I remember the very strange control scheme it had on PS4 I think it was? You couldn’t bind your abilities to any button, just specific combinations like Square+Left, but not Square+Right, something like that. I wonder if they’ve changed that in the newer ones.

I only just found out about it and wanted to share since I havent heard any dicussion around this style of game. It looks fun, but I havent had a chance to sink much time into it.

Does Backblaze work for what you are doing? It been a bit since I’ve price compared them, but I think it was something around 5$ a month per TB?

The Venn diagram of game developers, who are also interested in/good at running a business has very little overlap. You need many different kinds of people to run a business, but a game developers is only one of those. In some rare cases it works out though.

My experience around any opinion where there is a default option, the vast majority will accept the default without thinking. Then when presented with an alternative by someone who has actively chosen to not chose the default, people become highly defensive as if they did do their due diligence, whether or not they actually did. Depending on where you live, the defaults change, but being that humans are tribal, differences in lifestyle naturally create friction. In parts of America, you drive an SUV, use an iPhone, and eat meat. Whether or not they actively or passively chose that lifestyle, when someone doesn’t conform to what is expected there will be friction. How people react to that friction is up to them, but again, the default is to be critical of them and encourage conformity.

So computers can share IP’s then right? By your example they are sharing their public IP. From the perspective of the server you are connecting to, all the machines on your LAN have the same IP. Same way multiple physical phones can be connected to a single landline, all those phones share the same number.

That’s sorta the curse of an open protocol is that anyone, even your enemies, can use them. I am no fan of Meta. I am a big fan of open standards, monkey’s paw and all. It is not a case of tolerating the intolerant. To restrict Meta out of using ActivityPub is against the spirit of open standards. The protocol is no longer open, and THEN we really have something to worry about.

Don’t worry I’ve been quoted EEE enough times. I really don’t think that is the direction this will go down. If Meta actually embraces it, then the whole of the fediverse grows over all. Then, if Meta does extend the ActivityPib protocol in a way the that becomes incompatible with the rest of the ecosystem, we just let them go and do their own thing. ActivityPub already has a userbase, if they join us, and then later on cause problems then everything just goes back to how it is right now. The final E can’t realistically happen because the existing ecosystem will just carry on exactly as it is now. If people on Threads want to communicate with us, then they need to speak the same protocol. If they don’t, then they don’t get to participate.

Do you genuinely believe that the whole community of the fediverse would just lie down and accept breaking changes to the protocol without resistance? There are too many talented and passionate people invested in this ecosystem, the absolute worst case scenario is the protocol itself gets forked, and again the exist communities just carry on. There is no extinguish time line. Everyone points to how Meta handled XMPP, please compare the user bases of ActivityPub vs XMPP. The world has changed a lot since then. Another example I’d like to point out is Hashicorp’s Terraform. They explicitly tried to EEE, and the moment they attempted the final E, it was instantly forked, and the open licensed fork was adopted into the Linux Foundation and the ecosystem carried on.

Take that what you will, but I am reasonably convinced ActivityPub has enough support and community that any EEE attempt will inevitably fail. The front ends will change, the hosters will come and go, the open standard is here to stay.

What do you mean by Mastodon selling out to Meta? Isn’t Meta just building an ActivityPub based platform so we can talk to their users as far as I know. If they want to talk to us, then the onus is on Meta to stay compatible. If they aren’t, then we just continue on as we have.

100% agree. Universal Basic Income feels inevitable as a solution. Better and better technology puts machines in place of human labor, with no guarantee that other jobs will come into existence to replace the ones lost. Is it not the ideal goal to have machines do all labor, leaving humans to do what they actually want without fear of homelessness and starvation.

It just kinda sucks right now because these systems don’t exist to support this changing landscape.

Which is exactly the same as how there were no new jobs for horses created. Employment is not a right. You have to either adapt with the changing times, or become unemployed. I agree that it sucks.

Improvements in technology do not guarantee employment for tradespeople of current technology. A whole lot of horses became unemployed when cars became ubiquitous. I’d say the improvement of cars to society is worth the loss of employment to all those who maintained the horse’s infrastructure. Like all those manufacturing jobs lost from the improvement in machines, professional creatives must adapt to the times, or seek other forms of work. No different than any other job in all of history.

By writing text on their platform, you consented to their free and unlimited use of your text. Terms of Service and EULA on practically all platforms has this boilerplate legal agreement. You DID consent. Facebook has access to a massive amount of text, same with Google. They don’t need to bother stealing when so much is already in their databases.

Now if you never wrote any text published on any platform with that agreement, sure you could have an argument there.

I would argue they already have. Just as cars used to be slow, inefficient, and loud, compared to today. Overtime their will inevitably be improvements in how they run, but also improvements in dedicated hardware support. Timeline wise, we are enjoying the hot new Model T, knowing eventually we will get to have a modern Honda Civic.

I despise that the artwork generators are all based on theft.

Ownership of anything is difficult to define. The internet has accelerated this loosening of definition. If I pay a subscription to use my coffee pot, do I really own it? If I take a picture of the coffee pot, do I own the picture? If I pay a photographer to take a picture of the pot do I own the picture, do I own their time?

I don’t intend on trying changing your opinion on theft, but its interesting to think about how ownership feels very different as time goes by.

Docker, e.g. containers, are actually a process isolation system similar but not exactly the same as a chroot if you are familiar with that. It’s an isolation of resources, but not so hardware isolated like a full fat VM. For example, adding a GPU to a VM requires handing over the full PCIe hardware interface, with one interface per VM. Where as containers can just bind mount the device files in /dev and multiple containers can share the same GPU hardware. Containers aren’t virtualizating anything, just isolating processes from each other in a standardized way.

Bash being on the same level as actually fake code is a pretty hot take to me. What are your opinions on Python, or Ruby, or any other interpreted language? You could very well use them as your login shell, just like Bash if you wanted. In your eyes, if Bash *isn’t * a programming language at all, how do you describe a programming language? Languages that express code are just the same as languages that write stories, and whether you do it in German or Vietnamese makes no difference on what story you can write.

When you describe a language as constricted what do you mean? Bash can do anything Python or Rust can do, each of them is just specialized to being better at specific aspects for human convenience in writing code. There is no inherit limitation on what can be done by the language you use to express it.

Pseudo code is literally fake code. Scripting is an actual type of code. Scripted languages while not strictly defined, usually refers to languages you don’t compile before running them. Bash is considered a scripting language because you don’t ship a binary compiled executable, but rather ship a file that is human readable and converted into machine code when it is run. Scripting languages are compared to compiled languages, like C or Rust. Where the file you run is already compiled, and executed directly.

What do you mean by this?

i’m referring to the aspect of a scripting language being generally constricted.

Any Turing complete system, or this case language, can do anything any other one can, depending on the level of suffering you are willing to endure to make it happen. Anything JS can do, Rust can do. Anything Rust can do, Bash can do. The differences between languages is the assumptions they make, and performance characteristics as a result of those assumptions. Functionality is not practically different from one another, though some absolutely make it easier for humans to do.

Fork it, maintain it, and move on. RHEL was forked into Alma/Rocky when the original provider’s goals, and their community’s goals were not in alignment. So far, the forks have improved the ecosystem over all. Fork Nix/NixOS and build the community. Its no different than the Debian derivatives like Mint or Ubuntu.

That jumped out to me too. Seems incredible that the reason the system exists at all, has become a “weird” way to use it. You can git clone the kernel just like any other repo on github, so no big deal.