you’re missing some context in that.

“The sale of a product… which is patently offensive and lacks serious artistic value… (such as… images of… Nonconsensual mutilation of a person or body part”

insert joke about COD lacking artistic value, but clearly there is more to COD than just body mutilation.

it also says they tested it for two years in singapore and was still white. i’m guessing if they didn’t get mold in that time it’s probably not an issue.

It makes zero sense to bring back extinct species who have zero chance of surviving the current and future environment.

I agree that’s a horrible idea but I doin’t think anyone is actually proposing that.

For me the question is, is there enough scientific value to be gained by “de-extincting” these ancient creatures to justify keeping them in a controlled environment for study.

edit:

never mind, i was wrong.

https://colossal.com/mammoth/

Colossal’s landmark de-extinction project will be the resurrection of the woolly mammoth - or more specifically a cold-resistant elephant with all of the core biological traits of the woolly mammoth. It will walk like a woolly mammoth, look like one, sound like one, but most importantly it will be able to inhabit the same ecosystem previously abandoned by the mammoth’s extinction.

in this case, the specific action gives the entity an unfair advantage in the global market. Epic (with help from tencent) is suing US companies for antitrust laws, but tencent benefits from exactly that with stores like Steam and Google play outright banned in china. They have the entire chinese market to themselves and use the profit from that to push out further into the global market by doing stuff exactly like this.

Epic is ~40% owned by Tencent which is a chinese company that directly benefits from Chinese Governement sponsored monopolies. China legally banned US based stores like Steam and Google Play.

Epic is not here to do you favors, they are here to push Tencent and China’s global agenda.

depends how much chinese influence you want in the gaming market. They are already the biggest gaming company in the world.

It’s also a bit hypotritical for chinese companies to be suing US companies for antitrust laws when the Chinese government outright bans app stores like Steam and Google Play in their own country. They get to have their cake and eat it too, then use all the money they make in china to push out further into the world economy.

That’s the nice thing about having more contraceptive options on the market, you are more likely to find an option with minimal side effects for you and/or your partner.

it’s also bankrolled by Tencent.

of course nothing is 100% effective, not even condoms. consider each an additional layer of security.

more options are always good for edge cases.

1. some women can’t take birth control pills, and the other birth control options have downsides as well.

2. nothing is 100% effective, so if you want to be even more sure that you won’t make babies, both pertners being sterlized is extra security.

3. some men would like to be sterile but are hesitant to have a vasectomy done. They are generally simple but they don’t always go well.

4. for younger single men in casual encounters, you can never be sure of the other’s birth control status. I’m sure there are men who would like the option to be in control of their sperm.

agree to disagree i guess. i don’t find base games to be any less feature complete than they ever were. they fact that DLCs are sold on top of the base game does not change that.

which is a disingenuous way of framing the issue. if you’re including DLC you’re also getting much more content than old $60 games.

do you not agree most games ARE feature rich in the first place? I mean compared to old $60 games.

well DLC has always cost money on top of the base game so i’m not sure what your point is.

edit:

you’re ignoring that if you buy all DLCs you get much more content compared to old $60 games. If you want to look at this fairly you need to come up with some way of quantifying the content involved which is not easy to do.

I do agree that some DLCs are clearly designed as money grabs (like most premium/gold launch editions). But i disagree with lumping all DLC into that category, especially bigger expansions that release a year or more later.

of course it’s not unique but they take it to an extreme.

And, what makes the debate difficult with them is that they’ve always viewed adult content as a “risky” subject - due to higher frequency of support cases, chargebacks, general frustration, etc. As such, some processor that sell their service to adult businesses may charge higher rates - rates that stores like Steam or Itch are probably less willing to pay for 90% of their library.

but game platforms are clearly not your typical “adult business”. there are payment issues with adult businesses because they use shady billing practices like dark patterns, automatic renewals after a “free” trial, etc. I don’t know of any popular game platform that is anywhere close to that shady.

what is “ultimate” about it? it never got any DLC did it?

then it sounds like you don’t need to be subscribed to the science community where we talk about, you know, science.

agreed, unless the expense gets into the realm of ridiculous like competitive swimsuits did for a time. then either only the wealthy clubs/athletes have access to the equipment, or everyone does and it’s just an unnecessary expense on the sport. there would have to be health and safety benefits to justify it.

so just like pretty much anything you eat then.