I don't typically have sex with things I'm not attracted to... And even if psychologically my sexual impulse seems different from that of an animal's, it's biologically the same.
What purpose does this distinction serve?
1,527 karma · joined June 22, 2016
What purpose does this distinction serve?
You have different goals in life than other people.
Please try to be aware that the path you've chosen is not the only right one. Some people have different goals.
Some people even have the cognitive ability to regard the goal of fulfillment in life and creativity as more important than the run-of-the-mill goal of survival that most people are seemingly satisfied with reaching towards.
Basically to get around this absurd policy I have to switch to another carrier and back over two months. However, I don't plan to switch back once I make the jump.
In the last year I've traveled to a couple states and a few dozen cities and I had garbage speed and latency in all of them. T-Mobile's solution was that I buy a new phone. But the phone achieved 100mbit when I first got my plan.
My carrier tells me that in order to downgrade my plan I would have to first cancel my phone number and wait a month.
What debate exactly do you think I'm making up? This entire discussion stems from a disagreement about what qualifies as a "hacker", which is all that I have addressed.
Gamification is usually meant for creating addictive behaviors but I think some of it was in earnest effort. I can see how the idea of "Nobody ever wants to learn, let's try to make learning a game" makes sense from above, but it's hard to actually implement correctly. And at some point, some new manager with ideas about gamification for profit's sake inevitably joins the company.
The topic at hand was how randomness is undesirable in video games.
> Chess is a good example of a game with perfect information for both sides.
If we're discussing perfect information with respect to Game Theory, Chess is a good example, though my favorite example is Tic-Tac-Toe because of how simple the ruleset is.
As for a 2x2 game with Fog of War and truly no randomness, I would suggest Advance Wars. Spawn locations on maps are always predictable, though a player can create hidden information by not deploying in every available spawn location.
> The meaning connoted by cDc is the the one from the movie Wargames
cDc engaged in much more than run-of-the-mill systems exploits. They produced a lot of literature and overall espoused hacker culture as an inclusive one. I'd be very interested to hear what each of them think about how broadly the term "hacker" can be applied, and I'm willing to bet they don't all share the same view.
> The argument isn't about whether Beto was a part of hacker culture at all. Clearly, he was. It just wasn't the hacker culture the OP was referring to.
You can't do that. You can't say "both definitions are valid" and then bristle up when someone doesn't use your preferred definition.
It does seem that if you remove randomness entirely, what you're left with is a game whose strategy revolves around information symmetry/asymmetry. Either it's a game where all the rules are known and players are on equal footing, or it's a game like Diplomacy where rules and game state are known initially but players can create information asymmetry to use to their advantage as the game progresses.
Bullet spread as a stratagem isn't random because the idea is that you can choose: Quick, reactionary hip fire or slow, focused aiming? One guarantees a hit at the expense of speed, the other guarantees speed at the expensive of maybe not hitting. But no one using hip fire will be angry that their gun might have missed, because the system is predictable, non-random and non-changing. However, if we were talking about a system where sometimes your aiming is precise and sometimes it isn't, with no clear rules, then your strategy begins to depend on randomness instead of interfacing with it.
That's why randomness isn't "paramount" to the combat of PUBG. This is why the game is successful. Bugs nonwithstanding, once a player secures loot they can form predictable, actionable strategies that do not depend on RNG. If this wasn't the case, and randomness bled into combat itself, nobody would play the game.
After you get your gear, randomness is no longer in play other than the circles of death. A shot to a player's head should always connect. There's no element of randomness when engaging with another player.
If there was a noticeable random element of accuracy in your weapons, the community would drop PUBG in a hot second. Fortnite's scene isn't nearly as competitive so it's possible there is more leeway for random combat, but in PUBG dependable combat is a MUST.
Is there a particular case you find lacking? What are you trying to learn?
Tumblr disintegrated because they lost sight of their community, first with the Yahoo acquisition, and again with the Verizon merger. And now it's useless to everyone, both the users and the people who thought they could squeeze it dry for a few bucks. There's nothing to argue with. That's simply the facts. You're arguing a straw man and you don't even have a point, you're just playing a poor devil's advocate.
The same thing happened when Yahoo was running the show, the bleed-out was just slower because they were more timid about making sweeping changes to Tumblr's ecosystem.
Instead of Yahoo or Verizon realizing that they weren't fit to run a community and divesting the company to more competent leadership, as money machines they were unable to recognize the human element behind these companies and ripped them to shreds trying to scrounge up pocket change.
You are trading ease of use and convenience for the next generation's walled garden where Facebook sees and provides everything.
Sure, the impact doesn't feel as such. And supporting Facebook's plan by talking to your relatives on it doesn't seem like a big deal. Neither did it feel like a big deal when the generations before us decided to sacrifice our entire planet for a few decades of economic advantage.
Tumblr may be a company. But it was also a community. Real relationships were made on there. I wasn't big on Tumblr but it meant the whole world to thousands of people growing up.
Verizon could make its decisions in the context of running a company, or in the context of running a community. They chose the former, because as a money machine they have no interest in spending capital to be the bearers of a meaningful online community which facilitates the formation of meaningful connections between people.
You may be engineering your own solution, but it's still the solution to someone else's problem. When you win, it's an empty feeling.
With respect to sandbox games, games like Minecraft truly offer you unlimited freedom. Minecraft is completely open. You get dropped into a new world with no instructions and no goals. The only problems are your own, and so your solutions feel like your own. Your victories feel like your own. Your defeats feel like your own. You feel like you're in another world, not working overtime at your desk solving problems.
With respect to other genres, look for something between challenge and wonder. Find games which are made with 100% love no matter the complexity or fidelity. Each level, take in everything you see and think about how someone laboriously designed every art asset you see, every system you use, every character, dialogue, level chunk, etc.
Take in these games as the massive, collaborative works of art that they are. When you're playing them, you're setting aside time in your week to become a receptacle for someone else's vision. A patron of their art.
Find games which you're still thinking about months after you've beaten them. Find games which have dead simple mechanics and are designed around short bursts of focused, intense gameplay, with which you can spend the next few years of your life slowly and methodically honing your skills in the small gaps between important engagements.
Play old games. Don't just play the latest and greatest. Video games are only half a century old, it's still possible to play many of the bonafide classics without devoting your life to it. You'll find more engaging and rewarding gameplay with the simple, but focused systems older games employ. You'll find joy in the way that the game's artists were able to create their vision with only a 320×200 resolution and 256-color palette, or only a couple thousand polygons.
In short, avoid modern AAA games like the plague. Just like the monstrosity that is the modern Hollywood scene or pop radio culture, AAA games have become an engine which sucks players out of all the money it can.
If you're not into false gameplay, addictive elements like loot boxes and micro-transactions in the face of extreme grinding, that doesn't mean you're not still into games.
If this piques your interest, let's chat over email and I can explain exactly what I mean. I think there is much hope for the future of the internet and that we've just hit a nasty pothole.
I think the instructions are meant for Debian however and there are some differences in the commands you need to run. If you use a Redhat distro and/or you want some further optimization tips I'm also happy to work you through the process.
https://vfio.blogspot.com/2015/05/vfio-gpu-how-to-series-par...
Furthermore, it's proprietary NVIDIA drivers Wayland isn't supporting, not NVIDIA itself. AFAIK nouveau works just fine. There are many great reasons for not supporting the proprietary NVIDIA drivers.
> So small character pool means that "probably" the password is short/weak.
I really don't know how you came to that conclusion. I never claimed any dependence between the character pool length and password length. They're obviously completely separate properties.