Overwatch has more distinctive characters and style than StarCraft. While the latter is an amazing game and has some distinctive style, it's hurt by being in the 90s and tiny pixelated graphics. And the rest of its style is relatively generic sci-fi.
Plus it doesn't sound like he was art director for StarCraft, so it's natural to focus on the things he has more personal influence on.
That is absolutely not a free feature on Steam. Some publishers like Paradox leave old versions as 'beta' branches to allow us to reinstall them, but Steam as a whole is very against you playing anything but the latest version.
You cannot instruct Steam to not update a game. When you launch a game, Steam will update regardless, unless you have gone offline, or you launch it in a way that bypasses the Steam client. If you ever forget to go offline before launching a game, Steam will forcibly update it
Ai can combine two things. It can train on completely normal pictures of children, and it can train on completely normal adult porn, and then it can put those together.
This is the same reason it can do something like Godzilla with Sailor Moon's hair, not because it trained on images of Godzilla with Sailor Moon's hair, but because it can combine those two separate things.
Hey, don't stop at Garland. Who was Garland's boss, who could have told Garland to do his fucking job or be replaced by someone who will?
Never forget that failure to deal with Trump is ultimately on Joe Biden and no one else.
It's an innocent looking woman bawling her eyes out while being arrested. Why would they think this would help their anti-immigration cause?
Didn't you notice her skin is dark, and she's fat? Also probably something about her hair. These obvious signs point to the true evil inside her, you see! Only a bleeding heart satanic liberal atheist could see that and think she's an innocent woman!
There's a good chance it wouldn't stick depending on many factors, but it's extremely expensive to fight in court, and courts have shown themselves to be very hit or miss with technological things. Especially when trying to apply rules that were not written with things like software in mind.
He's the guy the toilets are named after.
I mean, it's still accurate as to whether you like performing murder. You might not like murder as an idea or as a thing that people do, but until you try a murder, you don't know whether you will enjoy the act of murdering.
One problem is people can't keep secrets. This involves too many people who would have to keep the secret. And when it comes out that it's just a marketing ploy, some portion of the customers would be even more upset.
Too much light for it to be a grue, it has to be pitch black for that.
Exposing kids to sex too early isn’t good for their development.
Depends on what you mean by this. If you mean involving them in it, then yes, probably (qualified because I know of no actual research on the matter; nor do I know of any way such research could be conducted so we will probably have to settle with 'yes, probably' as the closest answer to accurate).
If you mean allowing them to be aware of it as something that adults do, and occasionally seeing adults engaged in sexual activity, then no. The behavior of shielding children from both even having knowledge of sex, and witnessing it performed by adults, is relatively new, largely taking hold after the Reformation based on my relatively surface-level dives into the subject in the past (I have learned that going deep into this is difficult, the scholarly texts are long and difficult to read for laymen). In medieval times and before, children were aware of adults having sex; they often could not be kept unaware because there was no place for the adults to gain privacy. The modern view of the past is bizarrely anachronistic in that we project prudishness and avoidance of sexuality to a time period centuries before it actually became that way.
Thus, it becomes clear that the avoidance of children being aware of sex existing and happening is a very specific cultural phenomenon that does not paint an accurate picture of actual harm to children, and is based primarily in christian moralizing.
Elon certainly talks a good line, but his actions don't really follow. Like, I agree with this, eliminating intellectual property would be great. I am sure that whatever actions he tries in regards to this won't actually follow through and will instead somehow be twisted to benefit him at the cost of others.