Before I even looked I said, "I bet it's Russell Moore." He's been vocally anti-Trump since before his first term. Even got fired from the SBC ERLC for it.
So he's been there the whole time, basically. This isn't a reversal for him.
Edit: I hadn't actually read the article yet. That quote is David Brody. I just assumed the whole article would be about Russell Moore.
Hooking a whole desktop to a TV is intrusive with most desktop form factors.
Most people who want a console don't care about upgradability or repairability, and that's certainly not the main thing that "makes PCs so great."
Most people gaming on PC are equally "trapped in an ecosystem." This has a desktop mode if need be, but hardly anyone does games outside of Steam.
"It has Linux but most users won't notice or care" is a double positive.
"It won't push the player base, only the devs" is a double positive.
The point of a console isn't to make people into more technical proponents of open source projects. It's to play games.
And if it's competing in the console market, especially for people who aren't terribly interested in the "Call of Duty" type AAA titles of today, it seems like a perfect fit.
Guns don't kill people
☝️ Uh uh ☝️
Gunn kills people
With guns
In addition to what everyone else said, property damage is a big part of it as well.
Let's say you run into a building and knock out a load bearing wall. Or plough through a business or government office. It's not impossible to rack up a couple million in damages if you crash bad enough.
The biggest thing with auto insurance isn't covering your car, it's covering the cost of whatever you hit sueing you.
Your car may only be worth $3,000, but if you hit a pedestrian and they require a dozen surgeries and are wheelchair bound for life, you bet you're ass you're getting sued for a few million in medical costs.
In a reasonable country, those medical costs would be free, but since they're not you need some sort of protection against once accident bankrupting you in civil suits.
Yeah, this one clearly reads as satire. The fact that people think it's not is wild to me.
While I don't disagree, I do feel like people are over-quick to label any hard questions that don't align with thier viewpoint as sealioning.
I've more than once asked questions about the practicality or edge cases of a particular stance and been called a sealion for it.
But the thing is, I want to know how that thing handles the practicality or edge case issues, and am trying to have someone who is deeper into the weeds on the issue than I am explain it to me, but just get called a sealion for it.
To be fair, this has only happened to me 2-3 times, but it's super annoying, because I'm actually trying to understand, and might even be on your side if you'd address my concerns.
Ngl, I saw this and was like, effing chatgpt garbage, and down voted.
Then I realized the joke and upvoted. You got me on that one.
Sure, but that's not what the article is saying, to be clear.
I do think that any time you hire an intern, the only thing you can judge them on is vibes.
I used to be in charge of an intern program, and the thing is that you can't really select based on experience or anything, because they don't really have that. Instead, you end up asking a bunch of personality questions and trying to get a feel for if they'd be a good fit on your team.
Now, do I think "answers the phone" is a good test of that? Probably not. But then again, we used to ask people if they'd rather be a blade of grass or a doorknob, just to see what they'd say.
I guess my point is, if this was for a "real job," I'd be a little more judgy, but for an internship, I've selected people based on wilder things than "did they answer the phone."