Cloudflare can’t be forced to censor anything because CDNs are not actually needed by the internet, they’re just nice to have. The only place where they could actually do anything is in the registrar business, where any foul play would just result in de-accreditation by ICANN.

AWS, Azure, and Oracle do have too much power over the internet, but that’s a different scenario.

Why is Cloudflare bad for the internet?

With that much voting power why even bother having a public company.

A sustainable scene wouldn’t have dropped from a $40M prize pool to $4M. The issue is that the esports scene was not self funded, it was funded by a percentage of the base game economy.

The reduction in prize pool being related to the removal of battle pass shows that fans never cared about supporting the esports scene, they only wanted the battle pass for the skins or whatever it is that you get from it.

Even if the Dota 2 esports was sustainable, that would be one game out of dozens.

They know nobody is going to purchase the pay-per-view, but I guess they don’t care since the alternative is not getting any money anyways. Esports was never sustainable because fans refuse to spend money, so they rely on shady sponsorships from gambling sites and Saudi money.

Yeah you’re right. Mastercard says tapping your card also sends a tokenized version or the card number.

They were made ranked on 2018, and Rocket League had its peak in player base around 2020-2021 after it became free. Unfortunately that was followed by a huge drop in player base in 2022, which led to the extra modes changes in 2023.

Tapping your card shares the card number. Paying with your phone doesn’t.

Yeah, Snow Day and Dropshot are seasonal for ranked play. That’s because they were not popular enough on their own so it was taking too long to find matches at high ranks, making it hard to get the season title. Has nothing to do with the Epic acquisition though, just a need to reduce fragmentation on the player pool.

I guess that’s true for systems that have XWayland available. For Wayland-only systems, it seems to just default (or more like fallback) to Wayland.

Great points. I now agree with you.

The changes they’ve made are adding 348953754 pop-ups every time you open a game or finish a match

it has been like this since 2017. Now there’s maybe 1 or 2 extra pop-ups for the game pass garbage. Not that it’s a good thing, but it’s hardly a difference if it’s about 2 pop-ups or 4 pop-ups.

completely useless servers

Do you seriously think Epic servers are worse than what they had before? Psyonix servers were famously horrible to the point that the CEO had to issue a statement in 2017: https://www.rocketleague.com/en/news/server-performance-a-letter-from-our-ceo/

Followed by another Psyonix statement a year later: https://www.rocketleague.com/en/news/rocket-league-server-performance-update

I’m pretty sure it has been using Wayland for at least a year or two now (I think since 1.20.4). Minecraft renders with GLFW, which supports Wayland since version 3.4. I tried it about a year and a half ago and it was fine.

The game itself hasn’t changed at all since Epic acquisition. The only significant changes they have made are making it free and removing trading which don’t affect gameplay.

Signal is against federation.

You have a higher chance of solving this issue if you ask in #webrtc:matrix.org

Tags are locked to a specific commit. So you won’t be able to create a different release with the same tag. Even deleting the repo and creating a new one won’t allow you to reuse the same tag, unless you change the repo name.

Immutable releases include protection against repository resurrection attacks. Even if you delete a repository and create a new one with the same name, you cannot reuse tags that were associated with immutable releases in the original repository.

https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/supply-chain-security/understanding-your-software-supply-chain/immutable-releases

This is just blatantly false. The US is a fascist state.

This is actually insane. Why would you want a visa to visit a fascist state? I guess they applied for a visa just to have it and never use it? You don’t know what fascism is. You have never seen fascism and should be grateful you haven’t experienced the horror of an actual fascist state.

The govt is deliberately destroying the US and they know full well anyone against fascism is not trying to destroy the US.

How exactly are these people with revoked visas anti fascist?

The US is no longer politically about the nuance of belief between right and left, but about fascism and anti fascism.

It’s been like that since the early 2000s (it used to be nazi and anti nazis, but I guess they realized how stupid that was and downgraded it to fascism), funny how that works.

By the way, all of this fascism stuff is unrelated to the topic at hand (both the US and Australia have the right to deny entry based on just not liking what you said), so I’m not sure why you even brought it up.

Saying Charlie Kirk was a piece of shit who literally got what he asked for is very different from Candace Owens attempting to spread fascism to Australia.

Different things (I’ll assume you are right that Owens is a fascist because I don’t care enough to check)? Yes. Are both of them grounds for denial of entry? Also yes.

That’s almost like saying landing on the moon or Mars or the Sun are the same because the craft isn’t landing back on Earth.

Cool example, but that didn’t even make sense.

There is a heck of a lot of difference between a working commentator being held to account (in a country that doesn’t have the same free speech rules anyway for anyone) and holding a vacationer to the same when they are not earning an income from their comments and the country does say that political speech is free speech as a major component of their Constitution.

The US Constitution doesn’t apply to visa holders outside the US.

I’m not sure if you are arguing that the US no longer has a Constitution that applies

If you can quote me saying that, yes. Otherwise I don’t know why you even typed that.

or that you ignorantly thought Australia had the same Constitution as the US.

Never thought or said that. And like I said before, I actually support both decisions so I obviously think it’s legal under Australian law, as well as under US law.

Theft of a can of beans is not equal to theft of a nuclear sub. Sure, they both “boil down to the same scenario”; theft. But I think we can all agree that the same punishment for both would be imbecilic.

Welcome to the real world, where consequences are different depending on where you are. Australia is not the baseline for what should result in denial of entry, and neither is the US. They both have the right to deny entry for just for not liking your name, let alone not liking what you said.

The difference with this thread’s scenario is that yes, they both result in the same thing, but for different reasons. Denial of entry to someone who wasn’t tactful about the boss’ friend who was a hateful bigot is not the same as denial of entry for attempting to weaponise division to destroy a country.

Except that Owens is not trying to destroy Australia, but that’s how you and the Australian government interpret it. Guess what? The US government thinks those people are trying to destroy the US. All that matters is that Australia doesn’t like what Owens said to deny entry, and all that matters is the US didn’t like what was said about Kirk to deny entry.