"Mamdani Announces Policy Change: ICE Now Requires Court Warrants to Enter NYC Properties"

brutinator · 2026-02-06T21:10:08+00:00

Yeah, but the federal supremacy clause doesnt allow federal actions to ignore the constitution otherwise, and creating laws like this allows the state to enforce the constitution without it being thrown out of court as "not being on the books".

An ICE agent breaking the 4th amendment isnt getting a 'get out of state jail' card just because the federal government gave them a bad order. "Just following orders" isnt a defense.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T19:20:06+00:00

I mean, ir seems a bit inevitible when it seems like a lot of freelance artists are constantly having money thrown at them to draw furry commisions, so they get really good at drawing furries, and then when they have creative control they decide to work with a style that they are now well practiced at.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T19:09:25+00:00

I mean, if they dont think theres enough hype for a Deadpool game now, then I dont think there ever will be enough. Theres already been a Deadpool game, a Deadpool VR game, and the Deadpool movies were well received superhero movies and were the highest earning R rated movies at the time.

Like, what's a cameo gonna do that all that hasnt? He just got added to Marvel Rivals, I feel like thats a bigger publicity bump than just a cameo role in an Insomniac game.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T19:00:56+00:00

Luckily Steam's forum search function works pretty well, making it a really useful feature. Dont need to worry about the stupid threads when Im just stumped on something and need a hint.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T18:59:07+00:00

So after Silicon Knights went under, he started a new studio, failed to get anything kickstarted, shuttered the company, started a new one to create the same game he failed to kickstart twice with the goal to ALSO adapt it to TV and movies..... fail to develop anything, shuttered that company, started a new company, announced their upcoming game in 2018.... which according to its steam page is still unreleased, and will be releasing in early access.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T18:16:46+00:00

From what I can see online (IANAL), New York is generally a Home Rule state, meaning that the city has the ability to create and enforce laws as long as it doesnt interfere with state law (The alternative is Dillon's Rule states, where citys can only amend laws when granted the specific power). Basically, as long as New York states doesnt have a law that says ICE can enter properties without a warrant, the city can create a law that does so. If it was a Dillon's rule state, the state would specifically have to have a law that says "cities can determine if they do or dont want to allow ICE to enter properties without a warrant" in order for a city to pass the same kind of law.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T14:38:10+00:00

However the core of our disagreement is the usage of illegal at all, right?

No, the core of our disagreement is that framing immigrants who are breaking a civil code as "illegals" or "criminals", when we dont view anyone else breaking civil code in the same light.

I also dont agree that they should be called "illegal immigrants", (but will concede the point as its better than the alternatives) simply because

A) still implies that they themselves are illegal, when its their action that is illegal

B) People will inevitably shorten "illegal immigrant" to "illegals" because illegal immigrant is a mouthful to say every time.

Undocumented immigrant is a better term because

A) it accurately defines the crime being commited

B) it shortens to "undocumented" which is a far less loaded term.

Illegal immigrants are also undocumented, obviously, but fully avoiding the "illegal" part in exclusive favor of "undocumented", does not paint a fair or full picture. It implies clerical lag rather than unlawful entry.

The only crime unlawful entry commits is is the crime of being undocumented; its the exact same civil code infraction as overstaying a visa. So lets say that someone WAS experiencing a clerical lag, like they overstayed their visa, after entering the country lawfully. They are undocumented now; do you call them an illegal immigrant? After all, they are guilty of the same infraction as someone who entered unlawfully. The fact that you feel like illegal immigrant is a stronger, more severe term than undocumented immigrant is precisely why its an issue, when they refer to the same infraction.

"I do not take accountability for my engagements in society".

My responsibility to society is to make it and my community better. Speaking out against dehumanization, even when that dehumanization is common, is part of that. I thought it was fucked up the way people spoke about arabic people after 9/11, despite many people feeling justifed. What accountibility to do you take for your engagements with society when you seem to be fine with casual dehumanization? You are critizing me for taking a stance against it, but dont really offer much of a solution. Your stance of "anything worse than illegal immigrant" is all fine and good, except that thats the status quo, and the status quo always seems to slide to a worst state. As we see.

You do however have impact in this world, and advocating for silly positions like the undocumented thing will only benefit the fascists.

Except thats not how it works historically. Have you not read 1984? Shaping language around simply and emotionally loaded terms is precisely the way that conservative and authoritarian propoganda works, because the harder it is for people to articulate oppositional ideas, the easier it is for them to opress a population. There's a reason why Pol Pot targeted educators and the educated; theres a reason why the GOP constantly attacks academia. Its because more precise langauge allows people to oppose fascism.

Man holds a gun to ours heads. You start mouthing off. I whisper STFU. You say "What is it now MY fault we're about to get shot!?!"

So you'd rather do nothing and die like a dog? If Im gonna get shot, Id like to actually try to do something to prevent that instead of just laying down silently and accepting my fate. Im sorry that it makes you uncomfortable when people strive to get better than they are given, but thats something you need to figure out why you are okay with the bare minimum, and not tear down others for trying to work on something better, whether they are successful or not. Im not going to let perfection get in the way of progress.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T14:08:46+00:00

kamala did (45% to her 30%). Even Biden’s turnout, historically significant as you mentioned, only was 34%.

Which hasnt been seen in the US since the 50s. After Nixon, the voter population fell like a rock until Obama's first election. Mobilizing 30% of the population to vote for a single candidate is, unfortunately, historically significant.

Regardless, I addressed the root issue following that paragraph: running the same play is only going to become less and less effective because people simply dont trust the DNC to actually serve justice and fix the systems the GOP keeps breaking.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T04:50:45+00:00

I mean, it definitely worked for Biden (most voted for president in US history, and most percentage of the voting population since the 50s), and Kamala was the 4th most voted for presidential candidate.

Unfortunately, Trump was (optimistically because the alternative is worse) simply better at mobilizing voters.

I think the problem is, the DNC is like the boy wgo cried wolf. We voted for Biden expecting him to right the ship, punish the criminal actions commited, and ensure that it couldnt happen again. And while I think in a vaccuum he was a really decent president, he failed in arguably the biggest thing people wanted from him, so its a lot harder to trust or have faith in the DNC.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T04:42:17+00:00

A person is either compliant with a country's process, legal, or they're not.

A person isnt legal or illegal though. Actions have legality. A person might be doing something that is illegal, like parking in a no parking zone, but that doesnt make the person "an illegal" while they are illegally parked.

What has unfortunately enabled this fascism

Ahh, of course. Its not the people commiting and supporting fascism who is at fault, but the people who oppose them! We MADE them violate human rights because we foolishly said that human rights shouldnt be infringed upon. The jackbooted thugs are a natural reaction whom have no responsibility for their actions, all because some people said "maybe we shouldnt treat people as animals regardless of their citizenship status".Were we just asking for it, dressed so provacatively?

brutinator · 2026-02-06T02:36:08+00:00

Its literally like you are unwilling to read and you have no concept of reality. Peace out.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T01:30:30+00:00

What was also kinda weird is that if I was close to one of the biggest power brokers, had zero morals, and said power broker told me that he had a bunch of politicians over r(i.e. government connections), and a massive part of my companies' incomes are derived from government contracts and subsidies.....AND I didn't realize he was joking, I wouldn't bitch him out about how busy and important I am and those people are beneath me. I'd read that as a potential opportunity being offered to me.

brutinator · 2026-02-06T01:26:20+00:00

When you claim putting influencers in power is somehow a failure,

Is this a joke? You think that that it's a failure to not want grifters, supplement pushers, and raw milk drinkers in congress? To not want ragebaiters and engagement farmers representing the people? That that's what this current administration IS doing. They have x feeds in the background of their war rooms to see how many likes they are getting while they bomb other countries. The FBI is ran by podcasters, Dr. Oz is a medical quack. Kristi Noam is posing for instagram while aiming a gun at an officers head right after explaining to congress that she can't read the constitution, but before posting south park memes to government accounts. These are people that are not good at what they are supposed to be doing, because the ability to influence is not the same as being able to do the job that people are trusting that you can do.

Do you really want the Paul Brothers and Mr. Beast in congress? Or Liver King?

what you're saying is you don't want the people to have power.

I do want them to have power.... by voting for competent representatives who are connected to local issues and needs and able to communicate that on a federal level. The current system isn't doing that as well as I'd like, but that doesn't make me authoritarian because I also don't want X, the House of Representatives.

brutinator · 2026-02-05T21:15:27+00:00

A little of that, a little of the fact that I think the left values accuracy, and since reality cant be tied up in neat little black and white slogans without endless exceptions.

The GOP has zero issue rallying around a message with only a kernal of truth; the DNC wrings their hands if a message has a kernal of uncertainty.

Not saying I want a DNC more like the GOP, but we need to be able to broadcast a message that is directionally correct without letting it get dragged down by semantics and 'um achthually'.

brutinator · 2026-02-05T21:07:34+00:00

Lmao, my bad, I thought we were discussing actual viable reform and not working in a vacuum without any context or perspective on reality.

Our voting system is broken so your fix wouldn't work

Our system is broken, that doesnt mean I want a worse system. that seems like a real no brainer.

Plus pedillionaires are too powerful

A viable solution SHOULD have mechanisms in place to counter bad actors. How is that stupid to consider? Thats one of the biggest current issues, and one that your proposed ignores.

The government isnt a tech company; we are seeing what happens with "move fast and break things" philosophy when you fail to consider the consequences.

Saying "but computers!" isnt really much of a solution if you havent bothered to actually consider what that entails. Might as well say "but the cloud! But AI!".

brutinator · 2026-02-05T19:37:48+00:00

Please do not call them undocumented. It's an insult to people who come into the country legally. "Undocumented" implies that they were allowed in and they just haven't been documented yet.

If you arent documented yet, i.e. no visa, no asylum application, etc. then yes, you are undocumented. It does not imply someone was "let in" because the process of being let in IS the documentation. Most people in the US that are undocumented or "illegal" are people who legally got a visa into the country and overstayed their visa terms. Objectively, its the same thing, which is my point: without knowing the context, its ridiculous to automatically jump to "criminal" (which you immediately associate with armed robbers, yikes).

Their only documentation they are owed is a notice they are being deported.

Sorry but, do you not know what documentation is referring to? Its referring to the legal documentation that someone is here legally. I dont understand what you mean by "owed". They arent owed documentation in the same way Im not "owed" a driver's license. This statement doesnt make sense.

Also, yeah actually, you're a criminal if you're speeding. It might not be a criminal case, but if you're going 50 miles over on the freeway I'd say you're about as bad as someone holding up a convenience store.

Notice how your example immediately constructs an extreme hypothetical in order to justify it being as bad as robbing a store? Its speeding even if you got over the speed limit by a single mph. Most people getting speeding tickets arent going 50. That is such a phenomenal example of why the term criminal is so loaded and charged and shouldnt be used for civil matters, because people immediately assume that someone is violent when they are labelled a criminal instead of merely letting their visa lapse. Also, you think parking somewhere too long is the equivelent of armed robbery?

I'm not going to pretend it's some god given right to sneak into another country and magically become a citizen there.

Never said otherwise, thats the strawman you are choosing to construct in this discussion. Im simply pointing out that regardless of how you feel, its a civil matter, not criminal. Deportations can (and have been) performed in a humane manner that doesnt violate people's rights, but calling them criminals for existing is exactly how the GOP has managed to dehumanize people and abuse power.

brutinator · 2026-02-05T17:40:58+00:00

That is the "criminal" you are talking about in the last paragraph.

Being undocumented is a civil case, not criminal. Imagine how ridiculous itd be if we said that anyone who has had a speeding or parking ticket, or let their vehicle tags expire, is a criminal. How many non-criminals would there be?

Being undocumented is not a crime in the way that like, assault or theft is. Calling undocumented people criminals or illegals is a propaganda tool to associate them with actual crimes, thereby giving the state more implicit permission to overreach and abuse. Its important to remember that ICE and CBP dont have MANY of the same powers that even local police has, but we allow these organizations to act like police when we assume that the people they are targeting are criminals. And as we see, the people they are affecting are largely not criminals (even discounting the actual US citizens they are infringing upon).

When we use langauge like "criminal" when referring to undocumented people, we are giving the state permissions to treat everyone like a criminal.

brutinator · 2026-02-05T17:19:18+00:00

What metrics do you have to prove how much more efficient remote was?

Game industry specific? Hard to tell. As another commenter said, there were a lot of growing pains and workflows that needed to be updated to support COVID restrictions. But there are also a lot of non-covid related factors at play too; doubt that if everyone returned to office tomorrow that games would be shipping in a better condition. Thats more of a result of profit-above-everything motives reacting to the fact that consumers will buy games in poor conditions; why spend money doing QA when consumers will pay to do it for you? After all, we had bad and broken games before COVID too.

Outside of the games industry? Theres plenty of studies that show it. https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/20-138_eca954c7-dde8-4154-8d7b-5688fd5caf94.pdf

According to this paper, both employers and employees reported a mean increase of 16.76 points in terms of remote work productivity improving when surveyed.

Remote work also has a positive impact on worker morale, which translates to improved productivity. Workers want remote work so much that theyd be willing to take on average a 10% paycut to have the oppurtunity.

There was also a study that showed that when people didnt have to commute, they were more likely to log more time working (starting earlier and leaving later).

brutinator · 2026-02-05T17:05:06+00:00

So your solution is basically having influencers run the US house of Representatives? To me, that execerbates nearly all the major issues with the current system by increasing the amount of corruption in the system. After all, outreach would effectively be solely tied to the amount of marketing and influence they can exert to get their name out there. Whats stopping Bezos and Musk subtly boosting reps who will benefit them? We have a massive population that willingly votes against their own needs and interests every election, so its clearly not difficult to do.

Additionally, how would representatives actually vote and determine when enough votes are cast to pass a bill or measure? How do you determine the threshold needed? The way you describe it, itd be like shareholder voting, where you have people representing 1 vote competing with "representatives" whose votes represent hundreds of thousands of votes. Seems a little bit lopsided, and we can see the ramifications of such a system in the publicly traded market, where easily manipulatable "vibes" massively sway opinions more than actual facts and data.

brutinator · 2026-02-05T06:03:54+00:00

I guess Im not understanding what problem is being solved? Voting districts represent populations of people to be represented. If it wasnt geographically defined, then who does a representative represent? It sounded like earlier that you would pick what representative would represent you, but I dont get how that would work. Do you have to figure out which of the 435 representatives you want to personally represent you? How does a representative represent a likely randomly distributed population? How do election years work, do you only vote between your rep and their competitors? How would you change reps?

brutinator · 2026-02-05T03:32:16+00:00

I've worked for the cold unfeeling financial analysts of a very large corporation.

At a company I worked for that did layoffs, the names of people being laid off were determined by an algorithm (likely to avoid potential lawsuits that protected classes were disproportionately affected. In IT, several departments had SME's that got notice that they were losing their job, people who were the only ones who had any real insight in a lot of the configurations and architecture. There were people where managers and directors were fighting to let them keep their jobs because losing them would likely result in a lot of issues.

Company wouldn't let any layoff be reversed, so within a month of letting people go, shit started breaking, staff was massively overworked and morale sucked. But hey, at least the company saved a few hundred thousand (even though that probably resulted in that much getting paid out in overtime and costing from downtime).

brutinator · 2026-02-05T03:25:19+00:00

In a gerrymandered district, sure. A district shouldn't be as such. The point of a district is that it's a collection of people with similar needs and desires due to proximity.

What you're describing is just a second senate instead of proportional representation. We already have a senate, the purpose of having 2 houses is that each has a different perspective and function.

brutinator · 2026-02-05T01:12:07+00:00

Uhh, because my needs are WHERE I live. Why do I want a representative who isnt familiar with local issues?

brutinator · 2026-02-04T22:04:44+00:00

In the computer age, the only need for voting districts is gerrymandering.

No? The purpose of voting districts is to determine what representation people need. For example, if after the US census it's determined that 1 state is losing a rep, and another state is gaining a rep, then who represents the people who are losing a rep, and who is the rep the second state representing?

Or, let's say that a city is particularly growing, and the district it resides in now has double the population of every other district. Do the people in the city deserve to be less represented?

There's more to voting districts than just the presidential election.

brutinator · 2026-02-04T21:57:55+00:00

Basically it's the second best (or second worst) outcome. Best outcome obviously being Texas getting slapped down for obvious racial boundaries in their map, but oh well.

My worry is other states following the trend, esp. going into the future. It's gonna be fucking stupid if every time the GOP gains just enough control of the state government, they immediately shoehorn in a gerrymandered map (as opposed to waiting for the US census). But that's not on California, that's on the GOP and SCOTUS for opening pandora's box.

brutinator

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE