Locks will only ever be a minor deterrent imo. The problem is that police in most places don't even try to go after bicycle thefts and the would be criminals know that.
If governments took bicycle theft as seriously as they did horse theft in the 19th century, then few criminals would even attempt to steal a bicycle if it had some basic protection like a cheap lock + a camera pointed at the bicycle rack.
It appears that in the future, Itch will allow creators to opt out of payment providers, meaning that it's probably on a per game basis, not per platform. That Itch and Steam are not making a per game solution now, is most likely because their current software doesn't allow it and they need time to rework it. Itch has promised various changes already, Steam has been mum afaik.
Source for Itch: "For NSFW pages, this will include a new step where creators must confirm that their content is allowable under the policies of the respective payment processors linked to their account.". https://itch.io/updates/update-on-nsfw-content
I only use Steam myself, so I hadn't checked Itch Io's communication yet. I don't know the platform myself so it's quite possible that I'm misinterpreting this, but to me it appears that Itch Io will allow creators to delist payment options that they are not compliant with: "For NSFW pages, this will include a new step where creators must confirm that their content is allowable under the policies of the respective payment processors linked to their account.".
Do you have a source of where they are saying that?
I have seen an article about the Australian political action group that was claiming credit for getting the games banned. The story behind the start of the controversy.
And I have seen an article about the communication from Steam that they were banning games which were in conflict with the rules of their payment providers. The result basically.
But I've only seen conjecture and speculation about what went on to get from the start to the result. I haven't seen any article that spelled out exactly what the different payment providers demanded from the gaming platforms, nor anything about what they discussed in between them.
Edit: after 12 hours there's 4 downvoters and 0 sources. Another victory for vibes over facts.
I don't get why the gaming platforms are removing games instead of removing the objecting payment providers as a payment option for purchasing those particular games.
If visa doesn't want people to purchase game X with Visa, then remove Visa as payment option for buying game X.
Your omissions and alterations are interesting.
The article doesn't just mention "a wreck", it says "In September 2022, Tyler flipped his father’s SUV while driving, leaving his passenger with multiple concussions and sever lacerations, according to reports." If Tyler was driving recklessly (and he was), then the passenger was the victim and the driver the perpetrator. If you're interested in hearing the story of the passenger: https://www.rawstory.com/lauren-boebert-car-crash/ The tldr: "If I did what he did, I'd still be in jail."
The "theft ring involving drug use" doesn't mention drugs in the article. And it being theft, means that there were victims of theft. Including apparently a broke woman with a brain tumor.
And also in the case of child abuse there was a victim (the child in case it isn't obvious).
I don't get how you can't recognize the victims in these stories.
In your example the daughter has committed no crimes and made no victims, and she could even be considered a victim herself. Tyler Boubert has already made many victims and will continue to make new victims because his mother's political clout is protecting him.
The morally right thing to do, would be to protect the victim(s) and bring the perpetrator(s) to justice. In the example of the daughter, the daughter is a victim and she and her family should get the time and space needed to heal. In Tyler Boebert's cases, Tyler was never the victim, but always a/the perpetrator, with his mother enabling him. With the Boebert family, the morally right thing to do, is to decrease the odds of Tyler making new victims, which gives journalists a moral imperative to consider every new crime of Tyler, to be news worthy.
If an adult family member of a significant political figure commits a crime, then there's 2 big reasons why that case deserves extra scrutiny: 1) to check whether or not the family member is treated in a fair manner by the persecution and justice system (which could go both ways, they could escape justice because of their family connections, but they could also be extra persecuted for political reasons). 2) To keep track of whether or not the political figure their integrity remains intact.
If Tyler Boebert's mother wasn't a prominent republican politician, would he have escaped a prison sentence for his litany of crimes? Personally, I doubt it. And because he keeps escaping consequences, he keeps doing stupid things.
That looks amazing. Does anyone know how this could have been done? I'm not asking for a friend, I'd just love to know.
The plane had wings that were level with the top of the body + with massive engines below them. Very distinctive feature. In the side drawing the wings are near the bottom + without engines. A lot of other errors could be explained by poor skills, distance, perspective, ... But drawing wings near the bottom when they were actually at the top, can't be explained by any of those practical reasons. And it makes the drawing useless for identifying the plane.
Decades after this drawing, it turned out that the CIA had been collecting loads of double agents in the eastern block, all deliberately feeding misinformation to the CIA.
HH alone is already a significant dog whistle. It's basically 88, but already one step closer to it's intended meaning. As dog whistle messages go, this one is very blatant. ~~I wonder what hidden symbolism they put in that image, there's bound to be more there.~~ NVM that last bit, it's a painting about white supremacy, but there probably won't be hidden fascist messages because the painting is older than fascism as a political movement.
Homeland Security was already sending out the occasional dog whistle during Trump's first term. Back then there was still doubt as to whether it was accidental or intentional, but now we know that the fascist take over of that organization started back then, which means that those old dog whistle messages were most likely intentional and an invite to other fascists to come join up. Which they did.
Which also explains how it was that ICE could immediately embrace the new status of being Trump's brown shirts, without any significant protest from inside the organization: unlike other government departments, they didn't need to do internal purges since the fascist take over was already complete at the start of Trump's 2nd term. This should be a warning to other countries where politicians are considering of giving fascists even one iota of power.
In my region, it seems that expensive stolen bikes mostly go to eastern Europe, Ukraine and Romania in particular.