This was going to be my recommendation, so I’m happy to see it.
Around the same time I also watched The Besieged Fortress. It’s about an ant colony attacking a termite mound. It’s staged, but handled as it might happen in real life, and narrated as if it’s some massive siege in medieval times. It’s fantastic.
Good luck getting to some place you’re happy being.
Funny, with a harsh ring of truth. I actually would be interested if they could dual boot with the game on a partition. That would make the transition to Linux easy too. But ultimately as it is, it’s “use Windows, or say to hell with playing games with your family”. I’m lucky that I still enjoy playing games with them, and them with me, so I gotta stick with that.
I love the idea of using Linux. But then I end up playing Warzone every weekend with my family. Can’t give that up. The best part is that they want kernel access, and still have cheating problems, apparently. (Must be higher than my level!) But it still inherently affects me, as they won’t port to Linux.
If someone posts a copyright violation on YouTube, YouTube can go free under the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA. (In the US.) YouTube just points a finger at the user and says “it’s their fault”, because the user owns (or claims to own) the content. YouTube is just hosting it.
I don’t know of any reason to think it’s not the same for written works. User posts them, Reddit hosts them, user still owns them. Like YouTube, the user gives the host a lot of license for that content, so that they can technically copy and transmit it. But ultimately the user owns it. I assume by the time Reddit made the AI deal they probably put in wording to include “selling a copy of the data” to active they want in the TOS.
Now, determining if the TOS holds up in court is of course trickier. And did they even make us click our permission away again after they added it, it just change something we already clicked? I don’t recall.
Step one is more posting. Keep it on people’s feeds. Do that enough and then you reach out to others who were looking for this and know it. Disenchanted Reddit users, like how some Twitter users went to Mastodon. (Mastodon.gamedev.place and PeopleMaking.Games being two off the top of my head.) And Discord servers.
Try to get enough of a community to keep it visible and alive. That’s the goal at this point.
Then you try to get the people who are looking for this and don’t know it. Now, this isn’t some giant Silicon Valley investment you expect to blow up. You build in the long-term, based on reputation and access. When people want something new, you have to be there. And when people get annoyed with the status quo, you have to be there.
As for the day to day, if we get to the point of what we can call a community, I’d like a few themed posts a week. Indies, game-tangential series (YouTube channels or podcasts,) maybe Q&As. At that point it’s really about the attention we can garner as a community, both the numbers and the specific people.
But let’s be reasonable. That’s several months down the line at best, given my assumption that many of the thousands of subscribers no longer use Lemmy at all. It’ll be an uphill battle. And worst case, if I did nothing, I’m no different than the current moderator. (Not a slam. Just saying.)
deleted by creator
The contemporary Modern Warfare series is a remake of the original series. At least a general new take on a lot from that series. It isn’t 1:1 by far.
Instead of letting you launch each game individually, or creating a general launcher that you start and then pick the game you want to play… They chose to force players to launch MW2 as a fake hub, and in that game’s main menu, click the MW3 option.
The article says you can tell because apparently if you want to play MW2 you just pick the game type and it starts starving for a match. If you want to play MW3 you have to wait as MW2 shuts down and you wait for MW3 to start, after you already waited for MW2 to start initially.
Like I said in another post:
Seems like a good time to remind everyone just a few months ago he took two active usernames from their users without warning. Both @x and @music were in use and taken by Musk with no warning and no recompense.
At this rate I see it as completely possible that someone buys one, and the first time they don’t update within whatever Musk feels like is “too long” that day, he takes it back with no warning.
Seems like a good time to remind everyone just a few months ago he took two active usernames from their users without warning. Both @x and @music were in use and taken by Musk with no warning and no recompense.
At this rate I see it as completely possible that someone buys one, and the first time they don’t update within whatever Musk feels like is “too long” that day, he takes it back with no warning.
I forgot where I saw someone else suggest it… But if you really want to win over shoppers this Black Friday? Don’t run a week of discounted TVs. Discount groceries.
I just don’t see it happening. People have been suggesting they create “VideoHub”/“MediaHub” for years, as they’re the rare company established in free-access video and also able to compete on the basis of having a (presumably) profitable enough service to keep them afloat through any rough patch. Though I’ll certainly agree, it would be incredibly interesting.
You’re obviously right. But it’s funny to me; I find it easy to imagine a world where staying independent and hosting your own stuff was seen as cooler. Instead of YouTube and Google Buzz, we ran RSS clients akin to Outlook and Thunderbird. They torrent and seed media we’re subscribed to while we’re at work or class. It’s saved on a home server. We walk in and simply toss it up on our desktop or TV. (Or maybe a mobile client streams from your home server over the Internet or over your home Wi-Fi if you’re at home )
And if you visited the website instead of YouTube’s recommendations, The creator just adds a few RSS feeds on the backend to pull thumbnails from, of other creators’ sites they enjoy.
Crazy how easy it is to daydream though, when I’m not the one putting the work in.
I absolutely don’t get what my parents have to do with oil barons, but okay.
I remember for a brief time Google offered up names, addresses, and phone numbers in their search results. Then after like a year (maybe less?) people decided to get freaked out over it. They offered a way to opt out, then just removed it entirely.
I also remember back in the 90s, my mom and stepdad buying a 7 disc set of phone numbers and addresses. No idea why they did it… But it was a thing.
I’m not arguing that Twitter is a good platform; I left it back in November for Mastodon and I’ve been happy with the switch. And if publishers want to run accounts labeled as “articles by Person A” and “articles on Topic B”, (to essentially make them user-friends feeds, instead of asking newbies to learn how to add RSS,) I think that’s great!
I’m just saying if a journalist (or any creator really,) is going to be active on social media, that it’s worth to work for the best interest as much as possible. Cultivating their circle on a neutral (between them and their publisher) platform is better for them than working exclusively on a platform owned by their publisher, locking in everything they do socially there. Be that Mastodon, IG, or whatever fits them and their style.
I absolutely get you; you’d think companies would want this. However employees probably shouldn’t want this. It’s generally probably better for them that they work for their own brand when possible, so I’m hesitant to suggest this become a thing.
The fear is a practice called “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” (or EEE). It’s been used by tech companies before: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
It, in theory, could work like this:
Meta embraces ActivityPub in its tech in an attempt to garner good will and make it easy for users to transition to Threads.
Meta extends on ActivityPub by saying "oh we’re just adding a few things that make this better for our users (on our service) but we’re still supporting ActivityPub!
Meta then extinguishes ActivityPub support, and severally hobbles AP, after they secure enough users to be happy and think AP offers no real competition anymore.
Then the enshittification process begins, by moving the focus from users to other interests (usually advertisers) at the expense of users. And eventually to the platform owners, at the expense of advertisers. Though I guess they’ll skip the middle step, being a public company?
I would be curious about the feasibility of a “performance mode” that was basically “reboot you into a “single program” mode”. I assume it would be unreasonable given so much software relies on the tools modern OSes provide, unless the software itself was made with this in mind.
You’d imagine some giant like Adobe would figure out a way to run dedicated machines, given they have so much software that uses lots of resources. But then, as best as I would find it for games, I imagine most people don’t want to give up alt-tabbing to their web browsers.
Edit: Besides. The real benefits would hit until you were coding to the metal anyway, right? Assuming that’s still feasible too.
I was at Full Sail in 2003-2004. Say what you want, but the point here is that people there LOVED games. We’d set up 2 TVs in the living room, and 2 in the bedroom, and go crazy for hours. A single game of single flag assault on Blood Gulch could last hours. Then we’d play FFA to pick leaders, then go again. After 2-3 games the hype would dwindle, some would leave, and we’d go to Munchkin. Then occasionally poker. Then Denny’s for breakfast because it was early in the morning and class was in a couple of hours on Monday.
Talk about a feeling of belonging. Definitely chasing that feeling still, and not ashamed of it.