[–] 1 point 1 day ago

Well, I can't say for sure if they are counted for the score. They might be good for visibility, pad the numbers, but it can also backfire if they end up being negative. It likely helps the little guys, but does little for Sony types.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Russia is why he had access to those guns. They're a major threat and having a militia available in case of attack is preferable to having nothing. So any laws which might have curbed weapon possession lost importance with that in mind.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago* (2 children)

    Devs/Publishers set who gets to review. Steam gives them the option.

    I reviewed plenty family shared games, when they allowed it.

    Edit: I just noticed you didn't mention who. Your comment can refer to the publishers as well. My addendum was unnecessary.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 18 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    A texan city is about to run out of water completely. Dunno which one, but i remember seeing someone pointing out they've been in emergency mode since 2022-2023 and that hasn't been solved at all since.

  • source
  •  

    https://planetplay.com/campaign/unicef-playforeverychild-charity-bundle-2026/#collection

    First time I'm seeing this site. And posting this is more of a question: Do you know it?

    Its theoretical mission seems legitimate, but is it trustworthy in practice? A non-profit sending most if not all of its money to devs and climate activism. Would that even be sustainable?

    I guess I'm asking for opinions more than giving notice. Kinda hoping it's worth some publicity and isn't just another shady practice.

     

    https://planetplay.com/campaign/unicef-playforeverychild-charity-bundle-2026/#collection

    First time I'm seeing this site. And posting this is more of a question: Do you know it?

    Its theoretical mission seems legitimate, but is it trustworthy in practice? A non-profit sending most if not all of its money to devs and climate activism. Would that even be sustainable?

    I guess I'm asking for opinions more than giving notice. Kinda hoping it's worth some publicity and isn't just another shady practice.

    submitted 6 months ago by to c/piefed_meta@piefed.social
    :ok4: 3 🤳 2
     

    I'm on mobile and currently I am unaware if there's a way to see who reacted how without pressing on the emoji and adding myself as someone who reacted in the same way.

    Also, it doesn't seem to work like upvotes where you can press it again to remove it.

    And holding a long press brings up the list of reactors, but it remains on screen in a persistent fashion.

    Are these common issues for an average user or is the feature still in development?

     

    Pretty much the question. Is it different enough from regular crap to be missed or is the prevention working fine?

    A thread about grok allowing nonconsensual deep fakes for paying customers had me wondering whether we'll be flooded once more in the near future by waves of spam bots meant to disgust and create trouble. And I thought to ask whether we can prevent that kind of thing now or it's something to be dealt with as it goes.
    And no doubt that it will go.

    view more: next ›