Ah I see. Sorry, I really can’t be certain of anything here haha.

I honestly can’t tell what this is implying. Are you construing my thoughts/background? If so it’s very presumptuous.

Go be the one to start it then. You’re not exactly among the most proactive people on Lemmy.

No CDs big enough, sure. Most modern consoles (like PlayStation and Xbox) use Blu-ray as their disc type for physical copies of games. Those can hold up to 100 GB for PlayStation 5 in particular.

Regardless, even if the disc isn’t able to store enough data to hold any one game, it isn’t immediately a problem. For example, the physical copy for the PS4 version of Red Dead Redemption 2 came with two discs to hold all of the data. There are ways around any data capacity limitations more often than not for physical media.

The History channel? As in the channel that hosts and broadcasts “Ancient Aliens”? You’re not exactly helping your case here.

Additionally, you’re incorrect in your citing of the notion that all property in a communist state is communally owned. All private property is communally owned, but that only goes for anything falling into the category of productive assets used to generate profit and subsume labour. You’re by all means still entitled in such states to owning any personal property, i.e. various forms of entertainment, food, toiletries, housing, etc. The whole basis of your distinction pretty much falls apart through that correction alone.

For the sake of providing an external source, you can read further on socialist/communist ideas through this website, particularly the first two paragraphs which once again thoroughly deconstructs your false distinction of the aforementioned ideologies.

Where did you get this definition of socialism from? There’s no such thing as as socialism that allows for capitalist ownership of the means of production; if a socialist says it’s fine, they’re not a socialist.

As per Einstein himself (in his article entitled “Why Socialism?”):

In [a socialist economy], the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilised in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child.

As you can see, as the means of production are owned and maintained by society itself in a socialist economy, there would be no possibility for any aspiring capitalist to accrue those means for themselves, and thereby maximize their own profit. In theory they would just be another worker without any special economical advantage over anyone else.

It’s as the case is with everything for these parasites: if it loses them too much money or makes them too little, they avoid it like the plague. It’s cheaper upfront to just run it through an open system.

Multiple things can be true at once.

Yeah, it’s also straight-up unfinished. They really just desecrated Indigenous land and didn’t even have the consistency in their shitty behaviour to carry it out completely.

The current Idiot-in-chief adding his likeness to it would be like pissing on a shit cake.

It’s on a case-by-case basis of course so it wouldn’t be the same for everyone. But generally speaking, Linux isn’t user-friendly (though I’m not saying it isn’t at all) in the sense that everything is guaranteed to be compatible with it and work immediately, whether it be certain peripherals that require extra setup to work correctly or software that was never specifically made to work on Linux. I know that from experience, having had some head-scratcher moments when trying to run an obscure/older game or trying to get certain hardware to run on my Linux machine without it having had compatible firmware out of the box. And I wouldn’t even say that I’m all that unknowledgeable with this sort of thing.

I’m not trying to disparage Linux or anything, but it’s definitely not so black-and-white as it easily working well for everyone all the time. It’s never really accommodated for that unfortunately, especially since there’s no one universal Linux distro with all those sore points snuffed out. Until that’s the case I don’t think it would typically appeal to the average person who only games on the side.

The main appeal of consoles is that you can essentially just plug and play without having to worry too much about extra configuration. As much as I like Linux, it’s generally not a good alternative for console folks who just want to relax and play video games.

Maybe innocent people who aren’t as technically literate as you that also happen to be using Chrome don’t deserve for their rights to be infringed upon? If that’s an unpopular thought then so be it I suppose.

the simple fact of the matter is that reality corresponds much more with left-wing pronciples and viewpoints than it does right-wing principles and viewpoints.

I’m not quite as sure it can be said that any abstract ideas or viewpoints can be said to correspond with reality. There’s nothing to say that it’s the case for that as it is with the existence of gravity or the roundness of the Earth. It’d be just as valid for me to appeal to the divine right of royalty as a matter of fact and yet (hopefully) we all know how little weight that actually holds in any practical sense.

I suppose what I’m trying to say is that reality isn’t something that can be bound to any one idea or perspective. Reality for, say, a cow is going to be a hell of a lot different from reality for any human being, and neither perspective is any more or less valid than the other. The fact that Humanity is still bickering among itself about the “right” religion and the “right” ideology I believe is proof enough of the nonexistence of any one objective truth when it comes to the things we believe in.

Most importantly though if we presuppose reality to have a bias of any kind then we’re still falling into the pit of human hubris that we’ve fallen into time and again throughout human history, and without a doubt still are. The universe doesn’t have any obligation to adhere to any one of our beliefs, and so when we make absurd leaps in logic based on them we’re setting ourselves up for damage and suffering far outweighing that which was ever necessary. The Crusades, Manifest Destiny, the Great Chinese Famine, the Holocaust… they were all caused at least on a psychological level through blind faith and uncompromising adherence to inherently fallacious ideas. At best there’s nothing productive about those beliefs, and at worst you get something like what I listed above.

I’m inclined to reframe this adage as rationality having a left-wing bias, since, y’know, reality is inherently unbiased. I realize I’m being somewhat pedantic though.

Bitch-boy CEO whining about rival company that epitomizes everything he doesn’t have at every chance he gets, very typical behaviour just carry on

Ah, the chimpanzee method.

It really weirds me out that gratuitous violence as a response to societal injustice is so common on Lemmy, if not across Humanity as a whole. Like let’s say this back-to-basics style of justice comes about in modern society and all the relevant assholes are subjected to it. What then? At least, what would the violence even be in the name of? Retribution? How is that productive in any way?

I realize this is a pretty disproportionate response to a relatively banal comment, but I see sentiments such as this one (either intended as sarcasm or not) so often here that I’m essentially using this as a catch-all spot for my thoughts on it.

I’ll just end this tangent with a quote about this sort of thing from a guy way smarter than me (and I promise I’m not just trying to be pretentious it actually applies.)

Absolute freedom mocks at justice. Absolute justice denies freedom. To be fruitful, the two ideas must find their limits in each other. - My buddy Albert Camus

idk ask the internet, I’m just trying to be helpful

/gen means genuine, it’s a tone indicator. Another one you might see is /s for sarcastic or /j for joking