for that matter programs SteamOS arranges to run even though they were written for Windows, do.
So. Improving the software ecosystem for Android does not improve it for Linux, but improving the software ecosystem for SteamOS does.

How many people buying a Steam Deck but have never used Linux are going to bother trying to install Linux on their desktop based on their experience with the Steam Deck? My guess is very few because it's a console that does everything it can to hide the operating system from the average user (although it does give "power users" more freedom than a typical console).

I tend to agree with this sentiment. Yes a few may try out Linux from their Steam Deck experience, and even fewer will stick with it. I worry It may even have the opposite effect. The default deck experience is highly currated, polished and very nice. Half of those advanced options we've seen demo'd on this site and others, I don't know how to do on my desktop without looking it up. People trying Linux for the first, expecting a Deck like experience, might be highly disappointed (why won't Steam update my system?!? Packages?!? Command line!?!? 🤪)

The nice thing is that most main line distros are highly polished, and some come with Steam. If that's all you want, that's cool, but then there's no reason to move away from SteamOS (when released, ofc). I hope it causes more people to be interested in Linux, but I'm not expecting it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments