• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 2nd, 2023

help-circle
  • Weird to hear that. My only issue so far has been how hard it is to get movement speed on boots. Granted, I’m only just about to start Cruel, so my playtime is low compared to many, but I’m absolutely loving all the boss encounters, particularly with the dodge mechanics. And not needing to worry about socket numbers, colours, and links on gear.

    Maybe I should read what others are saying, but I have nothing significant to complain about so far, aside from move speed being a bit too slow.



  • I don’t want to simp for a corporation, but what is Valve doing that’s anticompetitive?

    Like, don’t they need to be doing something to limit competitors’ access to the market to be anticompetitive?

    Steam requires base price/same price parity for selling Steam keys, but they’re literally giving their services away to developers for free in those cases, so that’s pretty clearly not anticompetitive, right? And there’s no requirements that I’ve seen written anywhere that they require price parity for non-Steam-key sales.

    And, based on the massive numbers of bundles of games I’ve bought with Steam keys with total historical-low game prices below best-ever Steam sale prices, they pretty clearly don’t even enforce this rule strictly (it seems like so long as the total bundle price is in line with individual title sale prices, they’re fine, even if consumers get other games as well.)

    So I’m not sure what the basis for this suit is. Not saying it’s healthy for the market to have an effective monopoly in this space, but the reason Valve is maintaining its marketshare is because they’re consistently offering the best value to consumers compared to other storefronts, which isn’t illegal.

    /Insert “prove me wrong” meme











  • … he claims there is no point producing proof because they wouldn’t be believed.

    He also dismisses any evidence created by others as untrustworthy.

    What a load of shit. It’s up to the person making the claim to provide evidence. People have claimed the opposite, and backed it up with “low-quality” evidence. Refusing it would be pretty easy, if it were true; get someone independent to verify in a pre-funded, blind trial.

    The only reason not to do this is because they know their product reduces framerate frequently enough to be a problem.




    1. Yes. Many people budget the most they can afford in mortgage payments to identify how much to pay for a home. Lower interest rates -> lower mortgage payments per $100K -> more money they can offer for the house -> house prices go up.

    2. Not just “people”, either. Interest rates are the main cost of expanding business activity. Lower interest rates means it’s cheaper to start or expand a business.

    3. Yes. Borrowing $100K just became $500 cheaper for each year the loan is held. With interest compounding over time, this has a much bigger impact the longer the term of the loan (mortgages and business loans are the biggest and longest, generally).


  • I think the building restrictions parent poster was referring to are density restrictions.

    As an example, there are narrow strips of Toronto along major roads that allow skyscrapers, a lot of it a block away from single-family-home zoning. So all the demand for multi-unit housing bursts up in narrow corridors.

    If, instead, quad-plexes became universally allowed, and lot height limits were increased to 3 (or 4? idk) stories, then single-family homes could be torn down or renovated to make room for up to 4 families to live comfortably on the same land.

    Rosedale shouldn’t exist. Single-family homes a short walk from downtown Toronto is a big part of why people are commuting from Barrie.

    West Van is just as bad. Even small towns in desirable areas are seeing density restrictions causing a missing middle in housing.