I think the point of the island is to show that when you have limited space, residential density really matters. Even if you took away all the concrete, spacing, etc between houses in this example and just out 100 ranch style homes in a corner with no spacing in between them, it would leave room for significantly less nature.

Your neighborhood sounds beautiful, and that's great, but that ratio between nature and residents is probably being achieved with more land than if high density residential housing was in place.

How active is your local Lemmy community? Mines is pretty dead but voting for the specifics you call for is still mentioned.

Of course people aren't going to be discussing the specifics of local races in the general politics community. It's entirely disingenuous to argue that's an indicator that nobody cares about local races.

Except one side is pushing for ranked choice voting, which would actually significantly aid third parties.

On top of that, I'd say there's some nuance - nationally, you'll see Democrats reasoning with Republicans, targeting the non-maga conservatives.

However here on Lemmy, there are very few conservatives as well as a disproportionate number of third party folks, so you'll see a lot more discussion centered around third parties.

If it's easier to reason with third party voters than trump voters, it seems like the logical thing to do.

EDIT: also worth pointing out the difference between "attacking" trump voters as individuals, because they have proven themselves to truly be deplorable, and "attacking" third party voting as a decision.

What? Nobody said it's not ok for RT to do that with Russia lol. If you read all the comments here everyone is saying that's expected.

I only see selfishness because you obviously get butthurt over hackers.

You're projecting a lot of the preferences and priorities onto me when I've shown that steam has chosen to operate this way for nearly a decade. It's not what I want - it's what steam wants.

Steams job is to provide people with a good gaming experience, my guess is that hackers ruin that for others so they don't like it and prioritize banning hackers.

Go do some research before claiming such things. It has been a thing for many many years.

So that's the thing... The bans have also worked this way for that long, which further solidifies the idea that valve prioritizes banning hackers over being forgiving of cheating relatives...

Most people getting VAC bans are the stupid ones trying out free hacks.

Are the ones using free hacks not hackers? Seems like bans on them for hacking makes sense.

You keep asking for my solution, but my solutions are so obvious it would take a stupid person to not think of them. Hey here's one: "investigate the main accounts manually". I thought such ideas would not require a triple digit IQ to be considered obvious.

I'm going to propose that this would probably take an infeasible number of hours when you scale it up to the full customer base for steam, which looks like 132 million monthly active users.. Otherwise, like you said, it's so obvious, what else would prevent them from thinking of it and implementing it?

They already had family sharing where a ban upon the main account could have been contested. You could at least ask them to consider the age or stupidity of the person or family member using your library.

Hmm, I might be misunderstanding what you're saying, but it doesn't seem like the case. If a borrower got the main account banned, it was up to the borrower to successfully appeal.

EDIT: here's a proposed change that I like. It's better than a blanket "you get 1 excused VAC ban", because with that solution what happens when you have two unruly teenagers? n+1, children, for that matter. However this would still potentially double the amount of hackers, since they could get their first strike for free before truly losing access to the game, so it really falls to how much steam wants to weigh keeping hackers out of games vs allowing folks to share libraries.

Nor do I even have to be the one to come up with a plan.

People that just complain without a better improvement in mind didn't actually care to change anything, because they've haven't shown that there's a reasonable alternative. Those people don't care if there's a practical alternative, they're just upset that it doesn't meet their specific needs. They just want to "speak to the manager" and complain. "It's not my job to fix it! Fix it!". If that's quote captures your stance, just lmk and it will save us both some time.

I actually even already gave a simple plan and you ignored it.

I didn't ignore it, I asked how it would deal with a fundamental enforcement of rules that steam has always done and you've ignored that, lol. Are you here to just complain or do you actually want to see if there's a better way forward? What's a feasible alternative to handle hackers and provide quality of life improvements like family sharing?

Your arguments that hackers are more important than a parent with a kid are selfish and stupid.

I'd argue that hackers are more important to valve because they implemented VAC bans almost 20 years ago. They just now announced a family sharing feature and you're pretending that steam was meant to be designed around the family to start, which is an uphill battle to argue.

And force Valve to ruin it for the rest of us.

First of all, it's already implemented this way. You're the one arguing for an alternative that could increase the number of hackers - if anyone is trying to force valve to ruin it "for the rest of us", it's you, since you're arguing to change the status quo.

Finally, don't want valve to "ruin" it for you? Don't use the brand new opt in feature. You have lost absolutely nothing - nothing has been "ruined".

A well thought out and conveyed response to the concern about hackers. Valve should implement your plan pronto.

Introduction to physics professors everywhere are salivating.

The spicy potato tacos are my sleeper taco bell hit.

I did recently have the Baja blast gelato and it was super disappointing - basically a diluted slushie that's frozen, no gelato/sorbet texture at all.

The sauce is 10/10

Childcare is a massive one that needs government funding. You can pay 1.5k per child and given that many places do 1 teacher to 3 infants, the literal max that one teacher can make, if every penny went to the teacher, is 4.5k/month, or 54k/year. This does not include facilities, utilities, administration, taxes etc. we all know in reality the teacher salary is much, much less.

In order to fairly compensate childcare staff, rates in reality need to be much higher. The problem is that severely limits access to childcare, which has a cooling effect on parents advancing their careers, because many will not have a choice between being a stay at home parent or working.

Therefore the government supplementing the costs is a much-needed solution.

So your proposed solution would let hackers make indefinite new accounts and add them as family. Do you see a problem with that?

If not, I hope you're done talking to me, lol.

Valve could have just banned the account that was actually cheating, send a mail to the owner, and let them disable the sharing. Punish after.

So what if a hacker just makes a new account, and adds that to the family and continues ruining the experience of others?

Humor me here.

My assumption is that steams main goal is to provide paying users with good service by minimizing hackers, and second to that, provide QOL features like family share.

Do you agree with that assumption? If not, what do you think the priorities are?

If you do agree with the assumption, what would you have done differently to accommodate both those priorities and your complaint?

It's much easier to bag on an idea than it is to come up with one, isn't it?

Do you have any proposals that you think would be better?

Yeah I hope you lose a ton of shit because you put trust in your kid, tell them to not cheat, and they cheat regardless.

And I hope your child is trusted enough to drive at some point, because you invested the time and effort to trust them behind the wheel.

I've had my steam account forever, so I might be overlooking something I did early on and forgot about, But I think the problem with anything along the lines of what you're proposing is that they don't have the time or ability to confirm that each steam account does belong to a different individual. This would either result in super intrusive amounts of data collecting, or risk someone saying "oops, look at that, my 15th child just got banned for hacking!" And then adding yet another "family member"?

Where do you draw the line in the above scenario? At least the current policy is clear.

And the penalty is losing access to a fucking game, not the death of other people.

Teenage driving proves that they can learn to be responsible enough to be trusted with the lives of others. You're saying they can't learn to be responsible enough with your CS skins?