mozz

I get what you're saying, but:

1. It matches the content of the article exactly
2. People are either familiar with the sabaya controversy, in which case it's instantly obvious what is meant, or else they are unfamiliar, in which case it would be impossible to communicate any level of approximation of the full situation in 250 characters (and I think the headline is about as good as anything at communicating the rough sketch). A big whole point of the article is, the situation's more complex than can be communicated with quick phrases.
3. The article itself is a pretty deeply factual and nuanced take on an active controversy in the news, i.e. not just a waste of time oversold by the headline
4. I am forbidden by the sub rules from changing the title
5. It's not selling you fucking printer ink, it is news in a news sub
6. I would be pretty surprised if the phrasing of the headline is why they are downvoting -- I think it's being interpreted as some kind of Zionism or excuse for Israel's crimes, which is a pretty sensible assumption TBF, but in this case is wrong

That's a lot of crewed aircraft

Since you abandoned this line of conversation, I posted the article (in a non paywalled version) if you're interested in resurrecting it.

I am somewhat anticipating that me posting it will be interpreted as Zionism, so you may be in good company if you want to head over to the comments and start yelling at me that I am a bad person for being opposed to this particular type of rape, because of who the victims are.

Haha I had exactly the same result. I tried kaizo Mario and couldn't make it past the first 10-15 seconds.

This GDC talk about the level design for Celeste is a pretty fascinating look at how were the nuts and bolts of making it come out so polished + good

So, you don't feel like checking III(c)1 to verify your claim that the UN report pertains only to the festival? I am trying to make it easy for you to learn how to check your claims against sources, but you do not seem eager to develop your skills in this area.

I'm gonna quit being a sarcastic dickhead for a second to take this question seriously.

I already gave citations of evidence -- a link to the report with some criticisms of what the article was saying was literally my first comment here, and then after that, I responded to questions usually with page numbers or section citations or quotations (examples here, here, and here).

But that made absolutely no difference to how you reacted. You continued to make 100% wrong claims about what was in the report, and didn't react substantively to the demonstrations that what you were already saying were wrong.

As I said, I don't feel like simply continuing that cycle of me providing citations and you continuing to blandly argue wildly wrong things like this. I decided to try a different tactic of asking you about the citations, providing enough hints that you should easily be able to find them in the report you claim to have read. I'm actually pretty happy with it, since it breaks the cycle of "duck season" "rabbit season" "duck season" and so on, and throws it into sharp relief when you're pointedly ignoring some kind of evidence that disproves your case.

Honestly, I'm happy with the result so far. I think it's a lot more effective at highlighting the fact that you're not actually interested in looking up information, or checking these wild claims you're making against some kind of objective basis.

So. Are you sure you don't feel like looking in the table of contents of the link I sent you, and locating the specific section which might possibly contain the answer to your question? There is, really, only one entry that qualifies. It should be very easy.

Of course, you could also pretend that someone me sending you the link and telling you to look in the table of contents near the bottom of the first page and you will probably find the information you seek, represents me not giving you a citation. You can claim that. It is your right. I will not stop you.

Yeah. SM64 you could say was just a normal game, after the exercise in deliberate punishment that was a lot of the NES library.

I greatly enjoyed James and Mike Mondays showing Metroid; in part 2 around 9:00 in, you can see the part where the real NES begins to set in. It’s a kind of unapologetic unbalanced hardness you don’t really see in mainstream games anymore; now it’s like a niche phenomenon if the game is just deliberately un-fun in sections to help you build character.

Super Mario World

It had by far the best tech and it finally opened up the format to the real potential and then the actual gameplay was for the first time in the series basically just a guided walking tour of all these different areas you could visit and then you got handed a trophy. Pure crap

Super Mario 64 had somewhat the same problem although with somewhat of a challenge from time to time, and with the added excuse that they were breaking new ground on the format and so it made sense for the difficulty curve not to be perfectly tuned and polished. SMW had no such reasons

“Out of order” is not quite a strong enough reaction for “We found a woman who doesn’t look pregnant as far as I can tell so that means that her and all the other women definitely didn’t get raped, so stop worrying about it”

Yeah, I get that. I just poked around at it and it's free of a lot of the taint that I was thinking of; it seems fine. It was a long time ago when I last used it, so maybe it's changed since then, or I may have been getting some C++ things mixed up with it, and C++ is awful I think we can all agree.

But yeah, in whatever case I wasn't trying to say it's not good for building a career on.

I am familiar.

Not saying don't pay your bills with it; that part sounds great. I was just confused by this guy's enthusiasm for it, that's all.

APIs

enterprise environment

business logic

...

Must be why all those tech focused companies, Google and Facebook, Netflix, Amazon, IDK, whatever list you want to put together, rely so heavily on C# for all their core enterprise API functionality. (I actually found a list. I'm not saying that it's automatically that something being popular means it's good, but I think if C# had inherent advantages over other more modern solutions then it would be somewhat more heavily represented in top-tier production software systems.)

As far as I can tell, C# doesn't really have any real advantages over other more modern environments aside from a certain cachet of "enterprise" in some sectors which is often convincing to non-technical people, which I assume is what you're trying to invoke here. I think it's missing some strong advantages in those environments that something like Go would provide.

I have looked at enough Node.js code to know I don't prefer it for most of the projects I've been involved in

100% agree, I actually actively don't like Node for a few different reasons. I mentioned C# not having many advantages in my opinion; Node has some active disadvantages.

With C#, I can go into a large application using good practices and quickly navigate the code and be productive.

I mean I think mostly what you're saying here is that you're familiar with it, and it's suitable for large systems. Which, sure, I get that and it makes sense, but it's also not the only production language that someone can get familiar with, and at this point I think it's missing some important features as compared with some of its peers (easy concurrency handling, good portability, and massive availability of libraries being some I could pick out).

Like I say I'm not trying to tell you you're wrong for using it if you're happy with how it solves your problems and the codebases you can create in it. I'm just saying that may have less to do with its technical features as compared with other languages and more to do with some other factors instead.