I loved control and Alan wake 1 (although that was years ago and I don’t think the gameplay holds up anymore).

I’m hesitant to pick this up because I can’t imagine it maintaining the same atmosphere as control being this big third person action adventure. I imagine the cut scenes still being good but while playing it you don’t get the same SCP vibe as Control. If anyone has comments on this I’d love to be persuaded, as of right now it’s a wait until deep sale for me which I wouldn’t have believed about a Control sequel.

Just to play devil’s advocate, everything is politics. If wages were higher, if multi-millionaires didn’t exist, if you owned your home and had a larger say in your communities laws and regulations, if your anti-trust agency was doing their job, if you owned a part of your work the AI bubble would look wildly different if not be impossible in its current form. We’re seeing the effects of wild wealth concentration and financial markets detached from their underlying financial output.

It educates people on the fact 8/8/8 wasn’t always a thing and the only way we got it was through unions and activism. I think an intelligent person can easily draw a line between progress being made 200 years ago and how nothing has changed the 8/8/8 agreement since.

To me that’s empowerment to fighting for 4/4/4 or 30 hour work weeks or anything better than our current dated set up. It tells us we can fight for a better future and present.

I think your responses to this are taking extreme theoretical positions that aren’t true. So for instance, the extreme theory of “I don’t support them because one of their (still financially connected) founders is a nazi” is “I must research all company’s I support for their political beliefs” and that’s not true - that’s an extreme stance.

My real stance is “everyone should strive to be as ethical a consumer as they possibly can be - given their time, energy, and financial situations.” It’s not my job to research every company and I don’t have time/energy to research every provider of every product I consume; but I do what I can. It’s the job of the journalist to dig up these meaningful stories and distribute them to their community, that’s why that job is so important. And easily getting these stories distributed to me is why I’m on Lemmy (or back in the day reddit).

So no, I do not have to research everyone to reduce my euros from going to Nazi’s. If my options are known Nazi or unknown something - I expect a reasonable person to always go with the unknown.

And I do want to live in a society where Nazi beliefs have real life consequences, including and especially at work. The extreme stance is “all beliefs can be held against you at work” and that’s wrong. There’s a difference between a person wanting their government to tax them 2% less and a person wanting their government to expunge all black people to countries they may have never even visited. There’s a difference between being a part of the NRA and being a part of the KKK. You can be in party that worsens your country and your quality of life and makes the world slowly worse (like pre-trump modern republicans in the US or the CDU in Germany). You can’t be in party that is actively looking to dismantle civil rights, harm the out-groups, and make society rapidly worse (like Republicans, AfD, reform for britain, or the Nazi party).

Everyone should want to live in a society where, if their coworkers are racist their company does something about it. Because that gets rid of racists at best or at worst it makes them sneakier - more quiet. Their has to be societal consequences for holding societally destructive beliefs. Should they starve? No. We should have Universal Basic Income. Should they be kicked out of their home? No, they should own their home and there shouldn’t be landlords. Should they be removed from any position of power and barred from ever holding one again? Yes, absolutely. They should be “tarred and feathered”, we should put a badge on them that says “dangerous and hateful” and we should treat them as such - they only get to hold jobs which can’t hurt other people they seek to hurt.

There is a difference between ideas destructive to society and most normal ideas and you should want to treat them differently.

As another user said, IVPN or airvpn were the ones that came up in my last search. I have removed proton for them having the same trump supporting tech bros problem.

My understanding is one of mullvads primary owners and creators donates a significant portion of their country’s far right party’s annual budget. Their policies, last I checked, included things like remigration or the forced expulsion of citizens based off of arbitrary and immutable characteristics (think bloodline or skin color). They’re akin to the AfD or Republicans. Theoretically a meaningful % of money spent on Mullvad goes to a person actively trying to make the world worse, like Elon Musk or JK Rowling.

So some people, including me, stopped supporting mullvad until the person is completely financially and influentially disconnected from the company.

Hey, I’m a real person who organically discovered this news and made behavioral changes based on the news.

I am not a nazi. I do not want to support nazi policies or beliefs or people who would strengthen and distribute Nazi policies or beliefs. If someone supports forcibly relocating citizens based off their bloodline history or the color of their present day skin, I think they should be as far away from a position of power as society can possibly manage while still treating them like a human.

I believe, based on the Mullvad news, that one of the main benefactors if mullvad - meaning one of the guys who got a % for every euro I spent on the service - actively and meaningfully supports a national party with policies akin to Nazis. I want as much of my money to go to NOT-Nazis as possible, ideally 100%. So I left Mullvad for… I think it’s airvpn. Or ivpn actually, although I considered airvpn.

I don’t think this is a crazy response. I also wish it was the overwhelmingly common response.

In your eyes is it ever okay for there to be enough pollution such that even during an inversion (as you’re claiming) that a city should look like it does on the right of this picture?

Because my answer is no. I don’t care if it’s L.A. or London or New Delhi or Beijing, I don’t think that amount of pollution is healthy. Or I know it isn’t, I don’t think it should be acceptable and we should be building towards a society in which that doesn’t happen.

I’ll post what I said to the other guy who thought it necessary to explain stocks to me.

The comment chain was:

• I can’t believe Elon musk is a trillionaire, that doesn’t sit right with me.
• he’s not a trillionaire, his stock went down, most of his wealth is in stocks
• i downvoted because that statement sounded like a defense of the wealthy, not the TH letter (which I actually like, sorry to the people on Lemmy who seem to have a hate boner for it).

No, I do not think saying “actshully his numbers went down this month and he’s not a trillionaire” is value added or demonstrating a grasp on how wealth works. Elon will be a trillionaire again this year or next, and more importantly he will not be the only trillionaire we see by the end of this decade unless something is done about it. He will not always have his money heavily tied up stocks, and he’ll begin diversifying it. The difference between someone having 900 billion and 1.1 trillion is not significantly important, they’re both unbelievably bad.

Maybe I’m responding too much to this chain, he obviously wasn’t heavily defending him, but it is what people tend to say before they defend him elsewhere in the chain. I’m just interested in keeping these societal issue topics more focused and clean.

Billionaires shouldn’t exist. That’s the important part of this that I want to echo and protect. I’m sorry if it sounds like I’m “tilting at windmills” or making the cause seem bad, that’s not my intention.

I downloaded for defending a rich person. “His networth is tied up in stocks” is the kinda shit someone says who doesn’t understand that that doesn’t make them any less rich. A trillionaire means a trillion dollars of your shit is owned by him, houses and farmlands and workers and production capacity and art. No one should be allowed to have more than 10-20 million, at that amount they can pick someone to never have to work again in their life every year for the rest of their life. That’s too much money.