davehtaylor

Yeah this looks like more of an alternative to Sublime

Might be neat. Might check it out. But devs really need to stop asking me to install things by curling a script and piping it into my shell. There are better ways to do this. Doing this leaves a massive possible attack surface.

Exactly.

Also far, far more often than not, when someone talks about “corrupt banking systems” they’re about two steps away from quoting The Protocols.

It’s all Libertarian/anarcho-captialist pablum, pushed by people who think society was a bad idea

Exactly.

SCOTUS justices need to be elected and have term limits. Give them three total 4 year terms max.

EDIT: I know this would take a Constitutional amendment to change, which given our current political climate, is functionally impossible

Yeah, just reading the headline, I was like, didn’t this already happen like a decade or so ago?

For far too long, there’s been this idea in tech spaces that a person, regardless of how shitty they are, is automatically deserving of adulation because they’re some “10x” developer. That soft skills, and wider understanding of the landscape, are completely unnecessary. They think it’s “meritocracy” where all that matters is the code you deliver, and you can be the shittiest person on the planet otherwise. It’s created so much toxicity, so much hostility, and driven so many people away. And it’s so much more apparent in OSS spaces where pull requests seem to be the only currency people have to wield.

Those kinds of attitudes completely pushed me away from participating is nearly all Linux/OSS communities. I used to be really active on a number of forums and in irc. But that kind of shit became so overbearing it just wasn’t worth it anymore. Not to mention the fact that it felt like 75% of the people there were also 4channers and well on their way down the alt-right rabbit hole.

Wow, that’s one of the worst-written articles I’ve seen in a while. It almost feels like a comment on something that we aren’t shown. Almost every sentence is missing essential context. When did he say that? In what context? Can we get a direct quote?

This article is absolutely just AI blogspam. A lot of words that say absolutely nothing.

The real problem is greed. These days, it’s not enough for a business to be profitable. For the guys on Wall Street, it needs to be even more profitable than last year. That goes so far that an old employer of mine complained not that they had lost money, not that they had not grown but that they had grown less than the year before and therefore all teams had to cut down on spending. To them, everything less than exponential growth is unacceptable and nobody even considers that the market is finite.

It’s absolutely unsustainable, and it’s destroying the entire industry (well, destroying everything else too, but here specifically for this discussion). Companies keep cranking out more incremental changes to their hardware that do not need them. Developers keep pushing out bigger and bigger and bigger games that cost more and more, chewing up and spitting out creative teams, burying players in predatory microtransactions and subscription fees that no one wants nor asked for. All so shareholders can make a few more bucks this quarter.

I just keep going back to that meme of “I want shorter games, with worse graphics, made by people who are paid more to work less, and I’m not kidding.” And they would make a killing with that if they’d do it. But they won’t because it doesn’t sound greedy enough to investors.

The point is that those “thousand” benefits for LO do not matter. That’s simply not how businesses run. It would be great if it were, but it isn’t. And your experience as an individual user with MS support is completely irrelevant with regard to business support.

If that’s your view of it, then you truly do not understand how businesses operate (especially larger companies). “Hey this is free, let’s switch to this!” isn’t a pitch. There are so many factors to consider: service, support, contracts, deployment, on and on and on. It would be great if every business adopted OSS, but they’re not going to. And that’s not a failure of one employee to convince a Fortune 500 company, for example, that LO would be a cost-saving measure.

in alot of countries, having WhatsApp becomes a must.

Why is this? I hear this a lot, but I don’t understand

Yeah, this is strange. They fork a repo, but clearly have no idea what they’re doing. Or they thought they’d just grab the code before it went down, and had no plan on what to do with it. Their website doesn’t work. The readme says “Most of the development happens on GitHub” even though they’re on GitLab.

Many users on Lemmy seem actively hostile to the idea of decentralization in a way that feels self defeating. They don’t want a better alternative to Reddit, they just want Reddit 2.0 and attempts to sway them towards something better feels like pulling teeth.

I keep seeing this, and I don’t really understand. Lemmy is a link aggregator that allows users to organize those links into categories/communities/etc, and lets people comment on the links and have discussions about them. From an end-user perspective, that’s exactly what Reddit is. So I’m genuinely curious what’s meant when people say they don’t want Reddit 2.0 from a technical perspective. From a social perspective, the toxicity, brigading, shitposting, etc are definitely not desirable. But with shit moderation tools, those sort of things don’t get sorted, and federation just magnifies all of those problems. Though I think disabling voting definitely helps discourage shitposting and low-effort responses.

But I genuinely do think a lot of problems really come down to the fundamentals of federation. And given how many downsides there are to it, I’m not convinced it’s actually a benefit at all.

Didn’t Oblivion already have the difficulty slider? You could just adjust that, no?

Not sure how much it affected the scaling. I usually just stuck to Normal difficulty. But as you went on, in Kvatch and inside Oblivion gates, instead of stunted scamps or clannfear runts, you’d start seeing spider daedra, daedroths, storm atronachs, and Xivili. Going back through Kvatch the second time, or when you get to the end of the main quest going through Imperial city you would be overwhelmed with a huge mob of Xivili and spider daedra.

You mentioned immersion breaking, and that’s another big issue. Just walking around seeing bandits go from wearing fur or leather armor, to wearing glass or daedric armor, is just ridiculous.

which provided an immersive way of gating content and a real sense of achievement when you came back later with better armour and weapons to finally defeat the enemy who gave you so many problems earlier. Basically the same experience you had with Death Claws in Fallout New Vegas when compared to Fallout 3 - they aren’t just a set piece, they are a real challenge

This is precisely why I dislike level scaling at a whole. It ruins any sense of progression. And I do love the way FNV used the deathclaws and cazadores as a gating mechanism.

Not the person you replied to, but for me Oblivion has some long and rich faction quests, really interesting side quests, and Shivering Isles basically adds an entirely new game to it, there’s so much to do there.

However, my biggest issue is that the leveling system (particularly the level scaling) is completely broken. If you rise anywhere above lever 5 or so, the difficulty ratchets up so much it makes the main quest nearly impossible to complete. I know level scaling is a big topic in the industry, but for me, the way it’s implemented nearly ruins what is otherwise a mostly great game.

I also wish you weren’t able to join all the factions. Like, if you’re high up in the Mage’s Guild, why tf would the Fighter’s Guild want you to join them? That was something Morrowind did really well. You really had to be deliberate about those kinds of choices.

The problem with Starfield’s settlements is that they are entirely resource mining operations. They aren’t really settlements in the way Fallout’s are. You have to spend a phenomenal amount of time to get the perks needed to make it even remotely useful or manageable, and by the time you get there, it’s not even worth it (which is true for most of Starfield’s mechanics, IMO).

The problems is that’s not what Fallout is. It’s not a settlement sim. But when I played F4 for the first time, it felt just like Fallout Shelter with a quest tacked onto it, which is not at all what I wanted. Especially the way the game strongly pushes you into the Minutemen. It makes it extremely tedious for a new player. After the first time, I walked away from the game and didn’t come back to it for over a year. I decided to give it a go and completely ignored the Minutemen, and it was such a better game. But you have to know you can do that.

Also it wasn’t until modding was opened up that the settlement system got good, IMO.

I recently did another playthrough, starting with 1. When I got to three, I spent a couple hours with it and just gave up. It’s just so shallow, bland, and lacking compared to 1 and 2.

New Vegas is the sequel 1 and 2 deserved, and Bethesda tries really hard to pretend it doesn’t exist.

F4 has only had staying power simply because of the modding community. It’s succeeded despite Bethesda. Modders took an extremely mediocre game and made it something much more rich and interesting.

Eclipse is a popular IDE that’s super customizable and extensible. They have a huge marketplace of plugins. And swear I remember there being a WYSIWYG editor for it, but now that I’m searching, it seems there might not be anymore.

I definitely understand the pain though.

We have experimented with CMS options, but had various issues arising from this - lack of customisation/design flexibility (each individual page we create often has a completely unique design based on the content

I’m a web dev who got their start back in the 90s. I’m also an enthusiast for classic computers and restoring them. One of the biggest problems is that older web browsers won’t view anything with HTTPS, have no idea how to render modern web languages, and modern browsers make a mess of classic sites (though this is also an effect of much larger screen resolutions). So I was working on a project to try to build sites on the modern web that older browsers could view, using like HTML3, with no CSS nor JS. I had this ambitious idea that maybe there was a way to create a CMS that could build older sites like that. I was trying to use a headless CMS that I could take content from with a modern frontend for a modern experience, and then build a backend that could wrap the content up in 90s-tastic style. And it’s possible if you want just a generic, bland and basic site. But if you want anything that looks like things did then, it’s impossible. Like you mentioned, everything was so bespoke. so often pages then were built largely with images: navigation, layout, styling, etc. Everything was so unique, custom, and specific to the site. It wasn’t like now where everything is based on the exact same grid, or Bootstrap theme, or WP theme.

The sad part is that there were so many WYSIWYG editors back then that you could use, and even web-based ones (Angelfire, Tripod, Geocities, etc) but all that’s gone now. I did find a copy of Dreamweaver 1 and 2 on MacintoshGarden and gave that a spin for a bit on an old PowerMac G4. That was fun, but I can’t remember if they had a Windows version during the 90s. Though as hard as it is to get even 10 year old software to run on Win 10 and 11, that probably wouldn’t work anyway.

Long-winded way to say: the divide between the 90s and now, wrt web tech, is vast. Not sure how close this is to what you’re trying to do, but thought I’d share it.

Yeah, finding fucking timed dialogue events made me wanna chuck the disc out the damned window

Here’s two wildly different dialog options, that might have vastly different consequences. You have three seconds to decide. Fuck that shit.