Thats wrong too. If you use an unmodified version of AGPL software, or just host any modifications in a public repository like github, then you aren't in violation of AGPL, even if the rest of your stack is proprietary and your service paid. How does it prevent SaaS?
The people forced another election, and elected his party MAS (movement towards socialism) more overwhelmingly then they elected Evo Morales in the election last year where he was couped.
On the other hand, MAS intends to exploit its lithium. It just plans to do that in a way that grows a high tech domestic industry instead of just exporting raw product. They also plan to keep the profits local to fund social programs and such, which rubs the neoliberal free market imperialists like American foreign policy goons the wrong way.
All the first world countries already despoiled and continue to despoil the resources of the world at an alarming rate. They owe a debt, and this is asking them to pay that debt to those who haven't done so.
There is room for many types, and when it comes to more traditional storytelling, games can create more direct emotional connections by making you the character, rather then the protagonist just being someone you watch.
But most games nowadays actively avoid that! They make you control Geralt or Solid Snake or Master Chief or whatever. You know, someone cooler than you could ever possibly be. They introduce third person cutscenes if the game isn't already 3rd person by default. You can't choose what to say or are very limited in what or how you say it. You pursue someone else's goals.
Half Life 1 is one of the few games that got it right, but does it have imitators? A silent protagonist is something to be ashamed of nowadays.
Silent protagonist games still exist. 'Prey' comes to mind (though an AI character speaks to you using your character's voice, and you can also hear your character speak on a few recordings you can find.
But in the tradition of HL, your character never utters anything while you are in their perspective, and there are no third person cutscenes.
Spoilers: the entity you are playing as is not actually the character it's presented as, so technically you never actually hear your character's voice.)
The new Doom games also have silent protagonists, but unfortunately have some third person cutscenes and are extreme examples of 'cooler than you'.
It’s obvious as a matter of academic theory to study society through racial lenses among other viewpoints. But that’s not what anyone is objecting to. (Critical race theory has been around for decades without much mainstream attention or opposition.)
> The acting dean of Northwestern University Law School began a diversity event by declaring, "I am James Speta and I am a racist." He was followed by Emily Mullin, executive director of major gifts, who said, "I am a racist and a gatekeeper of white supremacy. I will work to be better." These kind recitations are now expected of anyone claiming to oppose racism.
Talk like this would have been an unimaginable norms violation just ten years ago when I was at Northwestern. And it’s “obvious” to me that it’s a terrible idea to replace our existing social norms with ones that center race in all places and at all times, and provoke confrontation along racial lines. As a “person of color” I don’t view the world through the lens of “white supremacy” out to get me. I certainly don’t want my half white daughter to view the world and the white half of her family that way. (I would go so far as to say that such rhetoric in a school environment would amount to creation of a hostile environment bordering on abuse.)
Its one thing to study history, economics, and the law through those lenses. That can lend great and valuable insights. But it’s entirely different to single out individuals as “gatekeepers of white supremacy” so as to restructure interpersonal relationships at school or work along critical race theory lines.
And the opposition isn’t just coming from the “right” but also traditional liberals. Macron is, of course, a left-leaning liberal. My mom, a Muslim immigrant who has voted Democrat ever since she became a naturalized citizen, forwarded me Donald Trump’s order banning critical race theory-based training, with the note “he did a good thing, that was evil.”
Also, work to increase the democraticness of institutions in your country so that it may be changed in the future, and work to change people's thoughts on matters so they grow the will to change things.
The fact that the consequences are cleansed away makes it not remotely historical. You aren't playing a subset of history, you are playing a subset of propaganda.
Whats the point of setting it in a real war with real consequences if you are just going to erase all those realities? So many games seem set up so people can play war without consequences, but if you do that at least do it in a setting where you aren't insulting the real victims.
>>>Whats the point of setting it in a real war with real consequences if you are just going to erase all those realities?
Because these games are first and foremost a form of recreation? Certain things are abstracted because most people don't want to be bothered with them in their entertainment. Nobody would play wargames if they had to write a 5-paragraph operations order or FRAGO at the start of every turn either.
>>>but if you do that at least do it in a setting where you aren't insulting the real victims.
Short answer: ego. People want to think that, if given the opportunity, they would make better military decisions than the real-world leaders. "Yeah, Manstein won the Third Battle of Kharkov but I would have accomplished it with FAR fewer casualties." To exercise that, you need context and data that only comes from the accuracy of a real setting. Do you attack on the 19th of February, or a week later? How many kilometers is it to Kharkov? Do you want the culminating point of your attack to reach the objective with full lunar illumination, or none at all? What if there was one less Soviet mechanized corps due to an orders mixup? It's easy to cover all those different what-ifs by digging through the available historical records. To do that in a fake setting requires extremely laborious world-building that most people aren't willing to invest the time to execute.
Also, who says the "real victims" are insulted by sanitized wargames anyway? I know we have a large contingent of Eastern European members on HN, I'd love to hear their thoughts.
Monopolies (or even high concentrations) of power are bad, whether that's financial or legal or whatever. However, democratization can redistribute that power back amongst the people. The goal should be to work towards nearly even power, which prevents the abuses in power. If the government was controlled by the people, its "monopoly" wouldn't really be one, because it couldn't be abused by those who wield power within it.
