Skyrim was released in 2011, originally designed for the PS3 and XBOX 360. According to Statista, over 60 million copies have been sold as of June 2023. Regardless of any subjective feelings we might have, let’s agree that the game couldn’t have been this popular based on hype alone, so there must be something that makes it special.

I suspect that what you’re experiencing is not an overrated game, but the source material for a broad swath of games that have improved and iterated on many of the mechanics and ideas that were presented in Skyrim (and Morrowind, Oblivion, etc).

It’s like saying that you’re a fan of sitcoms, but you hate Seinfeld and Friends. Those shows weren’t perfect, but they created demand for a new type of show that has been modified and improved in numerous ways since they were aired.

Similarly, Skyrim is far from perfect, but when you put it into context, it is easier to see why it was successful. In 2011, Skyrim was THE option for an open world rpg with skill progression, decisions matter, and a crafting system. It was released in the same year as the original dark souls, Portal 2, battlefield 3, and Minecraft. If I’m completely fair, the Witcher 2 also came out in 2011, but had a more linear storyline, and was also one of the first games where your decisions mattered.

The fact that we’re even having a discussion about this game in 2025 should be a testament to its success. While I haven’t played it in years, I’d have a hard time agreeing that it is overrated. It certainly isn’t underrated, so maybe we could agree that it is appropriately rated, given the relevant context?

Ooh, new Creeper World? Underrated games, though the concept was tough for me to get my head wrapped around for a little bit.

Steam has voice channels? 🤯

Ahh OK that makes sense thanks

Hol up, Kagi is indexing discord servers?

Mostly you can’t - most fsd options I’m aware of are mostly in the robotaxi space. Here’s a website that tracks where they’re available.

Otherwise your best bet today that I know of would be Mercedes Drive Pilot, which has a Level 3 rating for being autonomous.

I prefer to digest text too, but still would choose to taste a meal than read a typed up printout of the flavors it contains.

If I showed up at a restaurant and was presented with a menu that didn’t describe anything about the dishes on offer, I’d be pretty disappointed.

Point being that we have limited time and a nearly limitless amount of options for how to spend it. Text summaries are a tool we can use to decide whether something is worth our time (and money) investment if we’re on the fence about it.

Thank you for distilling that down, cleared up all of the confusion I had. Cheers.

Oh, I was just interested in making a pun based on the name. 😂

To be perfectly honest I was under the impression that we had collectively bailed on PGP in favor of GPG, but based on the Wikipedia article it seems like PGP is still getting updates so maybe that’s not the case?

Well it’s not very good, it’s just pretty good.

Agree that passkeys are the direction we seem to be headed, much to my chagrin.

I agree with the technical advantages. Where passkeys make me uneasy is when considering their disadvantages, which I see primarily as:

• Lack of user support for disaster recovery - let’s say you have a single smartphone with your passkeys and it falls off a bridge. You’d like to replace it but you can’t access any of your accounts because your passkey is tied to your phone. Now you’re basically locked out of the internet until you’re able to set up a new phone and sufficiently validate your identity with your identity provider and get a new passkey.
• Consolidating access to one’s digital life to a small subset of identity providers. Most users will probably allow Apple/Google/etc to become the single gatekeeper to their digital identity. I know this isn’t a requirement of the technology, but I’ve interacted with users for long enough to see where this is headed. What’s the recourse for when someone uses social engineering to reset your passkey and an attacker is then able to fully assume your identity across a wide array of sites?
• What does liability look like if your identity provider is coerced into sharing your passkey? In the past this would only provide access to a single account, but with passkeys it could open the door to a collection of your personal info.

There’s no silver bullet for the authentication problem, and I don’t think the passkey is an exception. What the passkey does provide is relief from credential stuffing, and I’m certain that consumer-facing websites see that as a massive advantage so I expect that eventually passwords will be relegated to the tomes of history, though it will likely be quite a slow process.

What is your suggestion for a superior solution to the problems passwords solve?

What an absolute failure of the legal system to understand the issue at hand and appropriately assign liability.

Here’s an article with more context, but tl;dr the “hackers” used credential stuffing, meaning that they used username and password combos that were breached from other sites. The users were reusing weak password combinations and 23andme only had visibility into legitimate login attempts with accurate username and password combos.

Arguably 23andme should not have built out their internal data sharing service quite so broadly, but presumably many users are looking to find long lost relatives, so I understand the rationale for it.

Thus continues the long, sorrowful, swan song of the password.

Not to mention they’re probably paying double for it - once through their taxes for the public school the kids aren’t attending plus the tuition for the private school.

Ah the ol’ security by obscurity plan. Classic.

Sounds weird from inside the echo chamber though

¿Porque no los dos?

Why couldn’t it be both?

Counterpoint: Twitter will continue to maintain a critical mass of users until enough people move somewhere else to make it irrelevant. Continuing to use it only serves to further credentialize the platform, making it even less likely that users will find a new home someplace else.

It’s not much but they try a whole lot more than most.

Thank you. I’m going to restate your explanation to be sure I’ve got it:

• authorities want platforms to comply with legal requests
• when Signal gets a subpoena, they open the key locker and show that it’s empty. They provide the metadata they can (sign up date and last seen date, full stop) and tell authorities they can’t do better.
• when Telegram gets a subpoena, they open the key locker and show all the keys, then slam it shut in the face of the investigator, telling them to get bent.
• conclusion: it’s easier to never have the keys in the first place than to tease the government with them