I agree, but maybe it's time for a Linux based Nintendo DS / PSP sized device? I mean, Nintendo has abandoned these truly pocketable consoles. Maybe with a die shrink they could fit something 70% as performant as a deck into that form Factor?
I personally know a lot of people who miss the DS and don't game anymore now that the platform was dropped. Casual gamer types.
I just dump a liter of bleach in the upper deck and remove the seat. Nothing cleans you up better than a good swirl.
I might be mistaken, but these Intel based machines might be better for switch emulation, as they share dedicated hw for the particular form of texture decompression they use. One cool potential upside
It's really concerning how many comments are snidly dismissive or in some cases outright hostile to this particular peice of reporting.
Does Hamas deny that the hostages were kidnapped or mistreated? Are the circumstances of these particular people's capture suspect? Are thier experiences disputed?
I see no comments even attempting to say so. It reads as wantonly jingoistic.
"our fake history" is a pretty good match to what you're describing. It's a relatively light hearted, rigorously researched, history podcast with a focus on misunderstood historical figures and events.
"The plastic plesiosaur podcast" is a really fun podcast more focused on cryptids and pop science.
One of the host to plastic plesiosaur has a YouTube channel called "trey the explainer" which is worth a watch.
And if you like low key, entertaining deep dives into machining or tech, check out "technology connections," "this old Tony," and "tech moan."
Pregnant dinosaurs 🙏😊🌸
True! I personally feel that UBI would be the easiest pill for the West to swallow. It is totally compatible with capitalism, and addresses the most urgent needs of individuals.
I feel like a slightly more radical solution which is also compatible with capitalism would be laws requiring substantial stake in ownership in companies for workers. Proportional to the quality of employees and time worked. Meaning, that if you work 15 years at Amazon and get replaced by a robot, you see some passive income over time for the value you contributed. Likewise, the sale or liquidation of a company would see past workers getting some sort of payout.
People do lament poverty and the consolidation of wealth into owners through the displacement of the worker.
Just because we run swiftly in front of the whip of capitalism does not mean we should dismiss those who trip and fall. We should be angry that there is a whip at all.
I get what you are meaning to say, that secondary sexual characteristics dictate certain trends and limits. I agree.
However, what I find interesting is that historically, the bulk of manual labor was done by the lowest class cultures. It depends on the time and place, but indentured servants, slaves, and women of the household were expected to do most of the labor. These decisions were not made on the merits of absolute physical strength, but rather by ones social status.
In fact, the strongest men. Those with the most physical apitude and power, tended to enjoy leisure at the expense of these lower classes. Including thier women.
The idea that strong men make strong countries, or do the best work, is a myth. Typically, wealth is built by poor men, women, and subjugated social classes, and the mythical status of the strong man gender stereotype serves to justify this arrangement.
So yes, the strongest biological male human will probably always outlift the strongest biological female, but the actual outcomes of who does the work is decided by gender, and historically, the labor fell on the woman. See what I mean about gender being, "bad?"
I think a common misconception is that people will find new jobs. If I'm remembering correctly, studies on automation of furniture production found that displaced workers mostly just fell into poverty.
Certainly SOME people will find better jobs, but if it were simple and easy for people to find "high skill jobs" instead of thier warehouse work, they would have already done it.
But these traits are secondary and tertiary sexual characteristics (ie they are tied to your biological sex). They are certainly the origin of gender identity, but they don't justify it. My dissatisfaction is not with the concept of sex. It's fair to say, "oh that person has a penis, that person is a woman, that person is intersex," and we should strive to develop better, more diverse sexual classifies, but gender? Na.
Gender roles/ jobs, fem and masculine, the separation of media to cater towards one gender or the other, the gendering of clothes, attitudes, and opinions, and finally the gendering of sex. It's all just caveman talk, imo
Isn't this whole thing a bit performative? I mean, dogs aren't inherently more worthy of liberation from the meat market than any other farm animal.