• 0 Posts
  • 32 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: October 2nd, 2023

help-circle






  • Because these corporations presumably think they’ll buy a talented studio, get it to make something its isn’t used to making, force a bunch of shit into it for monetisation and/or launch early in order to keep schedule. All this to keep investors/management happy. Then when the combination of the aforementioned (repeatedly) blows up in their face; usually by pissing off customers, they lose money. Finally you start layoffs and rehires if needed because you’re running into money problems.

    They couldn’t care less about the talent. It isn’t rare for a lot of the talent to bail when these studio get bought up. Especially since it feels like you’re just going to be crunched the second you get the first job post acquisition. Found this while checking this assumption, a bunch of them left early for Arkane specifically.

    I always viewed it companies like EA take a gamble. Either the investment pulls off the unlikely, convoluted shit you ask and makes you money or you take it out back and try with another studio.





  • What do you guy think was the intention with this?

    I’m not trying to ascribe meaning to it… just wondering if anyone is familiar with the potential symbology

    Then after being told, with image examples, that it’s a natural formation.

    I grew up in a literal haunted house.

    I am 100% serious, though being diagnosed later in life with bipolar type 1…

    Given the last line I would suggest to you that it’s probably not a bad idea to get in touch with your usual doctor/psych and talk to them. Especially if you are prescribed medication as BD can make adherence to a medication regimen difficult as I’m sure you’re aware.

    Always remember, if in doubt, take these questions to a medical professional rather than the internet. Here you could be getting advice from people more unwell than you are and don’t know about your situation or BD.



  • CTDummy@lemm.eetoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlHow Would You Handle Students Cheating?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I’ll take your word for it. At the institution I’m currently at and my former one this is academic misconduct as it isn’t your own work. I’m real suss on anyone claiming to have a phd while suggesting methods that essentially introduce a potential time bomb for your degree. May as well actually learn how to learn if you’re going to uni but hey that’s just my (apparently red hot) take.


  • CTDummy@lemm.eetoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlHow Would You Handle Students Cheating?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I think getting them to show their work is appropriate and for any that can’t replicate their work explain to them the downfalls of cheating. The other comments here justifying likely haven’t ever been in an academic setting. Relying on cheating is setting yourself up for failure if you intend to continue studying at a tertiary level.

    I don’t think a punishment is necessary for cheaters just a lecture. Let them know people can and have had their degrees rescinded years after the fact when their cheating was detected with newer methods.

    Edit: downvotes for suggesting that cheating is bad lmao. Like I said cheating at uni is easily detected these days. Fuck the getting caught, you’re paying however much to get an education, you may as well actually learn.



  • That isn’t what a DMCA is for. Someone being compensated for the work they’ve done is unrelated to suing a company for using your art/code/work without permission or reference. Weirdly aggressive to modders though.

    Edit: for your edit, you can’t monetise a mod for someone’s else’s game directly but you can absolutely make money modding. And even if their EULA enables them to do so, taking a modders code without at least a reference is pretty dogshit. Literally a million dollar studio ripping off people who did it out of passion knowing full well they wouldn’t get compensated. I’m surprised a EULA can protect them legally for doing it tbh.


  • Docker is great because you can install something and all the shit it needs is installed and runs in that container. It’s good for a multitude of reasons mine are:

    1. No more installing a dependency, tool or library alongside a program that fucks up something else. No more shit breaking because you installed the latest python but some other program breaks if you move beyond 3.10 (and you forgot to use venv I guess).
    2. Somewhat a follow on from 1 but this makes for great functionality with self hosting. I can run a couple docker compose/build command and build/rebuild the containers anywhere I need them. I can test a container on a windows computer to see if it does what I want and works as intended and then spin the some container up on my media server, even if it’s a different OS. I have a bunch of them on my home server and it and it’s great being able to just plug in the port number of the other containers they need to talk to, if any, and that’s all. One container breaking doesn’t break everything else.

  • Alright and then this can be it for me as I’m pretty sure we won’t reach a consensus.

    What would you say of “people downvoting posts about football and basketball because they don’t care about it”? Or my posts that were on the emacs community, which has about 10 active users per month? Or etc

    I would say the edge cases for this don’t justify the blanket guideline and if they did it could be worded (and likely similarly ignored) like reddit did. I would also say situations like the language one can be implement with a UI fix. Plenty of small communities both here and on reddit grew despite being “niche” or even just not popular.

    You seem to understand that we’re are not talking about your case, but you still want to keep your downvote based on a flawed assumption.

    No. You don’t seem to understand that you’re providing guidelines that are incompatible with voting. You want to talk about edge cases in which your guideline can function and makes sense. I’m providing you far more likely and apparent cases where it doesn’t. Your guideline means someone would be breaking them even if downvoting content that breaks the rules of conduct I.e using it directly as intended. I’d consider guidelines for not downvoting stuff solely because you don’t like it for “reasons” before your guideline. Which I’d argue being a lot of former redditors, Lemmy largely inherited.

    The idea of even a guideline against shielding communities from negative engagement while affording all the benefits of positive engagement isn’t worth the odd niche community post being spared a couple downvotes from people who don’t know how to use it. If individual communities want to only display upvotes, then goes nuts since that makes way more sense. I doubt I was the first but I’d guess most votes are from people who share my numerous strong views on it. Anyway, as I alluded to before if you can’t understand my position after this many paragraphs then we probably better call it a day. Have a good one.


  • That’s fine and I’m saying that it is not a good idea to do so. I had figured my providing you with examples how intended voting behaviour can violate your proposed guideline would demonstrate that. Non English communities getting downvoted for… not being English is not intended or desired behaviour and deserves a more direct fix than a guideline.

    No because that has nothing to do with why I downvoted the OP. Also, as I pointed out in an edit, my engagement with this post has likely driven it up in this specific instance anyway. Even if it doesn’t this went from being engaged by 2-3 people to a lot more real quick despite the OP largely neutral votes for the first hour, and now being -10 so clearly it doesn’t just drop the post off the face of the planet due to downvoting and probably other factors are considered.

    Anyway, throughout this I’ve done my best to address every point you’ve brought up. Yet I’ve had multiple questions, some even asking for clarification, go ignored. So I think now is probably a good time for the old “agree to disagree”.


  • I mean if you want me to be specific then unfortunately I can do so. It’s more than I just disagree with you. It’s that I think your reasoning in the OP is very flawed and misrepresents the situation you are attempting to portray. Which felt dishonest initially but given your attempts to engage people who disagree I now assume misguided, sorry to say. Also I think people stating their views under the pretence of a question should be discouraged due to proximity behaviours like concern trolling (not implying that’s what you’ve been doing, just an example). Lastly, I super strongly oppose being shown content on a site like this that I can’t interact with. For your case it may make sense but I can super easily see it being abused by the cases in my example; where people can grandstand shitty politics(again as an example) but then the onus is on me for some reason to not engage with said content.