@JechtUltima Unfortunately it looks like I’d have to phone PlayStation Support. Think I’ll just hide them on PS5 which is all I can do for now. If only there was an option like there was on Steam to completely eradicate all traces of it!
@nomither6 Essentially an anti-abortion law. What's brilliant (and insidious) about it is that it skirts traditional issues of constitutionality by changing the enforcement mechanism: instead of having state officials enforce the law, it instead opens up medical professionals who perform abortions after "a fetal heartbeat is detected" (essentially, around six weeks into the pregnancy) to lawsuits by private citizens.
"The law allows any person — as long as they're not a government official — to bring a civil lawsuit in state court against a provider accused of violating the new law, regardless of whether the person bringing the lawsuit has any connection to the abortion being sought. If they prevail, they are entitled to at least $10,000 in damages, and the law is structured to make it especially costly for clinics that are targeted with an enforcement action. It prohibits clinics from recouping attorneys' fees from their court foes, even if judges side with the providers in the lawsuits. The measure also prevents clinics from seeking to transfer the cases to venues more convenient for them, unless they have the agreement of their opponents."
If this law isn't swatted down by the supreme court (they've essentially kicked that ball down the road by saying the law is so different that they can't currently speak to its constitutionality), it's going to become the future of anti-abortion legislation across the nation.
@JechtUltima The R's didn't really "pack" the courts, persay. The Republican Senate Majority Leader at the time, Mitch McConnell, invoked non-existent procedural standards about not seating justices in the lead-up to a presidental election in order to deny then-president Barack Obama his pick for the supreme court in the desperate hope that a Republican would succeed him. Well, as I'm sure everyone is aware, that last, best hope happened when Donald Trump won the last presidential election, and an effectively stolen supreme court seat was given to a moderate conservative, Neil Gorsuch, since there was nothing to stop the now blood red federal government from pushing conservatives into the court. Another justice retired after a months-long behind-the-scenes campaign by the Trump campaign to sway him, which opened the path for the second conservative justice, Brett Kavanaugh, who was also the subject of a famously nasty confirmation hearing after sexual assault allegations were raised against him. These two were rushed through before the 2018 midterm election, since, as happened, the party not currently in power often gains a majority in one or both chambers of the congress (in this case, the House of Representatives flipped to the Dems).
This was enough to remove the moderate-liberal bent of the supreme court before 2016, but the final straw came when progressive justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died. Despite it being the lead-up to an election, and Ginsburg even expressing the wish that she not have her replacement chosen by Trump, McConnell ignored the hypocrisy of his actions and effectively flexed his power as majority leader of the Senate to shove through a final, very conservative justice, Amy Coney Barrett. This essentially ensured a very hard right Supreme Court (which Trump seemed to have stupidly thought was going to throw the election to him after his months-long campaign to declare the 2020 election fradulent; that, needless to say, didn't happen).
So while the Republicans gained a majority through dishonorable, viciously partisan behavior on the part of Mitch McConnell, they didn't pack the courts. And, no, there's no viable way for Democrats to pack the courts. Opinion-wise, it is opposed by the majority of the public (not that this matters; most aspects of how America is run are opposed by the public, lol), and it is widely thought that such behavior would undermine the legitimacy and stability of the highest court in the land by making it a partisan political tool. And, frankly, I agree. If court packing is on the table, then it's just another weapon to be wielded every election cycle where the political balance of power shifts.
In terms of procedure, it would require a majority in both the house and the senate BEFORE the filibuster. Dems technically enjoy majority control of both houses, but it'd require literally every democrat to support it, and right now there are a couple of of fairly conservative Democrats in the senate who are making it difficult for Dems to pass ANYTHING that Republicans dislike, let alone something as radical and nakedly partisan as court-packing. So even though it's probably technically possible to use the reconciliation process, which is safe from the supermajority requirement imposed by Republican filibusters on literally everything else, to pack the courts, it's never going to happen. Even if every senator was for it, Joe Biden has pretty explicitly come out in opposition to court-packing. Hell, we can't even get the senate to agree to procedural changes to the filibustering process to force a talking filibuster (currently, the minority in the senate can paralyze the legislative process by filibustering pretty much everything outside of reconciliation bills, which only three of can be passed per year, effectively forcing everything to pass with a supermajority of 60 votes, or 3/5ths of the chamber).
Generations of young Americans could see a drastic curtailing of their bodily autonomy, voting rights, ability to marry people of the same sex, etc. because the party that has lost the majority of popular votes over the last few election cycles has nominated the vast majority of supreme court justices.
So, in short: our government is broken and useless; they win; we lose.
@JohnnyShoulder@nessisonett Oh, I had no idea about all that. I’m oblivious. But after a quick internet search it looks like Tripwire Interactive came out in opposition to his remarks and he has now stepped down as CEO. Besides, I’m not sure that removing a game he was involved with has any impact on him or even on Tripwire at this point. No money exchanges hands either way. Now, I suppose I understand if you just want to distance yourself as far as possible from the guy, but hiding the game hopefully will accomplish that. I am curious though if you are able to get Sony to take the games out of your library, let us know. I’m sure they can do it, but I’m not sure it will be easy to make it happen.
“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”
Backlash must have been pretty intense for the CEO to "step down" this quickly. Although I guess that's what happens when literally everyone immediately starts distancing themselves from your company because of a comment you made.
Man, imagine losing your position as head of a decent developer because of a twitter post you felt compelled to make about an anti-abortion law in Texas.
Hey, guys. I'm thinking of maybe getting a vertical stand for the PS4 Pro. The official PS4 Pro Sony Vertical Stand is pretty expensive but I've also noticed a few other third party ones. Any recommendations?
When I saw that TLoU2 was added to PS Now I thought maybe it would be a better financial move to just join Now for 3 months for roughly the same price as buying the game and then I’d have the chance to play other games. I’ve not seriously considered joining Now before. I looked over the list of all games on Now and honestly there’s just nothing I’m seeing that I really want to play that I don’t already own or have access to through PS+. Don’t get me wrong, there’s plenty of really good PS3 games on the service, but I’ve mostly played all of those. So I think I’ll just stick with the old fashioned way of buying games. 😄 I don’t know.
“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”
@Th3solution Welcome to the world of game services! The way you felt right now is the same feeling I had when I started using Game Pass. There were a couple of games I was already interested in playing so I might as well just pay for a month of GP and play all of them to save myself money. As a bonus, there are dozens of other games I can check out to see if they're any good. The best thing about this approach is that you get to discover so many games that you would've never considered playing before. Granted, I'm not that familiar with PS Now's library of games but I'm sure it will expand even more in the future. That's why I tend to not buy that many games these days because there's a high probability they will be added to a service in the future. At that point, it's much cheaper to just buy a month for a low price, play all the games you're interested in and then wait until more games that you're interested in are added and then buy another month. This is pretty much my approach to gaming nowadays: buy physical games that I'm really interested in and every now and then buy a month of Game Pass (or in your case, PS Now) and play everything I'm interested in and then go through my backlog while I wait for more titles to be added to the service. It's honestly the best of both worlds if you play a lot of games. If you only play one game at a time then maybe it'd be better to just buy that game and take your time with it. For now, maybe it'd be for the best to just wait for more games to be added and see if you change your mind.
@Th3solution The best thing about Now is being able to try random crap you wouldn’t ever buy outright. Me and my brother play Don Bradman Cricket 14 through streaming as a party game because neither of us really understand the controls or cricket which makes it rather chaotic. And my mum spent over an hour playing Farming Simulator before realising that there were about 12 tutorials still left. It just eliminates a lot of the ‘what if’ when it comes to buying games and I’ve bought other entries in series outright because I enjoyed what I played on Now.
@Th3solution Further to what @nessisonett says, I also find it useful try out games I would never usually bother with. And there have been a few games which I had almost bought before they came to the service, only to play them and find out I didn’t like them. It has also curbed me buying games all the time in sales, as I usually just see what is in my libraries instead. Think i paid 35 quid for a year last time I renewed, for that price it is a no brainer for me.
Life is more fun when you help people succeed, instead of wishing them to fail.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
Forums
Topic: General PlayStation 4 Thread
Posts 1,521 to 1,540 of 1,584
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic