9bananas

not really, highly depends on the game... definitely worth checking beforehand though!

haven't run into any problems so far, but that doesn't mean that it can't trigger anti-cheats

FYI, for anyone interested in fixing this kind of bs:

there's a program calle WeMod that easily fixes this kind of thing.

it's basically an automated trainer platform that let's you cheat in games with 0 prerequisites, know-how, or effort.

highly recommended for stuff like assassin's creed, far cry, and similar games with bullshit grind.

setting xp/dmg/resources to something like 2 or 3X literally makes the game playable again!

(probably collects a ton of telemetry, which I don't care about on my gaming system...)

yeah, no.

thing is: YT/google/the data kraken knows you regardless of wether or not you're logged in.

they track everything from IP, to location (even just approximate based on IP), screen size, browser, OS, and sooo much more.

being logged in makes it easier to track you within a site, but you get tracked regardless.

Orconomics (Dark Profit Saga, Trilogy) for the exact same reason!

excellent fun to read, incredibly funny!

right?

pretty sure Hallstatt is the worst by far on the list, but it looks kinda mild...

it's ratio is about 4.3 THOUSAND visitors per resident.

next closest is Étretat with about 125 visitors per resident, the rest seems lower, judging simply by relative orders of magnitude.

Hallstatt is insane!

japan is also kinda fucking itself over twice:

• they don't have enough young workers and treat them like shit, which is directly causing the pushback you describe
• they are so xenophobic that they can't just hire foreign labor either

so, yeah, double fucked!

the TSA is not "not perfect"; they're a joke.

it's pure theater. they have basically no ability to detect actual weapons at all, hence why it's a common problem when passengers arrive abroad only to find out they accidentally carried loose ammunition across borders.

there's a huge difference between "not quite perfect" and "completely and utterly useless waste of time, money, and resources", the latter of which describes the TSA.

IF they actually did anything useful at all, then fine, you have a point. but they don't, which is why people are disagreeing with you.

because in principle you're right, that security is required and should be taken seriously....but the TSA isn't actually providing security. they're providing the appearance of security.

yep, exactly what they are :D

*LLMs: large language models ;)

this is not true.

it entirely depends on the specific application.

there is no OS-level, standardized, dynamic allocation of RAM (definitely not on windows, i assume it's the same for OSX).

this is because most programming languages handle RAM allocation within the individual program, so the OS can't allocate RAM however it wants.

the OS could put processes to "sleep", but that's basically just the previously mentioned swap memory and leads to HD degradation and poor performance/hiccups, which is why it's not used much...

so, no.

RAM is usually NOT dynamically allocated by the OS.

it CAN be dynamically allocated by individual programs, IF they are written in a way that supports dynamic allocation of RAM, which some languages do well, others not so much...

it's certainly not universally true.

also, what you describe when saying:

Any modern OS will allocate RAM as necessary. If another application needs, it will allocate some to it.

...is literally swap. that's exactly what the previous user said.

and swap is not the same as "allocating RAM when a program needs it", instead it's the OS going "oh shit! I'm out of RAM and need more NOW, or I'm going to crash! better be safe and steal some memory from disk!"

what happens is:

the OS runs out of RAM and needs more, so it marks a portion of the next best HD as swap-RAM and starts using that instead.

HDs are not built for this use case, so whichever processes use the swap space become slooooooow and responsiveness suffers greatly.

on top of that, memory of any kind is built for a certain amount of read/write operations. this is also considered the "lifespan" of a memory component.

RAM is built for a LOT of (very fast) R/W operations.

hard drives are NOT built for that.

RAM has at least an order of magnitude more R/W ops going on than a hard drive, so when a computer uses swap excessively, instead of as very last resort as intended, it leads to a vastly shortened lifespan of the disk.

for an example of a VERY stupid, VERY poor implementation of this behavior, look up the apple M1's rapid SSD degradation.

short summary:

apple only put 8GB of RAM into the first gen M1's, which made the OS use swap memory almost continuously, which wore out the hard drive MUCH faster than expected.

...and since the HD is soldered onto the Mainboard, that completely bricks the device in about half a year/year, depending on usage.

TL;DR: you're categorically and objectively wrong about this. sorry :/

hope you found this explanation helpful tho!

the DLC are pricey, but they're also proper, old school expansions adding lots of content that actually enhances the game.

it's perfectly playable without the DLC, and there's a LOT of DLC-sized mods on the workshop!

kind of a fundamental problem with modern DLC: they generally don't get cheaper over time (remember when that was an actual thing? not just sales, but actually lower prices for older games?).

if you keep up with the releases it's super okay at about 20/25€ once a year, maybe twice, bur if you're late to the party it's a whole lot of cash all at once!

exactly why paradox introduced a subscription for Stellaris' DLCs at 10€/month... honestly kinda worth it, if you know you're just gonna play for a while and then move on...still wish stuff would just get cheaper at some point again...

least that's supposed to deliver explosive surprises!