The canon is anything that appears in the games. There are clear timelines between many of the games, asserted within the game text or game subtext.
Producers have gone on record echoing what’s states in the HH, both before and after it was published.
Do not mistake the canon for something the producers and designers feel in any way bound by. That’s not what the term means when discussing media.
If it’s still 9 months away, there’s no real reason to announce it publicly before the Christmas season. The fact that the original Switch’s sales are flagging is not a reason to announce, since it’s not launching in time for the holidays. Its announcement isn’t going to spurr Switch 1 sales.
When it’s announces will be entirely deoendent on when retailers need to know launch details. Once it’s outside of Nintendo, they’ll have to announce things publicly or risk losing control over the narrative.
“The government needs to stop people from doing a capitalism, but it had better not stop anyone from doing a capitalism, that would be tyranny.”
It’s great for gaslighting people into thinking they don’t know what a bicycle looks like!
That creative endeavor: A 5e clone with Blades’ progress clocks slapped on top of it.
It’s not “widely misunderstood”, it’s been widely hyped by the people actively selling it. The tech bros are pumping and dumping it, just like with every other tech panacea.
It’s not the public, it’s the snake oil salesmen.
Ah, the dichotomy of Linux users:
“wHy DoEsN’t EvErYbOdY uSe LiNuX???”
and
“gEt On My LeVeL nOoB”
Musk <-------------------------------- LYs -----------------------------------> Self-Driving car
Any questions?
No, what they want is to be able to coax more money out of their sales numbers. Retention is correlated with future purchases, both of paid DLC (if the game has it) and of future studio titles.
And it’a an easy metric to point to when talking to a publisher and negotiating funding.
It’s something that should be publicised not because OpenAI has promised privacy, but because a lot of people seem to assume it where it has not been offered, and they need to be reminded that they’re kind of out to lunch on the issue.
Like, people in companies keep using these things to write reports with privileged information. People need to be informed as gently but alsonas firmly as possible that they’re sending this stuff over the internet to an organization that considers everything it can see to be its own.
Oh fun. Who is Elon going to just haphazardly drop the ISS on top of?
This way they can spend more time rearranging the store so nobody knows where anything is, in turn making us walk past a bunch of stuff we don’t need in an effort to try and induce an impulse purchase!
Efficiency!
Nothing pseudo about it. This is the natural progression of capitalism.
“Roll acrobatics, I guess.”
“Natural 20!”
"Ok… You contort your body in ways that no humanoid creature should be able to, and successfully fit inside the jar.
"Can I get everyone else to make a Wisdom saving throw, please?
"Uh huh. Uh huh. Uh huh.
“Ok, everybody else now thinks you’re a djinni.”
Ad soon as they go public, their product is their share price. And even before then, since most growing private companies seek out private investment long before going public.
Yeah, there’s plenty about how Mastodon frames itself and its features that are frustrating. That “easy mobility” requiring an 80 step process that involves downloading and re-uploading a bunch of files kind of anchors you for seeing how disconnected some developers are from the user expectations they set.
But does there?
This comes back to what federation and “the fediverse” is, and why trying to hide its nature is harming it.
No one expects their Facebook post history to follow them to Reddit, or to a forum, or to Lemmy, because they’re different websites. Just as no one expected their Twitter history to come with them to Mastodon.
But because it’s framed as “Mastodon” and not “social.website.com” the expectations are different.
Federation isn’t a mess, it’s just… messier. And too many federated services do their damnedest to hide that they function differently, meaning people treat them like they’re perfect drop-in replacements.
It results in a lot of questions about “Why can’t I ____?” and answers of the “Because this doesn’t work that way” variety.
Like, look at Mastodon. It bends over backwards to hide the fact that it’s 10,000 different websites. The result is that people could not understand what the big deal was, nor why it wasn’t as easy to see everything from some other website as easily as they could from a single website that everyone was using.
This further led to centralization of the Mastodon ecosystem, which… I mean, at that point, you’re just abandoning the central concept.
“Just use this thing that you’ve already rejected for X, Y, and Z.”
“Have they fixed X, Y, and Z yet?”
" Fuck you for asking."
I don’t know, this is starting to sound like a separate discussion with separate issues, and as a result it feels like goalpost moving.
The issue with women’s fantasy armour has long been that it exists for the Male Gaze, as a trope that is propagated by men for the purpose of titilizing men. It’s objectifying the female form, and doing so in a way that does not include women in the discussion at all.
The second image, instead of being a continuation of that, just feels like fashion, and complaints about it land as “no one has ever cared about aesthetics in a suit of armour” which is a totally false take and indefensible platform.