I liked it. Unfortunately aside from valve, no serious studio has put any resources into making a good vr game.
Sitting games could be big on vr. Flight/space sims could be awesome.
A few times as a kid I had to take a taxi alone. I knew the way home, but the driver decided to make a lot of unnecessary turns and go this round about way to run up the fair. I was probably in 3rd grade and knew what he was doing but didn't have the guts to call him out.
I hope so too, that has to be a very difficult situation for working parents to navigate.
employers are permitted to require staff to work up to two unpaid hours per day for a limited period in return for more free time.
Wow.
Am I thinking of that game with the awesome scope mechanics? That game has PVE modes?
Sure, I replied to another comment here.
Equality and equity are different, as it has been defined by various movements in the US. This definition has been adopted in mainstream usage for a while now. I'm surprised by your question, I feel this would be common knowledge to most people in western societies by this point. But I'm happy to answer if you are asking in good faith.
Equality is sort of the color-blind approach to treating people equally, with little to no regard for their race. It looks at their individual circumstances, not making broad assumptions based on their racial background. For the record, color blind doesn't mean we dont seek to identify and correct racial issues, it just means we typically do so without creating race specific policies and instead apply the policies to everyone. My deep appreciation of equality as a fundamental principal is why I oppose equity and the strategic equivocation with which it is used.
Equity is contrasted to that by putting race front and center, and often above all else when making decisions on resource allocation. It's how we get policies that broadly focus on racial groups. It's not always advertised but equity is opposed to equality, so that specific races can be selected to receive benefits, or excluded from receiving benefits.
Speaking to the movement more broadly, In order to justify equity, anything that can be measured through the lens of race will be(deconstruction) and any difference in outcome will be flagged as racism, but only if white people are on the advantagous side.
Why is this bad? Don't POCs need help?
They often do, but our racial based policies to correct them are often counterproductive, discriminatory, or even harmful. Our need based programs already disproportionately benefit them, and will continue to do so more if we bolster them. Here's some quick examples of equitable efforts, just to give you an idea of how it manifests. These are extremely condensed, but I could pull links later if you want them.
- Misguided attempt to remove sat scores from college admissions because of claims it's inequitable.
- Despite overwhelming evidence that helmets save lives, helmet laws were cut because some demographics didn't wear them as often.
- College students giving free covid masks to minorities but saying white people must pay.
- There was an attempt to create a math framework that attempts to deconstruct mathematics into a racist construct.
- When a professor did a comprehensive study of police violence and found no disparity in some aspects of policing, he was advised not to publish the results.
The pursuit of "equity" is a tribalistic and often racist effort that rebuilds and reinforces the systemic racism we've been trying to dismantle for decades.
Your comment speaks to high level concepts but you didn't provide an the example to ground it to reality.
Like others have mentioned they aren't seeing these examples of core issues having impacts on their day to day lives/communities. I'm not either. When it comes down to it, laws written to apply to everyone are generally enforced for everyone.
Catching violent perpetrators pretty much always takes priority over non-violent theft. When we see acts of violence get immediate police attention it feels like the image you are trying to portay is inaccurate.
I Googled some extremely invasive weed(creeping buttercup) and Google suggested to let it be, quoting some awful reddit comment.
Seems like the delight dobby portrayed when he was freed would put that argument to rest.
Don't disagree but surely it's not impossible to add some regulations to protect the consumers here.
We have always subsidized having kids over those who don't. And honestly its the best use of our tax dollars. What do you think school is? Also, parents pay taxes before and after they raise children.
No issues?
You guys must be doing it way better over there. Over the course of many years, 12,000 children have been sexually abused in some way while in the boy scouts of America program.
That was my issue with old school SymForums. I don't see that so much on reddit.