Think SEA, Korea, Japan are going to feel better off with China empowered by a weak USA? They want trade for both national security and their economic interest. I'm sure Samsung and Sony want to pickup their share of the Chinese electronics exports.
Has Germany proven they won't sell out to do the right thing? I can't imagine German car manufacturers don't want in US markets for some greater cause. BYD is eating their lunch in China, but BYD is also non-existent in the US market.
We are possibly looking at the US kneecapping the world economy (including its own) but I'm highly skeptical country A isn't going to try to capitalize on country Bs expensive exports.
No. The reason it exists is businesses get guidance from legislators and existing case law on what prevents you from running a foul of GDPR and the cookie banner is what we ended up with. If those banners did nothing, companies wouldn't include them. They are there as the lowest effort legal defense.
Again, the cookie banners have nothing to do with GDPR, where are people getting this misinformation from?! Was there a popular article saying we have those cookie banners because of GDPR, or what?
The banners are the result of much earlier directives that predate GDPR by a lot...
It's not misinformation. Yes ePrivacy predates GDPR but it had no teeth. The reason your replies are full of people saying, "Our lawyers told us to implement it for GDPR" is because it was a minimal thing you could do to meet GDPRs emphasis of receiving consent from users for data stored in cookies. Basically the fear of fines from not being GDPR compliant forced companies add them.
I agree with you these cookie banners are not sufficient by the text, but in practice unless EU commission and courts make lawyers believe these banners are worthless, EU legal teams will still recommend them.
> What these two lines are stating is that cookies, insofar as they are used to identify users, qualify as personal data and are therefore subject to the GDPR.
gdpr.eu is by the way not an official resource of the European Union but by the Swiss Proton AG. They note down the page that gdpr.eu doesn’t constitute legal advice. Although they are correct in this case and your misunderstanding was in reading for future internet discussions I'd recommend not using private sources.
Ive had a really good group of DnD/Pathfinder in the past, but I've tried several times to join games at the a local shop and it wasn't fun. D&D probably selects for a certain type of person that might already have some poor socialization skills to begin with. Moreover, it allows said person to absolutely dominate the game and make it no fun for anyone else.
My recommendation is like yours, join a hiking group, or some other more structured activity in person where you don't have to worry about someone's halfling barbarian with agoraphobia spending your gaming session derailing the module. If you find a good group though, it's a lot of fun.
I had somewhat similar experiences before. A lot of PnP is a bit too much dependent on the DM and what they tolerate. And I had both DMs being absurd non cooperative and players being absurd non cooperative, neither groups lasted long if the person in question isn't willing to reflect a bit about this games being at the core cooperative games (not just between the players but also the DM, even if the story is literally pitching players against each other, which is rare as hard to do well).
One issue I have seen a bit more specific to DnD is people over obsessing with the world building matching exactly the "generic DnD world" provided by wotc (or worse a specific module). And using this to remove agency from the DM to prevent them from tweaking things to e.g. stop a player from going completely rogue or accidental derailment of the campaign in not fun ways. It also means that people which play a ton of DnD have additional knowledge far beyond their in game character, which is rarely ever good. (DMs being similar inflexible is also not so helpful, but often based on inexperience, while for players it's often based on experience in combination with egoism).
But also to be clear some of the best complains did got derailed a lot, accidentally and not by a single person thinking their experience is more important than that of others.
Through the main reason I'm currently not joining a PnP group is that with the games I could have joined recently they require too much time in between meetings, at lest if you haven't played the system for docents or even hundreds of hours already :/
> One issue I have seen a bit more specific to DnD is people over obsessing with the world building matching exactly the "generic DnD world" provided by wotc (or worse a specific module)
IMO this should be handled in the "session zero" expectations setting. Personally, I couldn't DM for someone like that, they should just read the official Forgotten Realms novels.
I started playing D&D in the 90s, before 3e even was out. For me, D&D and other TTRPGs are basically an excuse to hang out with friends. I treat it like a board game night. I've sometimes heard this called "Beer and Pretzels D&D"
I don't find many people who want to play Beer and Pretzels D&D anymore. When I go to public meetups or game stores meetups I find the groups are not casual at all. There is a heavy focus on staying in character and roleplaying over just having a good time.
The absolute worst version of this are people who seem to want to treat it like a therapy session. They genuinely seem to be trying to work through personal problems through their characters. I understand the desire to explore things in a "safe space" like an RPG but to me it's such an inappropriate venue for that sort of thing.
I would love to have an in-person RPG group again but as a hobby it really seems to have shifted from "mostly average people with slightly poor socialization" to "mostly the weirdest and most asocial people you have ever met"
> There is a heavy focus on staying in character and roleplaying over just having a good time.
For some people, that is having a good time! Most of the games I'm in, I'm significatnly more interested in the stor & characters than combat, etc. (Although, yeah, we do chat & have beers, etc.)
> The absolute worst version of this are people who seem to want to treat it like a therapy session. They genuinely seem to be trying to work through personal problems through their characters. I understand the desire to explore things in a "safe space" like an RPG but to me it's such an inappropriate venue for that sort of thing.
I think it's totally fine, as long as everyone at the table is fine with it. A session zero is definitely a requirement to play D&D, imo.
> Most of the games I'm in, I'm significatnly more interested in the stor & characters than combat
I'm not talking about "prefers roleplay over combat". I'm talking about "gets angry if you break character and make meta-comments about the game"
> A session zero is definitely a requirement to play D&D, imo.
It shouldn't be, but unfortunately we can't seem to trust the general RPG community to not be inappropriate weirdos without stating explicit rules and expectations for behavior
If someone comes to your house party and shits on the floor you don't invite them back. No need to create a rule saying "don't shit on the floor" that all guests need to agree to next time there is a party
> I'm not talking about "prefers roleplay over combat". I'm talking about "gets angry if you break character and make meta-comments about the game"
Oh yeah, that's annoying. I'd leave that game.
> It shouldn't be, but unfortunately we can't seem to trust the general RPG community to not be inappropriate weirdos without stating explicit rules and expectations for behavior
> If someone comes to your house party and shits on the floor you don't invite them back. No need to create a rule saying "don't shit on the floor" that all guests need to agree to next time there is a party
I don't think I agree with this characterization. Of course there are baseline rules for living in a society, but a session zero is for more than reminding players that they cannot fucking make sexual innuendos directed at the only woman at the table - it's for making sure everyone is aware of the style of game played, and to make sure it's the right game for them.
Some people might want a hack-and-slash through a dungeon, cycling through characters as they get fed into the meatgrinder. Some people might want a game of court intrigue. Some people want high-magic, some people want low-magic. Some people want to explore something from their personal life and treat the game seriously, while others want a light-hearted game.
To go back to the party analogy you brought up, of course nobody is allowed to shit on the floor, but if I'm being invited to a party, I would very much like to find out if it's a frat party, or fancy cocktails, or a child's 3rd birthday. I might bow out of an invitation if it's not something I want to attend.
This honestly strikes me as a sort of motte and bailey argument
At first we were talking about Session 0 as setting guidelines for what behavior is appropriate
Now you are saying that Session 0 is more about setting expectations of what kind of game is being run
These two topics really don't overlap much because it is equally inappropriate to shit on the floor at a frat party as it is a childs third birthday party
The problem in the RPG space is that there are a lot of weirdos in the community who really want to shit on the floor every chance they get
Edit: And yes of course session 0 can be for multiple things. It's where expectations are set about the sort of game being run, house rules, appropriate behavior, etc
My point is more about how tedious it is to constantly have to remind people that shitting on the floor is not appropriate, because somehow many people in the RPG community have the idea that everything is allowed in these sorts of games, rather than assuming a baseline of social contract is still at play even if we are playing an imaginary game
Essentially what I'm saying that players should assume most weird stuff is off limits unless explicitly allowed in the Session 0. What I see instead is often that players assume everything is allowed unless explicitly disallowed by the Session 0. I think that's the wrong attitude
> Now you are saying that Session 0 is more about setting expectations of what kind of game is being run
Yes, because different behaviors are appropriate for some games, and not others.
> The problem in the RPG space is that there are a lot of weirdos in the community who really want to shit on the floor every chance they get
Won't argue with you there, and definitely agree with you that some people in the space just have no concept of a social contract - or at least, their concept is so warped that they're impossible to play with.
I honestly have had incredible luck finding good parties but no idea how I would ever find one again if my current one fell apart. It's such a difficult task and yet it manages to happen naturally.
I work extra hours when I need to and less when I need to. I don't mind working more when it's something interesting. I will work less when I'm burned out. On average I probably do more than 40, but it's not required.
That to me seems like a reasonable expectation from most employers at my salary.
A family member of mine is going through keynote 522, which is a clinical trial that combines 3 chemos and an immunotherapy prior to surgery.
The five year survival rate for stage 3 triple negative breast cancer is normally about ~60% but the clinical trials show with immunotherapy it exceeds 80%. So the survival rates you see online aren't capturing the progress we are making with these drugs. Hashimotos seems worth the risk.
An interesting aside is that the patients in the clinical trials who had adverse reactions to immunotherapy and came off the medication had higher survival rates than patients who stayed on it. The hypothesis is that stimulating an immune system overreaction also means it was also highly effective against the cancer.
Interesting theory, but not in my experience. My wife died of MBC and she had lots of reactions. Anecdotally, the pembro + chemo may have given her an extra year, she did well on it.
Also the opioid epidemic actually did make benzos much harder to get. Atleast where I live, your primary doctor is very unlikely to prescribe them and instead will refer you to a psychiatrist. The people I know who were on Ambien or Atvian have been cut off.
I think the ADHD drugs are probably next. My conspiracy theory is too much of the professional class (including doctors) is using them regularly, so it's much hard to crack down on.
I'm in the same situation and I agree that when we are together we do collaborate and plan better. On Zoom, people tend to set their mic on mute and very passively engage. However, once we have to actually execute, being in the office is a negative. In the office, it is impossible for me to put my head down and work for a couple hours without someone showing up at my desk with a question. On Slack, I can set dnd with a status message and flow.
I'm aware of the "listen" versus "problem solving" scenario. I refuse to accept the framing. For some reason people have bought in to the idea that you can unload your emotions on someone and also create expectations on how they should respond.
If someone approaches you with a problem, they should expect you'll help them find a solution.
