Gomes then sued, alleging absentee ballot mishandling and supplying video footage showcasing Geter-Pataky, a member of the Democratic Town Committee, repeatedly dropping absentee ballots into drop boxes or handing them to others, who then did the same.

If I’m interpreting this correctly, it sounds like a couple of election officials just put absentee ballots in with regular ballots instead of… I assume they should have been set aside for vetting? The article doesn’t say what should have happened. The article doesn’t really go into the impact- seems like they just really, REALLY wanted to print a headline about Democrats meddling in the elections process.

When I think of “stuffing” I think of people creating wholly illegitimate ballots, which does not seem to be what happened here.

Also worth noting that this was for the Democratic primary for a mayoral position in 2019, and some of that info probably should have been in the headline.

I actually think it’s worse for Meta to take a loss on hardware. That tells me that they are expecting to make that money back and then some elsewhere. It’s possible that they are just hoping to make that money back through software sales (similar to Sony), but I just have a hard time trusting the company. The “Meta” name is such a turnoff that I don’t want a piece of their hardware in my house, let alone on my network, so I haven’t even looked at their offerings.

Also, I disagree with the notion that “for a budget rig somethings got to give”. The answers for a “budget” rig are… Nintendo Labo. The AR games with the 3DS. The various ways of strapping a smart phone to one’s face. Things that the VR community scoffs at, but the average consumer is much more likely to purchase.

I think the “budget” option is to just… Not use VR. For me, the adapter isn’t a huge deal. They just cut the price by $100 earlier this year. The Horizon bundle, plus an adapter, comes out to $560. The Valve Index can vary based on the setup, but I figure that’ll be at least $1k. The HTC Vive products seems way more focused on business than gaming, and all of their headsets are >$1k anyways.

So for me I have 3 options: wait for Valve or HTC to make more value-oriented products, get the PSVR2, or just not do VR. And I’m perfectly at peace with just abstaining from VR- I certainly don’t regret that I didn’t buy a 3DTV for example. But this PC adapter has suddenly made the PSVR2 an option where it previously was not one.

In this entire article, not even a single attempt to quantity the number of complaints.

This sounds to me like an extremely small minority. It appears as though Fallout 4 has sold over 25 million copies, and there’s… Maybe a couple dozen people on the Internet complaining?

There’s just no pleasing some people I suppose

For me personally, I dislike Meta strongly enough that the Quest was never an option.

I already had a PS5 and have a couple of digital VR games Sony have away a while back, plus there’s a few more I have been interested in. But until now the library was so restrictive that I could not justify the price tag for a PSVR2.

The only other option I considered was the Valve Index. I like Valve a lot and I’m sure it’s great, but at this point it’s 5 years old and would be 2x the price of the PSVR2. Not being comparable with the PS5 for those couple of free games plus exclusives in interested in like Horizon is a minor setback as well, although it’s not a huge deal and Horizon might come to Steam anyways. Also I would have to upgrade my PC a couple years earlier than I would otherwise- my RX580 is mostly fine now, but I don’t think it could handle VR.

Couch gaming.

I’m a technical person and I’ve tried a lot of different methods to do couch gaming with a PC. From having some sort of lap tray to various wireless mice and keyboard solutions. I’ve currently landed on having my gaming desktop just stream with Steam Link to my living room. As long as I’m selective about which games I want to play, I can usually get a good experience. But I still have at least 60% of my steam library that isn’t a good experience doing that.

Having a dedicated piece of hardware with a custom OS that is designed around a controller is a huge difference maker. Plus you add in how ridiculously expensive it is to get either a USB external optical drive or internal SATA drive to watch DVDs and Blu-Rays. Heck, even just watching Netflix or YouTube in the living room is easier on PS5 than a media PC for the average user.

There’s a reason Valve tried to make the Steam Machine.

Why is this story suddenly getting posted to dozens of communities that in seeing in my feed?

It’s one 73 year old tribal elder who complained that today’s youth don’t respect tradition. This same story has been pre-printed for thousands of years.

I keep scrolling through all and seeing this re-posted over and over again, so to save anyone else the trouble- the NY Times interviewed one 73 year- old tribe elder who complained about the youth not following traditions.

I think we’re done here.

Elders like Tsainama Marubo, 73, observe a decline in traditional activities and increasing cultural division.

Where have I heard that before??

Lol a good chunk of those “breaches and hacks” are either unrelated to PlayStation (Sony Pictures being the most notable) or had no impact to users.

I don’t care if they leak their source code for games or if their social media account gets socially-engineered. Even an outage from a DDOS isjust a minor inconvenience. According to the source you posted, they haven’t had any issues leaking PlayStation user data since 2011, over a decade ago.

Security concerns are valid for everything you do on the Internet of course, but are you bringing that same energy to Valve for the security issues Steam has had over the years too? The 2023 issue with dev accounts getting hacked to inject malware. The 2020 issue with the “Steam Sockets” library. They had their own data breach similar to Sony’s in 2011.

It’s funny to me because tons of PC-exclusive games also require accounts on Steam and no one cares.

The requirement is dumb, but the attention is also disproportionate because of console war fandom.

It released too late and was way too expensive.

I say this as someone who grew up in that time period and has fond nostalgia: it has one of the worst libraries of any console. Depending on how you count (the different regions, the 64DD, what counts as a “game”, etc) there were 200-300 N64 games. That may seem like a pretty big difference between 200 and 300, but in comparison the PS1 had, on a conservative count, 4,100 games. If you want to say only 10% of PS1 games we’re good that’s still more good games than the N64 had games.

There are a handful of titles that will be remembered as some of the greatest games of all time. The two Zelda games, Super Smash Bros, Mario Party, Mario Kart, Paper Mario. Personally I like the Pokemon games too. But the list falls off pretty hard after that.

I love 3D platformers and collect-a-thons, but I could never get into Mario 64, Banjo Kazooie, or Donkey Kong 64. They all feel rudimentary to me, similar to Jumping Flash on the PS1. Maybe it’s because the N64’s joystick was so uncomfortable and loose. Crash Bandicoot 1 came out in the US before Mario 64 did, and in my opinion it was more fun, looks better, sounds better, and holds up better today. And then there were two more Crash games, plus the Spyro trilogy which I consider even better.

There are “cult classics” for the N64 that I think are only remembered like that because of the lack of other options. Blast Corps for example is a unique and creative little game. It’s fun to play for a bit, but was that experience really worth the price of a whole game? It almost feels like it could have been a side mode in something like Twisted Metal.

There’s so many games it didn’t have. Metal Gear Solid, Castlevania, and Final Fantasy are perhaps the most famous. Even a lot of games it did have were much worse- Resident Evil 2 and the Tony Hawk series are big examples where the cheap storage of the PS1 was clearly better. I remember I had a mediocre PS1 game called Battletanx that was pretty fun. Later on in high school my friend had a modded Xbox that emulated N64 games and I recognized that title, so we played through the co-op. It was still fun, but the textures were mostly replaced with flat colors and it was hard to see what was going on. I thought there may have been an issue with the emulation, or maybe the ROM was for some beta build or a hacked version, but… No, that’s just how it looked on the N64.

I didn’t mind the 3-prong controller. Honestly just having handles was already an upgrade over the SNES and Genesis. But the controller itself feels so cheap. The buttons all rattle around loosely and feel mushy and unsatisfying to press. The joystick is hard plastic, too tall, and flaccid. The plastic itself is a downgrade compared to its predecessors and to the Dualshock and even Saturn controller.

I still have my N64 and the handful of games I got for it. It had some of the highest highs of any console, but little else.

That was explaining the delayed releases for PC, not saying they would never come to PC.

In this example Ragnarok came out in 2022, so there probably isn’t much meat left on the PS5 bone with this one.

Economists are pretty famous for fighting amongst themselves. The vast majority of economists don’t agree on anything with each other.

The loudest economists tend to agree with each other. The ones whose views and supported policies happen to result in more wealth being funneled to capital holders. For some reason those people are the ones who get interviews on TV and articles published by major outlets. I wonder why that could be?

I’m not saying every “indie” economist on the Internet is valid as there’s plenty of bad ones too. But the idea that deflation is terrible certainly deserves scrutiny. Just look around… Is the populace happy with the results of the current systems and policies?

To quote one of the most famous economists, Hayek, “The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design”

How many people can afford to keep their money under a mattress though? According to studies last year, 57% of Americans could not afford a $1,000 expense.

Why is saving such a bad thing? There’s so many articles about how people aren’t saving enough for retirement (especially with pensions disappearing as a concept over the last several decades). I know it’s been a couple of decades, but just a couple generations ago consumers used to actually benefit from the interest on their savings. My mom likes to talk about how she used Certificates of Deposit to slowly get low-risk, passive income that exceeded the rate of inflation and her mortgage rate and helped to pay off her house. I check every few years and even now CD’s just aren’t worth bothering with because the rates are so low.

“Savings lowers spending, that’s the paradox of thrift. Keep that money in your pocket and the growth will never lift” has some truth to it, but why do we need to perpetually grow on a planet constrained with finite resources? When will our hunger be satisfied?

A lack of savings creates more volatile markets and a worse quality if life for everyone because of it. Toyota famously led the way with their “just in time” business model- reducing inventory down to the absolute bare minimum to operate (savings is not just limited to money). Pretty much every manufacturer in every industry followed suit. Toyota learned it was a bad idea when Japan was hit by an earthquake and they struggled to get parts to make cars- they then reversed course and kept a modest supply of parts on-hand. Most other companies saw this during Covid when “logistical issues” (really the greed of these businesses leading to inadequate insulation from supply chain disruption) led to shortages of almost every consumer good.

Economists seem to forget sometimes that money needs to be used for things other than passively making more money.

That’s a gross oversimplification of consumer behavior. Consumers react differently to market changes for different types of goods.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2015/fed-funds-rate-historical-chart

Only compared to recent prior rates. The full picture is that rates are final normalizing after being held absurdity low.

Cool story. Not sure how it’s relevant.

I would disagree with you on the pedantry. There would be two separate transactions: a buy buys the property from the seller, and the borrower borrows from the lender.

The property is treated as collateral, but the buyer/lender is the owner of the property. Mortgages are a bit special different from most common consumer debt because of the timing- the transactions need to be simultaneous because you need to have the collateral to get the money, and you need the money to get the property, but afterwards you still have ownership of the property.

Whether it’s a mortgage, a car, putting a latte on your credit card, or a multi-billion dollar corporate acquisition it’s the same.

That aside, the rest of your comment I agree is good advice to consider, but it’s just part of the equation. You’re assuming the mortgage is actioned as plan throughout it’s lifetime. However, the borrower has options. They might want to pay early and will save a lot of interest that way (maybe more than just interest if they have PMI). There’s also the option to refinance out of a higher rate later on.

Also… You’re comparing two different things by asking if a house listed for $300,000 is worth $700,000. In order to do a fair comparison, you need to do the same calculation for every house you consider and for the entire market you’re basing your expectations around. The only houses worth $300,000 when you factor in the interest of a 30 year mortgage would be a fraction of that cost. Or if you’re comparing to the alternative of not buying, then what you really need to compare is the cost of renting vs the interest you expect to save in whatever period you expect to defer buying for.

Except even then you can plan to refinance. There’s tradeoffs- it’s a pain and you have to pay additional costs, but if the rate is that much of a problem it’s usually worth it. Plus the additional history of a few years of mortgage will likely help your credit score.

And there’s even more context. You’re talking about buying today- my parents had immaculate credit and a huge down payment when they bought their house in the 80’s. Their interest rate was 15%. The US has had artificially low rates for decades, to the point where people are considering 6% and 7% to be “high”.

Rates will certainly impact who can or cannot afford to buy a home of course, but the only ones who are deferring purchasing at all for that reason are people viewing their home as a financial instrume that needs return on investment. If you need a home for shelter, a slightly higher rate is still a way better financial decision in the long-run than renting most of the time.