AeonFelis

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago
  1. Ask ChatGPT for a solution.
  2. Try to run the solution. It doesn't work.
  3. Post the solution online as something you wrote all on your own, and ask people what's wrong with it.
  4. Copy-paste the fixed-by-actual-human solution from the replies.
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If it's on fire and the autolocks, you know the doors are strong enough to not budge when you try to kick them open.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

And? Did he?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago

He won't die before releasing Half Life 3, which means he's immortal.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Actually... Yes? People's health did deteriorate due to over-reliance on technology over the generations. At least, the health of those who have access to that technology.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

The solution isn’t to address all of the concerns of all the ideologies since that would be impossible.

I disagree. Completely solving all the problems is indeed impossible, but it should be possible to address them. Or, at the very least, acknowledge them. At least the major ones.

And I do agree that ideologies should be treated as tools. More specifically - tools for analyzing the existing and desired structures and for framing the problems. There is no reason not to try viewing the world through the lens of each major ideology in order to get the most complete perspective. These views may not agree, and that's fine - the disagreements may provide some interesting insights.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago (5 children)

I remember reading somewhere that one of the main reasons for the USSR's failure was that they immediately shot down any idea that had the tiniest bit in it that could be interpreted as capitalism-related. Even a suggestion that's 100% communist values but was using some capitalist-sounding terminology would get immediately disqualified and place it's supporters in hot water.

I think the USA - even if not as extremely - is doing the same thing but from the other side.

With such a mindset, "using economic policy that was proven to work" is outright impossible. Any policy that works (and not just in economy) will need to address the problems raised by all major ideologies - because even if an ideology got the solution completely wrong, at the very least that problems it was born from are real. Refusing to acknowledge these problems on ideological basis will not make them go away.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

Makes me wonder how they are still keeping themselves afloat, considering the abhorrent state and quality their products are.

Their main business model is patent/trademark infringement lawsuits.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Lemmyers

The official term is Lemmings.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Shoot the lock to escape the room, and save the other bullet for whoever locked you up in there.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (2 children)

beat thw shit out of the fascist with the other

You mean ask them for help, or use them as oversized clubs?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

The best solution I found for the Paradox of Tolerance (or, more accurately, for a bigger class of problems that contain that problem) is https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/24/nominating-oneself-for-the-short-end-of-a-tradeoff/

The gist of it is that we decide on the following maxim: in conflicts of interest we should favor that cannot easily back off over the side who can.

For example - we want to tolerate a black person existing and we also want to tolerate[^1] a racist person being racist. These two toleration are conflicting. The black person can't stop being black - they were born that way - but the racist person can choose to stop being racist. So we favor the black person's existence, and do not tolerate the racist person's racism.

[^1]: You may argue that we should not tolerate racism at all to begin with, to which I'd say the reason we should not tolerate racism is that there are people who get hurt from it, which is what this maxim is all about.

This maxim is not perfect, of course. It does not apply to all cases, and it does leave up to debate the question of who is forced into the conflict and who is doing it out of choice (e.g. - a conservative may claim that LBGT people are willingly choosing to be so while they are forced, by word of God, to hate them). But I still think it's an improvement:

  1. It's morally arguable. As long as we don't go into the details, it's easy to defend as a principle.
  2. The question of who if forced into the conflict and who is willingly entering it can be discussed more objectively than the question of what should be tolerated and what shouldn't (I'm not saying it's always easy to agree - just that the discussion is more objective)
  3. Even in cases where both sides are forced or cases where both sides are willing, looking at it through the lens of this maxim allows to point at the true perpetrators and/or the true victims, instead of arbitrarily picking one side to blindly side with.
 

Encountering one of these embedded tweets in a blog post, my hand instinctively moved to click the X and close it. That took me to the website.

Could this be a clever ruse to generate more visits? Is Elon Musk actually more cunning than we give him credit?

 

I have this idea for a certain game development tool, but before I start another side project I want to check if something similar already exists.

An important part of game development is fine-tuning numeric values. You have some numbers that govern things like character motion, weapon impact, enemy AI, or any other game mechanic. For most of these there is no "correct" value that can be calculated (or even verified!) with some algorithm - you have to manually try different values and converge to something that "feels right".

The most naive way to fine-tune these numbers is to have them as hard-coded values, tweak them in code, and re-run the game every time you change them. This, of course, is a tedious process - especially if you have to go through long build times, game loading, and/or gameplay to reach a state where you can test these values (that last hurdle can often be skipped by programming in a special entry point, but that too can get tedious)

A better way would be to write these numbers in configuration file(s) which the game can hot-reload - at least while in development mode. That way you can just edit the file and save it, and the game will reload the new values. This is a huge improvement because it skips the building/loading/preparing which can drastically shorten the cycles - but it's still not perfect because you have to constantly switch between the game and the configuration file.

Sometimes you can use the game engine editor to tweak these while the game is running, or create your own UI. This makes the context switches hurt less, and also lets you use sliders instead of editing textual numbers, but it's still not perfect - you still have to switch back and forth between the game controls and the tweaking interface.

Which brings us to my idea.

What I envision is a local fine-tuning server. The server will either update configuration files which the game will hot-reload, or the game could connect to it via WebSocket (or some other IPC. But I like WebSocket) so that the server could push the new values to it as they get updated.

After the server deduces the structure of the configuration (or read it from a schema - but providing a schema may usually be a overkill) you could use its webapp UI to configure how the values would be tweaked. We usually want sliders, so you'll need to provide a range - even if the exact value is hard to determine, it's usually fairly easy to come up with a rough range that the value must be in (how high can a human jump? More than 5cm, less than 5m). You will also decide for each slider if it's linear or logarithmic.

The server, of course, will save all that configuration so that you won't have t reconfigure it the next time you want to tweak values (unless there are new values, in which case you'll only have to configure the sliders for them)

Since this would be a server, the tweaking of the values could be done from another device - preferably something with a touchscreen, like a smartphone or a tablet, because tweaking many sliders is easier with a touchscreen. So you have the game running on your PC/console, gamepad in hand (or keyboard+mouse, if that's your thing), and as you play you tweak the sliders on the touchscreen until you get them just right.

Does anyone know if a similar tool already exists?

 

Narrative scripting languages like Yarn Spinner or Inkle were originally meant for writing dialogue, but I think they can also be used for scripting the world progression even when no dialogue or even narration is involved.

Example for something silent that can be scripted with a narrative scripting language:

  1. When the player pulls a lever...
  2. Move the camera to show a certain gate
  3. Open the gate
  4. Move the camera to show something interesting behind the gate
  5. Return the camera to the player

Even though no text nor voice are involved here, I think a narrative language will still fit better than a traditional scripting language because:

  • Narrative languages describe everything in steps. Scripting languages will need to work a bit harder to generate steps the actual game engine can use.
  • Narrative languages have visual editor that can help showing the flow of the level as nodes.
  • The interface between a narrative language and the game engine tends to be seems to tend to be higher level (and less powerful) than the one with a traditional scripting language.

On the other hand, flow control seems a bit more crude and ugly with narrative scripting languages than with traditional scripting languages. It should probably still be fine for simple things (e.g. - player activates a keyhole. Do they have the key?), but I wonder if a game can reach a point where it becomes too complex for a narrative language (I'm still talking about simple world progression, not full blown modding)

view more: next ›