internet discourse is so attention-seeking, contentious and unempathetic that I feel like it’s fostered a culture where people expressing hurt are routinely interrogated and doubted just in case they’re seeking undeserved attention. (because some people do!)

so, people are caught between a rock and a hard place. They can be honest about what burdens them in a way that leaves room for critique, and take the emotional damage that comes from the interrogation of their experiences. or they find extreme, bulletproof-sounding, “nobody could be ok under these circumstances” ways of putting their problems that aren’t in line with reality.

The former is honest but puts you at emotional risk when you’re already vulnerable. The latter is inauthentic but does grant the solidarity and support they’re seeking in the first place. I can’t really blame the people who pick door #2, especially when this decision is conditioned over long periods of social media use. It’s also in line with catastrophization, a common distortion many of us experience already.

notably, this has always been a common problem with how PTSD is understood, specifically complex trauma. many people discount their own trauma because it’s not the typical “got my limb blown off” image of trauma and they’ll occasionally be attacked for claiming they are traumatized. So they find more extreme ways to put their trauma that do get them the support they’re seeking. (and need!)

I don’t know what the solution to any of this is but I do feel it comes from a real place and I put the blame more on social media than the individuals, despite how annoyed I can get with people when I see it.

Ultimately, we’re discussing two different styles of communication that I don’t see as any better or worse than each other - everyone finds what works for them in their circumstances and environment and your style probably works great for yours!

There’s a fair bit of hostility and harassment I encounter in public for various reasons, and I also have some inherent difficulty processing speech and verbalizing. As a result, I take a pretty blunt approach to communication - one in which I do not mind showing that I’m angry, because that is a necessary thing to be sometimes.

I practice mindfulness a lot and do not generally feel required to say the first thing that comes to mind. But if a drunk asshole is following me home, I’m not looking to outwit em. I’m looking to stay focused on my safety while letting em know that I see em and I’m probably more trouble than they’re looking for.

In serious conversation with people I care about, I do swear, but it’s because phrases like “I’m so fucking sorry that happened to you” come naturally to me and are effective. The emphasis that a little bit of swearing can add in moments like that is pretty useful.

This all doesn’t have to be your thing, like I said this is all down to personal preference - but it would be a mistake to assume that people who swear aren’t communicating as meaningfully. It’s just another tool that we have at our disposal.

My answer too.

And also for the benefit of anyone who’s just played the base game: the DLC is basically a sequel, and I found it even more impactful than the base game!

1. why is letting off steam indicative of a weak character? I think that when under stress, it’s actually indicative of someone being emotionally intelligent to recognize they need to let some stress out and find an avenue for it. I can’t explain exactly why, but swearing has always been a pretty effective way for me to let out some stress mid conversation while staying focused on a problem.

2. some contexts call for aggression. i.e. If someone’s making me or someone I care about uncomfortable in public, it can be pretty useful to bare my teeth back. A simple “fuck off” doesn’t require me to engage with any of their bullshit at all, gets the point across, and carries it with a mild aggression that actually does make people fuck off much of the time.

3. it is imprecise, but in many contexts it’s precise enough to convey displeasure and dismay enough to get the point across. In fact the power of “fuck you” is in how concise yet universally applicable and understandable in so many situations.

Much of the time communication isn’t about being creative or coming off smart. It’s about effectively conveying meaning with the tools you have. Sometimes that means simple, crude language is more effective at conveying something than all the wit in the world.

So when I’m in a situation that calls for its use, I don’t care that “fuck off” is a dime-a-dozen phrase that doesn’t make sense. It’s never misunderstood, it’s cathartic to say, and I don’t need to think on the spot to figure out something more eloquent - my mind is on, y’know, who or what needs to fuck off instead.

Especially considering a lot of the creative talent behind Valve’s acclaimed single player catalog are no longer at the company. Valve is a different company now and so their games will be different too.

Hmm… usually I prefer push-in 😇

Gotta say I’m glad we can be and date any genders we like these days with much milder pushback (on average) than used to be the case. Really does help zoomers be a lot healthier imo, even if we’ve got other issues in the internet age.

young men have been told that white men are the worst thing to be.

Ok, but try not being a man and see if people think that’s any better…

That’s been my experience with GPT - every answer Is a hallucination to some extent, so nearly every answer I receive is inaccurate in some ways. However, the same applies if I was asking a human colleague unfamiliar with a particular system to help me debug something - their answers will be quite inaccurate too, but I’m not expecting them to be accurate, just to have helpful suggestions of things to try.

I still prefer the human colleague in most situations, but if that’s not possible or convenient GPT sometimes at least gets me on the right path.

[Outer Wilds cycle end music intensifies]

they had to change the motto because it got too cumbersome to set up the drum machines when they wanted to say AUDIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO [synth riffage] VIIIDEO DISCOOOOOOOOOO

I will say, these days it’s more or less impossible to release a game that’ll run perfectly on every system and it’s a good thing we’re able to fix crashes and patch issues as they come up. This has naturally had its downsides as publishers squeeze devs for tighter releases, but outside of that it’s a very good thing for devs and players.

Np, thank you for asking!

That’s a good question! It’s definitely very rare that a birth name is entirely necessary to use in conversation, but an occasional situation comes up where I’m talking to an old friend about someone who’s since transitioned and I need to use a deadname to let them know who I’m talking about. Generally I say something like “so I ran into Denise, you knew her as Brett back in the day, etc etc etc” and just use Denise from there on. If the person I’m talking to isn’t caught too off guard by that, it’s a very smooth and natural way to handle that as a matter of circumstance and move on to using the preferred name quickly.

Generally, using their current preferred name/pronouns (or neutral pronouns) is best. She’s still the same person, so it’s true to say Caitlyn Jenner won the 1976 Olympic Decathlon. If any other facts about the event itself were directly relevant to the conversation, that’d be ok - e.g. it would be accurate and inoffensive imo to say she won the men’s division.

But name/pronouns change all the time otherwise so it’s more normal to use the current ones. If Ms. Jones gets married and is now Mrs. Smith, it wouldn’t be inaccurate to talk about Mrs. Smith’s car breaking down last summer.

As much as I pretend to be one, I’m not really a fighter. I think this war may not need me to be one. The time to respond has already begun, and while front-line protests aren’t my strong suit, supporting protestors in my community is the place for me right now. If a greater conflict escalates, I’m probably not like doing the active fighting, but I can sure as shit help with supply lines as well as helping people who need to recover in the backlines. If I ever need to be in a fight I intend to be prepared, but there’s a lot more to do in a war than fight. And by the time anything like that would happen, I hope to have a resilient community around me who can support each other through hell. The fight’s already begun to an extent, and it’s important to remember that our best place may be “back-of-house” so to speak.

While this is true to an extent, from experience this line of thinking has its limits and is very easy to misapply. On the one hand, yes you can tell people their ideas do not gel with the vision of the project, and sometimes that’s the right call. And sometimes doing this a lot is best for the project.

On the other hand, even if a majority of the work is coming from one person, not only does your community learn your project, they also spend time contributing to it, fixing bugs, and helping other people. I feel it’s only to a project’s benefit to honor them and take difficult suggestions seriously, and get to the root of why those suggestions are coming up. Otherwise you risk pissing off your contributors, who I feel have the right to be annoyed at you and maybe post evangelion themed vent blog posts if you consistently shut down contributors’ needs and fail to adapt to what your users actually want out of your software. And forking, while freeing and playing to the idea of freedom of choice, also splits your userbase and contributors and makes both parties worse off. It really depends on the project, but it pays to maintain buy-in and trust from people who care enough to meaningfully contribute to your project.

I used Copilot for a while (in a Rust codebase fwiw) and it was… both useful and not for me? Its best suggestions came with some of the short-but-tedious completions like path().unwrap().to_str().into() etc. Those in and of themselves could be hit-or-miss, but useful often enough that I might as well take the suggestion and then see if it compiles.

Anything longer than that was OK sometimes, but often it’d be suggesting code for an older version of a particular API, or just trying to write a little algorithm for something I didn’t want to do in the first place. It was still correct often enough when filling out particular structures to be technically useful, but leaning on it more I noticed that my code was starting to bloat with things I really should have pulled off into another function instead of autocompleting a particular structure every time. And that’s on me, but I stopped using copilot because it just got too easy for me to write repetitive code but with like a 25% chance of needing to correct something in the suggestion, which is an interrupt my ADHD ass doesn’t need.

So whether it’s helpful for you is probably down to how you work/think/write code. I’m interested to see how it improves, but right now it’s too much of a nuisance for me to justify.

Ironically this is one of those things that’s easier to deal with in a poly context - your partner isn’t your one and only so if they’re ace and you’re not, you’re allowed to get those needs met elsewhere and still have a loving romantic relationship with them.