Doesn’t quite check those boxes, but it definitely sounds like a game that was based on Defend Your Castle, from back in the days of Flash games.

Ok, I genuinely might be reading this wrong and the other guy won’t communicate, so:

The way I read that is “we will have a button that’s there that you can click to activate an AI feature” (though it’s unclear if that’s actually what it’ll be like when finalised). And yeah, I’d rather that was an extension or something I’d go and toggle on if I wanted. That said, I also don’t consider that to be “on by default”.

And before anyone misunderstands more, I hate the addition of AI in everything and don’t think Firefox should do this. That’s not the point I’m arguing.

I mean it seems to me the opt-in part is when they say it will be opt-in by it potentially being a button on the toolbar. Though the dev acknowledges not everyone will see that as opt-in.

Source: https://mastodon.social/@firefoxwebdevs/115740500373677782

I can understand why people have issues with that, but let’s at least keep criticisms to what they’ve actually said?

Note the confidence that point was said with. What you say will not come to pass, as Elmo clearly has perfect knowledge of the future

Trust the all-knowing Elmo. He’s your friend, forever and always.

Nobody was proposing taking land from them though.

I mean just the Peel Commission on its own was abandoned because it would have required displacing a large number of Arabs. Palestine was 3% Jewish in 1917. You can see why a 20-80 split could be a problem.

Scepticism is a good thing but this information is just basic history and is freely available on Wikipedia and other sources.

I agree. My issue was with your original link. I mentioned the Balfour Declaration because it’s a pretty good starting point on Wikipedia that I had read myself.

memes on social media like the OP that present a totally made up version of history in order to promote a political agenda

To me, OP’s post reads as a political cartoon that captures sentiment at the current moment. Not to mention the part where Palestine wasn’t given/offered independent statehood during the creation of Israel, so in some ways that is true as well.

Also none of that really changes the fact that Palestine finally getting statehood when most of its land is lost and its people are victims of an ongoing genocide seems far too late. Whether the people who represented Palestine in the past shoulder some blame for not making concessions is an interesting conversation, but it doesn’t matter much for the message OP is conveying in my opinion.

But again, I’m no historian. I’m not even someone who has enough time to really research this and present a properly informed opinion. Just some random guy who thought your original link seemed pretty superficial and biased.

Well that’s kinda missing the context of the Balfour Declaration, especially within the larger historical framework of the First World War, the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire, and the Sykes-Picot Agreement.

That was pretty recent history for the first offer in your link. I’m not exactly surprised Palestinians wanted all their land back at the time.

Couple sources would also do that magazine a favour. Not that I’d trust it anyway with that tone of writing and being so brief about complex geopolitical history. At least include who did the rejection and with what reasoning.

I’m not going to pretend to be an expert on the topic and all. I just happened to come in here from c/all and thought I might learn something interesting from your link, but it really seems like it’s missing too much for that.

Agreed. As another commenter says, in Glasgow the football team might just matter, and considering how things go: fair enough.

But this specific case was actually not about who the candidate supported, that’s just what the judge brought up as an example. I’d say it wasn’t even about not drinking, that’s what the candidate alleged. But the ruling seems like it would apply to all of those cases as precedent anyway.

By law, technically, yes. But that’s the trick: you say you didn’t hire someone because you think they wouldn’t fit the team. In reality, it’s because of their religion or ethnicity or gender. Officially though, you say it’s because they wouldn’t join in for drinks on Friday. “I just didn’t vibe with them”.

Of course this has caveats. It’ll only be possible between two equally qualified candidates, but that can be subjective as well.

Also this specific candidate was not hired because the employer said they didn’t vibe with them. The football team is an example used by the judge. The not drinking and being introverted was used by the candidate. It’s a weak case. I don’t think the candidate had much to stand on, but the judge’s ruling is way too generic is what my point is.

For football teams? Sure, maybe.

But that’s not the main point in the case, is it? To me this decision seems like it says you could decide not to hire someone because they don’t drink (since that’s basically what was being argued). Couldn’t that then be used to legally discriminate against, say, Muslims? Or people more committed to family than work?

Oh damn, I was going to get a heart attack if you hadn’t posted, so perfectly timed from my perspective. Thanks for the reminder!

Not really a surprise. Obviously cost of living, home prices, wage stagnation, etc are pretty bad right now. Labour is kicking in austerity again. Future prospects look uncertain.

In general, it’s hard to find a job. It’s honestly hard enough to meet new people sometimes, as the article suggests.

Not the first time of course in history, but the way people know about and relate to the world is different. Plus contraception and abortion are more reliable and accessible than ever (to be clear, this is not a negative).

I’m in my late 20s, most of my friends are in their mid 20s. Most don’t want children, usually due to their own physical and mental health concerns, but also just due to the socioeconomic and political situation. The ones that do are trying to find a decent place to live and get a job that pays enough to support children. That takes time, you actually need to move up the corporate ladder now, at least if you want to give your children what you had while growing up or better (all uni graduates, mostly from what we’d consider middle class backgrounds).

But of course at the end of the day: does this even matter? Does not having enough births to replace deaths change a thing? Does not wanting children really mean anything?

Of course I bring up a lot of issues, but most of my friends wouldn’t want children even in a perfect situation. Sure, it’ll pressure the social safety nets maybe down the line, but perhaps that is just inevitable and we should be looking at modernising our systems instead. Who knew 50-150 year old ideas wouldn’t hold up forever?

The wealthy need consumers, but as a society could comfortably live with a lot more and a lot fewer people.

I feel like this should be an official EU petition like Stop Killing Games as well. Have lawmakers actually tell payment processors that they have no right to deny legal transactions (not just fictional content, but any legal transaction).

As others have mentioned, I don’t think Labour will do well in the next election based on what they’ve been doing so far. So voting for “third” parties is inevitable. It’s just a question of whether we can get a majority of progressives, or we just end up spread out and Reform sweeps the win.

I think maybe the ideal solution would be if the progressive parties formed some sort of coalition ahead of time, centred around electoral reform. Discuss who contests which seats, etc, and how they’d vote as a coalition.

Well the most ideal would be if they did that with the express purpose of getting electoral reform done and then calling a general election right after. That way even conservatives and right wingers might vote for them.

It really is past the time when Britain finally went through some actual changes.

Starmer, but also Labour as a government as a whole, has really felt like they are trying to do a Tory Best Of / Greatest Hits of the Last Decade tribute.

The Tories have been doing austerity and tending further and further to the right for a while, which seems to have fairly obviously contributed to them losing the election. No idea how anyone looked at that and thought “good idea”.

Yeah, they’ll keep harping on about “once in a generation” as if multiple loads of crap hadn’t hit the fan. Brexit of course being the big one, but Labour following up the Tories with more austerity and generally conservative governance also won’t help.

The upcoming (Scottish) election cycle will probably matter a lot for indy and seeing how Scotland reacts to Labour. The SNP did get hit by a lot of scandals so things might get shaken up a bit. I wonder how many will put another referendum as one of their main points.

Oh, the journalists wrote and article that you clicked on and shared, and maybe even commented on on their website? And it points out a particularly problematic part of an otherwise pretty good game?

Fantastic, they did their job well.

I enjoyed playing the game but that achievement and “jennerising” really did leave a sour taste in my mouth (the latter is a drug effect that temporarily changes your body type). Though I found “tropic thunder” giving you dark skin somewhat amusing. Humour is subjective, and I could honestly accept all of these being just a tad too far to be funny anymore, in which case I’d rather the game was more friendly to everyone (and it’s better for its success too).

To have some fun though at your expense; the funnily appropriate way you mistyped a sentence:

try to cancel a game just because an achievement

I assume you missed the word “of” but it lets me ask: just because an achievement is what? Come on, say it.

All that aside:

I’m surprised someone on the fediverse is using “social activist” as a pejorative though tbh. Moving away from centralised social media is similarly a way to speak out against social issues you believe in.

Yeah… Would be smart. So Labour, who are trying to be the Tories but from 5-10 years ago, will not do it. Gotta court those undecided centre-right and right-wing voters: the people who still believe in Brexit, even though polls show that’s definitely not a majority.

Sigh.

The Homeworld series is great with fantastic campaigns (minus Homeworld 3 I’ve heard, not even played that).

I’ll also throw in a classic Imperium Galactica 2 because I still think for a 90s 4X RTS it has so many elements that I’ve just not seen replicated since. Though usually short and quick, it has fully simulated and controllable space and ground battles; espionage; diplomacy; you assign your unlocked tech to hard points on your ships… It’s Stellaris but better in most ways, imo.

Unlikely to be it since it’s nowhere near from the last 10 years, but CITY 2000 seems like it could be similar at least artistically?

I think the best I can recommend is looking through Steam, searching for “London” and the mystery genre. I didn’t quite catch anything there that fit at a glance, but maybe you will. Similarly could be done on GOG, since it sounds like it could potentially be an older game? Or itch, but maybe the best way to search for that would be by googling london missing friend mystery site:itch.io.

I’m assuming a modern setting, with no supernatural elements and the mystery genre, so that’s the best I could do. It’s going to be very hard to find something without some details being fixed. Point and click? Photos or isometric? Is the player character visible? Do they have any identifying details? Does the pub have a name? Anything like that could do a lot.

You say you watched someone play it on youtube then you might be able to search your youtube viewing history?

If Deep Rock Galactic counts, then Monster Hunter games should as well. The hub is usually a bar/restaurant with food, drinking, and an arm wrestling mini game. You can also randomly cook meat out in the field or go to hot springs.

Many other games do have bars, but without any real interaction. Lego games and Borderlands come to mind.

Stardew Valley has cutscenes at the bar and you can play a mini game there, but not quite as interactively as DRG.

That’s all I can think of right now. It feels like Baldur’s Gate 3 or Saints Row should also have something similar to Stardew at least, but I can’t remember how much you can do in those bars. Same with MMOs I haven’t played in a while like Runescape. I’m sure if I mention them someone else will know though.

As a bonus: with modding, Lethal Company can have a casino with a bar you can get drinks at.