Progressives just follow the general vibes forward without thinking, they are mindless tools who want to go forward at any cost.

Do you realise how ridiculous your statement is once applied to another group? Change is constant. Adapting to it doesn’t mean people are without convictions. Furthermore, you are judging the destination (centric), regardless of the path taken to get there. You can end up a centrist by carefully weighing the teachings, convictions, and information multiple camps provide. Or you can end up a centrist by having no thought and refusing to take a side à la “the only way to win is not to play”.

You are also presenting a false dichotomy: either you have convictions and stick to them no matter what, or you have none and accept whatever argument happens to sway you to one extreme or the other. People are more complicated that “left right”, right-wrong, black-white,… The ability to weigh arguments, be open to comprimise, and thoughtfully consider new ideas isn’t a fault.

Do I have to belong to a group to defend them?

That by definition is not a centrist.

So what’s with the anti-centrist rhetoric?

I will attack you directly because I have no arguments. I want to revel in my defeatism.

Understood. Goodbye then.

Decisions are made by those who show up. If you don’t, you better have a lot of reach, because otherwise you’re giving up your decision making power. And if you did, I don’t want to hear a word of your moaning.

Not everybody lives in a two-party hell-hole. Being able to choose a little bit of A, B, and C is possible.

The “winner-take-all” nature means only the largest parties consistently win seats, marginalizing smaller groups. This structural advantage makes it difficult for new or minor parties to gain significant representation.

Independents are not a smaller group. They are 56% They are the bigger group and vote D or R because they have no other option. Independents can replace the D party.

The US isn’t a lost cause. Proportional representational is only made harder by people like you, who scream till they’re blue in the face that change is impossible while being surrounded by constant change.

So, there is no law against a third party. Got it.

The 56% which are independents can thus create their own party and win against either D and R.

You’d be right it they were 20%, or even 30% independent and split their votes between D and R. But with a majority, they can easily get past the post and make the changes they want. It just takes not giving up and crying “it’s impossible”.

Why isn’t it possible? Is there a law against it?

And yet the independents won’t create their own political party to finally bring about change for fear of being called “centrist”

Same goes for people who can “see the framerate”.

Is there a problem with crossposting or did @[email protected] paste the link into the URL submission box?

Don’t believe the ads. They are just trying to hype something that is too early for its time.

VR tech can, and it will, revolutionise gaming. It’s just a question of when. Headsets are too heavy and require wires which impedes movement. VR glasses are developed by big tech and are perfect for privacy invasions, plus their batteries don’t last anywhere near long enough.

Smartphones had already been invented nearly a decade before iPhones came out, but they were too early. The tech wasn’t ready. Look at where they are now. Solar panels were invented nearly a century ago but didn’t take off until then entire supply chain and manufacturing chain was built nearly 80 years later. The friggin helicopter was invented centuries ago and so were planes. You will find countless other examples.

Right now, we’re trying to make it possible to conceive children without any sex and to grow them in external wombs. This has been a quest for decades and we might not see it bear fruit for a few decades more.

Just because they have failed so far doesn’t mean they will always be failures. Every failure narrows the problem space to points of success.

OK, sure. If Valve bans you, how are you going to install your games?

I know that on GOG I can download the installer, back it up, share it with friends and family, and they can install it. Do the same with Steam.

And finally, Valve is a USAian company. GOG is European. That is pretty important.

How so? I’d expect getting people willing to publish their games there, regardless of the payment system, to be the problem.

What we need is an alternative store where opensource games can make money. That would change the business.

ps: You are already not buying games when you pay for them on Steam.

True, use GOG.

What? The land of the free? Whoever told you that is your enemy!

La Marseillaise, the French National Anthem.

We need another revolution against the rich. This song should be blasted in front of the houses of rich fucks and whenever they show up in public.