![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0943eca5-c4c2-4d65-acc2-7e220598f99e.png)
this makes me wonder how much longer a towel could be used if it were promptly dried after use, rather than put up on a hook where some of it dries sorta and the rest of it clumps.
this makes me wonder how much longer a towel could be used if it were promptly dried after use, rather than put up on a hook where some of it dries sorta and the rest of it clumps.
even when you are clean from showering, you are still covered in delicious skin, refreshing moisture, and things that thrive in the presence of both.
deleted by creator
plausible: check
testable: TBD
falsifiable: TBD
still, 1 out of 3. not bad!
prices will be raised regardless. record profits? raise prices. record growth? raise prices. cost of production goes down? raise prices.
if you won’t deny a thing to someone it’s pretty hard to sell it to anyone
This is such a common phenomenon that it has a name: cognitive dissonance. If you already knew what that was, then your comment suggests another example of it.
Relay or decrentralize it maybe.
The thing I read about this earlier said Signal is super against decentralization iirc. Or at least against federation? Are they different?
deleted by creator
Hey, I’m fully on board with your defense of social media, but I think in this case the commenter is just saying “i miss the social media we had before they started calling it ‘social media’”. Even 2004 facebook fits this description, and I’m inclined to agree. I miss social media when it felt more like IRC and craigslist, when facebook was a glorified personal guestbook, etc.
We need to be more efficient with what we make
We need to make stuff with the goal of not having to make any more of it at some point. Currently we have an economy that gives no shits about what is made so long as it sells more this quarter than last.
Either we need a magical wave of enlightenment to change the priorities of those who control the means of production, or we need to change the structure of our economy and its incentives to make “build to last” a winning strategy.
So tl;dr he/his team did two things:
On the surface it sounds all good, but I can’t help but notice a future conflict of interest for Zhao should Glaze ever become monetized. If it were to be ruled illegal to train AI on content without permission, tools like Glaze would be essentially anti-theft devices, but while it remains legal to train AI this way, tools like Glaze stand to perhaps become necessary for artists to maintain the pre-AI status quo w/r/t how their work can be used and monetized.
this is a grievance i’ve needed validated for a long time. tysm
it’s such a wild example of feature creep, and yet it’s not quite the wildest example of Star Citizen’s feature creep. When Roberts’ funding exceeded his wildest dreams, he should’ve changed nothing from his original pitch and simply delivered that. For reference:
Original funding goal: $2 million US
Funding by end of Kickstarter campaign: well over $6 million US
If they finished the project with a $4 million surplus, great! They’d have ample budget for post-launch support, and maybe even for some free post-launch content updates to improve goodwill. If that’d gone as planned, the dude’d be sitting on a whole new generation of goodwill.
Oh, and we’d have a game like this:
Pick up jobs as a smuggler, pirate, merchant, bounty hunter, or enlist as a pilot, protecting the borders from outside threats.
A huge universe to explore, trade and adventure in
Wing Commander style single player mode, playable OFFLINE if you want
Actions of the players impact the universe and become part of its history and lore
Fully dynamic economy driven by player actions
If caught alone in an online ambush, send a distress broadcast to your friends and if they’re nearby they can jump in-system to save your bacon.
You wanted proper Newtonian mechanics. You got it! Spaceships adjust their trajectory and orientation just like the real thing.
10X the detail of current AAA games (as measured in polygons)
Range of scale never seen before in a game - ships from 27m to 1km scale, all at same level of detail
Support for Joystick, Gamepad, Mouse, Keyboard, as well as HOTAS, flight chair, rudder petals, and VR
the cardinal rule regarding “in-game purchases” is: Players who spend money purchasing in-game credits will have no advantage over players who spend time!
Instead they immediately pivoted to a pay-for-ships funding model and let the scope grow to seemingly every one of Roberts’ wildest whims
The tech demo is cool. Realization of no-loading-screen transitions from surface -> atmosphere -> orbit -> microgravity -> docking with another ship is wild. Being able to watch your pilot and gunner do a space battle from out the window, while you go walking about the ship is wild. But having it be only a tech demo for this long is so disappointing, and having the focus pivot from singleplayer-with-online to online-with-singleplayer are significant disappointments.
funding timeline: https://starcitizen.fandom.com/wiki/Crowdfunding_campaign
original pitch/campaign: https://web.archive.org/web/20121015042706/http://robertsspaceindustries.com/star-citizen/
corporations can’t seem to ever accept a limit for themselves.
This is the result of competition. When success is measured relative to others, it’s forever a moving target. Under this definition of success, self improvement is equally effective as sabotaging another. And as we can see, it’s not just businesses sabotaging one another. If a business can get away with sabotaging its own consumers, as it can in the case of a monopoly, a cartel, or regulatory capture, it will.
It’s just that, living in that moment, it appears that these companies are so unbelievably large and powerful that they could never be unseated
It’s also that the U.S. has shown repeatedly that it’ll prop up companies with ongoing subsidies, or even bail them out as in the 2008 crisis.
strictly speaking it’s
here’s a gift card so
you can give us that money back againwe can keep your money but give you something for free later.
it’s hard to know the extent to which the comment represents the marriage. otoh, if one were to read their comment and leave thinking “sounds like a normal, healthy marriage to me”, that imo would be a premium red flag on the reader.
communist because u want a commune = communist
communist because u want tanks and gulag = tankie
deleted by creator