PonyOfWar

The ones I've been playing on and off over the past few years are Guild Wars 2 and Lord of the Rings Online.

GW2 is a really nice game to just pick up and play without needing huge time investments. It has a fun gameplay loop and well designed zones to explore. Haven't gotten around to playing the new expansion yet, but I hear it's pretty good.

LOTRO is great for that traditional MMO experience. The community is very friendly and surprisingly active. It has a nice atmosphere. They are also frequently giving away the expansion packs, so you get a lot of content for free.

Well, we know who won in 2016. If we're back to those numbers, or maybe even below those numbers, that seems like a bit of a problem to me.

It's tough. A 2-party system where one party wants to end democracy feels like it's already not much of a democracy at all. I can understand the frustration of having to vote the mediocre technocrat as "the lesser evil" each election. On the other hand, the prospect of a second Trump presidency is horrifying and would be a disaster for far more countries than just the US, so I'd still vote for Biden every time if I could.

The problem won't be people voting for republicans instead of Biden, but people choosing not to vote.

Denke das kann man aber auch nicht so verallgemeinern. Meine Stadt wäre das Gegenbeispiel. Da hat Ditib vor ein paar Jahren eine sehr schicke Moschee im semi-traditionellen Stil direkt am Park bauen lassen. Synagoge gibt's nicht.

Dazu kommt noch, dass wir alle keine Klimabewegungen, sondern Klimagerechtigkeitsbewegungen sind. Das Klima selbst kann uns ja völlig egal sein.

Verstehe ich nicht. Wie kann euch für Klimagerechtigkeit "das Klima völlig egal sein"? Eine Klimabewegung ohne Gerechtigkeit existiert nicht aber eine Klimabewegung ohne Klima?

a) mensch sich nicht zu diesem Thema öffentlich äußern kann, b) ich als Klimaaktivist nur noch Klima machen kann und zu gewissen Themen deshalb öffentlich die Fresse halten muss

Ich denke hier muss man differenzieren zwischen Meinungsäußerungen von individuellen Mitgliedern und Statements über öffentliche Kanäle der Organisation, die dann schnell als "offizielle Meinung" empfunden werden. Man sollte sich bei solchen Statements überlegen, ob diese den Zielen der Organisation nützen oder ihnen schaden. Meiner Meinung nach war hier definitiv letzteres der Fall.

I enjoy them, but only when they are well made and use the 3d to add proper depths to shots. Too many 3d movies tried to rely on cheap "object comes out of screen" tricks that get old very fast.

True. But you know the movie is bad when it can't even do mediocre derivative fantasy justice.

Probably the Eragon movie. Watched that one in the cinema as a kid. A terrible adaptation that doesn't do the source material justice in any way.

That's what he wrote in his second paragraph and it's a fair point. In his third paragraph (the one I quoted) he claims that just having that functionality in webviews is already a "huge loss" though and I was curious what kind of scenario he was thinking of.

The option alone also now also allows people to build stuff that will only work in those WebViews, rejecting to work without the integrity check, which is already a huge loss.

Can you give a concrete example how this would be a huge issue? A webview is part of an app, which is already a closed system. If a developer wants to, they can already build their app using native UI with integrity checks. Now they can do the same when using webviews. It really has none of the implications it would have for browsers.