Modva

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I wonder if there's any value to considering the point he makes on its own merits.

And billionaires are also bad.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

This space is less capitalistic than you might be used to. It's more of a small town square, and we hang corporates for team building.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Only some people will get access I presume

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Well, rather this than a bad release

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

Still evil motherfuckers that they even tried it. Won't forget.

 

People keep telling me that dating today is a war zone, facing all kinds of challenges.

Dating apps don't seem to be directly trying to help solve the problem as much as generate revenue. In fact, they are very directly motivated to not make great long term matches.

Some people seem think that just getting out there and hoping for the best is the answer. Maybe that's true, but it's still very random. I was wondering about a hypothetical alternative:

What if you could go to an agency of some kind get rated through a thorough evaluation process? Would that be helpful ? It's not perfect, and many things are hard to measure. But maybe it's a less random starting point and can escape the exclusively money driven approach of dating apps.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago

I've been in similar situations with my children. Parents can't be experts in everything, no matter how much we wish we could.

The evidence that you are a great parent is in caring and realizing when you are out of your area of familiar expertise, then seeking input to close that need.

The right thing to do is reach out to a professional or 2 and get multiple opinions, then weigh those opinions up with the child you know and love. Decide from there on what is a good course of action. An outside opinion often helps us with blind spots, but get more than one if you can.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Blind fury. Blind to someone's faults, blinded by love. Poker blinds. Types of medical trials. Venetian blinds.

Getting angry at other well-established uses of words seems like fun.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 week ago

Moved to Firefox some months ago, it's fine. Small adjustment but browsers generally offer high interchangeability

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Tough and getting tougher, we're releasing a major system into live usage in 2 weeks and we're nowhere near ready

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Yeah you're right, a divider. Or a 0.x multiplier I suppose.

And you're also right about the divide between highly skilled and not, but I think that's what we saw quite strongly in SAO. The side effect of serious consequences separated the players.

I don't think it's a successful design approach for a commercial game, most players do not play permadeath even if it's an common option.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago

Why is PCMag supporting more Twitter usage? It's a poison, a platform for mass manipulation.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The underlying threat of serious consequences changed player behaviour, psychologically.

Today gamers throw themselves into monsters with limited regard for consequences, which changes our perception of the encounters.

I wonder what would happen if number of deaths was a tracked stat that acted as a multiplier for player skills / powers.

view more: next ›