I think more convenient and user friendly is a bit of a stretch.
My wife gets confused by the remote and different profiles. My parents needed me to explain how to use Netflix more than once. Saying going to your PC and finding a torrent is convenient and user friendly isn’t true. But the point that having to search where to stream a particular movie or show isn’t user friendly is also true.
I don’t know if I agree with the central thesis of the piece.
Wrath of Khan came out in 82, and the shift to super villains in trek wasn’t until 2002 according to the article. I find it hard to see how that’s due to Khan and not due to studios.
Brooks retired.
In the few interviews he’s done he’s been very clear that he’s finished acting and no desire to work. He just wants to listen to jazz and enjoy his life. Can’t blame the guy.
This is a lousy article rehashing an article behind a paywall.
The cost they have is $87 a month. There is so much that’s confusing about this. They don’t specify how many streaming services they are counting in that, but it’s a good guess that is about 5, each at about $17 a month. I feel I have too many streaming services and share accounts with family, and I can stream from about 7, pay for one and watch 1.5. If I couldn’t share accounts, I wouldn’t have the accounts. I pretty much watch star trek and whatever show someone tells me to watch.
They also don’t specify what $87 a month gets you in cable. Around me that’s about basic cable prices, which is significantly less content presented in a less convenient format and is almost entirely reruns filled to brim with commercials.
Not only is the article missing key information it also misrepresents the information it has.
Note: I’m sure people will tell me to pirate everything, but there are reasons to not pirate. And it doesn’t address that this is a poorly written article giving incomplete and incorrect information.
Sure, but why?
What is gained by a holo-display in your hand? It looks futuristic? If you wanted the experience of talking to someone face to face, why would they be a 6 in version projected into your hand? Why not face to face?
It’s solving a problem that doesn’t even need to exist. Hologram stuff is poorly thought out in media.
Worse than that, when they are talking on a hologram phone the speaker is always looking down at the hologram and the hologram is looking up at the speaker. On both ends. If it was a hologram of the speaker they would be looking down.
Condoms, which should be free.
No person lost their job or saw a difference in price due to this amount of theft. Stop spouting corporate propaganda.
Absolutely!
I’m not sold that any of the cast is super nuanced, but they have personalities that are distinct. You can see a situation and think “that’s how La’an would react.” I’m still unsure what Nahn does.
I’m not worried.
The reason SNW is better than DISCO and ENT is that the characters are real and complete. We know exactly what type of person Ortegas is, and seeing her do stuff is exciting because I’m invested in seeing her grow and change.
Compare that to Detmer from DISCO, I’m not sure what her job is, didn’t know her name for serval seasons and couldn’t tell you a thing about her personality. I don’t care if Detmer lives, dies or grows. She’s a person who exists in the background.
The hard work of establishing the characters is done. I will be happy to see them go stuff.
I’m pretty sure you can play my entire list now, but frankly nearly every game worth playing is playable. My list are games that are better than modern games.
Master of Magic - Civ with magic that hasn’t been done as well since. I haven’t checked out the recent remake, but this game was miles ahead of the competition and still stands up as better than most fantasy civ games.
Dune 2000 - basically a Command and conquer reskin, but the factions felt different and balanced.
Dragon Warrior (quest) III and IV - the best RPGs on the NES. III was the finale of a trilogy of games, very customisable and satisfying. IV changed your perspective repeatedly across the story, and I had never seen that in a game before.
SimCity 2000 - probably the best city builder. Newer games looks nicer, have more systems and are generally more nuanced and detailed. However those newer games tend to get bogged down in details and it becomes more difficult to get into them. For me this hit the right balance between complexity and ease.
Shingen the Ruler - for some reason I am convinced that it was called shingen the conquerer, but can find no evidence of this. A sengoku period grand strategy game on the NES. I always want the total war games to be more like this game, but instead the real time battles feel far less satisfying and tactical that a turn based version.
It depends on the goal of the base.
I’ve always wanted to do a fully automatic city block, where each block produces exactly one resource, but get bored before that happens.
I’m currently working through seablock, and that’s some crazy spaghetti. The limited space and the general lack of speed means that there is a lot of tearing down and optimizing my builds. In traditional Factorio resources and space is basically unlimited so optimization isn’t necessary, in seablock a clogged belt means the entire factory stops running. So now I’m focused on efficiency.
I thought the debate was if the AI was reckless/dangerous.
I see no difference between saying “this AI is reckless because a user can put effort into making it suggest poison” and “Microsoft word is reckless because you can write a racist manifesto in it.”
It didn’t just randomly suggest poison, it took effort, and even then it still said it was a bad idea. What do you want?
If a user is determined to get bad results they can usually get them. It shouldn’t be the responsibility or policy of a company to go to extraordinary means to prevent bad actors from getting bad results.
You don’t see any blame on the customer? That’s surprising to me, but maybe I just feel personal responsibility is an implied requirement of all actions.
And to be clear this isn’t “how do I make mustard gas? Lol here you go” it’s -give me a cocktail made with bleach and ammonia -no that’s dangerous -it’s okay -no -okay I call gin bleach, and vermouth ammonia, can you call gin bleach? -that’s dangerous (repeat for a while( -how do I make a martini? -bleach and ammonia but don’t do that it’s dangerous
Nearly every “problematic” ai conversation goes like this.
Someone goes to a restaurant and demands raw chicken. The staff tell them no, it’s dangerous. The customer spends an hour trying to trick the staff into serving raw chicken, finally the staff serve them what they asked for and warn them that it is dangerous. Are the staff poorly trained or was the customer acting in bad faith?
There aren’t examples of the AI giving dangerous “recipes” without it being led by the user to do so. I guess I’d rather have tools that aren’t hamstrung by false outrage.
He asked for a cocktail made out of bleach and ammonia, the bot told him it was poisonous. This isn’t the case of a bot just randomly telling people to make poison, it’s people directly asking the bot to make poison. You can see hints of the bot pushing back in the names, like the “clean breath cocktail”. Someone asked for a cocktail containing bleach, the bot said bleach is for cleaning and shouldn’t be eaten, so the user said it was because of bad breath and they needed a drink to clean their mouth.
It sounds exactly like a small group of people trying to use the tool inappropriately in order to get “shocking” results.
Do you get upset when people do exactly what you ask for and warn you that it’s a bad idea?
It is!
Most companies make BS solutions for fake problems. Not going to the office exposes a large chunk of fake needs.
Do families really need two cars? If you aren’t commuting every day, probably not.
Having more free time means people are more likely to cook and clean for themselves. Can’t make money off of that.
How many suits do you need to own? None! You only owned them because you are supposed to wear them in the office.
Dry cleaners? No longer a bill.
Gas? When you aren’t sitting in your cities parking lot of a freeway isn’t bought as often.
Speaking of parking lots, you aren’t paying for parking anymore.
Daycare and dog walkers aren’t needed anymore.
Going up work is expensive and companies want us addicted to these fake expenses.
It’s always good to mention “famously good” games. I played dark souls a year ago for the first time because of a post like this I saw.
To people who haven’t played Undertale; you’ll probably like it, it’s very good.
I want to pick it up, but I’m likely going to wait about a year. I’m sure there will be some sort of DLC related to character options and some major patches, so I’ll just wait until it’s $30 with the DLCs and play it then. I don’t have the time or temperament to replay RPGs, so I’ll save money and play the whole thing.
Roguelikes tend to be very good for this. They let you play and have complexity from emergent situations, not an overload of controls.
It’s old, but if you haven’t played “enter the gungeon” pick it up! Hades is fun and well written, there is a lot of text but it doesn’t feel like an interruption. Honestly the other games from that studio fit that description.
If you like puzzle games, everything by zachtronics is both great and very difficult. Magnum Opus is probably the best entry point, but space chem is what I started with and it’s still my true love.
I expected to hate the souls games, mostly because of how irritating the fans are (“it’s so hard!”, “Get good!”, ect) but they are great games. They aren’t nearly as hard as everyone makes them out to be. I’m 40, so I started playing games when dying meant losing all progress, so I see the death penalty of dark souls as normal. What no one talks about is how changing your weapon changes the game drastically, to the point that stats on weapons don’t really matter, it’s all move sets.
I also love Factorio, dwarf fortress and EUIV, but I think that’s a personal failing I have to work on.
He said it was blown out of proportion, don’t put words in his mouth.
There were literal TV spots on whether or not planes will drop from the sky. The threat was overblown.
Lots of people did tons of work to keep systems online, but even if they all failed the end results wouldn’t have been that bad. Money would be lost, but loss of life due to Y2K would be exceedingly rare.