CoderKat @ CoderKat @lemm.ee

I write bugs and sometimes features! I'm also @CoderKat@kbin.social.

---

Read more

Posts

7

Comments

728

Joined

2 yr. ago

The idea of an "inquiry" for this is so utterly hilarious. What is he expecting it to find? That leaving the EU was a disastrously unpopular decision and that anyone can wave a flag?

Also, they view Rule, Britannia as a modern, relevant, unironic thing? I see that as the British equivalent to when Americans are like "MURICA, fuck yeah, guns and lifted trucks and bald eagles and worshipping the founding fathers!" Which is to say, incredibly cringy.

I'm just finishing act 1 (no spoilers please) and my rampant stealing of everything remotely valuable seems to be paying off in my ability to buy literally anything that catches my eye. I kinda wonder if I'm overdoing it with how much gold I have vs the price of things so far, but I don't want to risk encountering a trader with amazing stuff that I can't afford.

I still have lots of room for even modest gear improvements. eg, not all of my party members even have 2 rings yet, let alone gear that is genuinely useful to their play style. And some of my characters have some gear that are very niche usage that I'm keeping an eye out for something that will give them an edge in combat.

I hate Steam's review system, though. Binary yes or no is not useful to me. I want to know if a game is good (maybe a play eventually) vs absolutely amazing (where I might prioritize playing it right away). Such granularity is also useful because a 10/10 might be worth it even if it's not my favourite type of game, but a 7/10 can be very worthwhile if it is the type of game I adore.

It's a shame that user reviews on sites like Metacritic are just consistent trash. Too many users only know 0 or 10 and the user reviews are often review bombed. I wish regular users could at least give numbers like critics. No professional critic is gonna give a game a 0 because of a handful of problems, for example, but average people will totally give a game a zero for that. Only problem with critics is that they often have a perspective that makes them detached from the average person, since they spend all their time reviewing. Ideally user reviews would fill that gap, but users are incredibly fickle.

Yeah, it's not actually a food. Nobody eats these for the taste or calories. It's purely for the experience of the challenge and the packaging is understandably part of that experience. It's still wasteful, but it's the kind of society we live in. Packaging works. If they could sell as well with less waste, I'm sure they would. The packaging is a calculated attempt at maximizing the experience, especially under the assumption that it's going to spread by viral videos.

Agree on your last sentence. I think one of the big problems is that women as a whole are disproportionately over sexualized and when they are sexualized, it tends to be a lot more blatant.

There absolutely are plenty of works of media where male and female characters are both sexualized. But there's also many where only the female characters are notably sexualized (or are so damn heavily sexualized that the sexualization of the male characters pales in comparison).

There's also the fact that things being made for men is so normalized that nobody bats an eye if a video game or movie only has prominent male characters. Society often treats such works as if they were gender neutral. But if you create a work that's all women, society tends to treat it as "for women only", toxic masculinity often treats such works as a no-go for men, and many people are much more critical towards them.

It doesn't even have to be as blatant as all characters being the same gender. In general, society tends to default to male dominated everything and can often even view being 50/50 as "women are taking over".

Even on the internet, people tend to default to male pronouns. Or when giving a hypothetical, they tend to default to male characters.

All these kinda things lead up to media that also skews for men.

Lol, same. I think I've always made the decision to like and/or subscribe in the middle of videos, usually when I've seen enough to conclude I want to see more.

I wonder, does YouTube have any stats they expose for what timestamp people like at? I'd actually be really curious to see a graph of that for some videos. It'd obviously be biased towards earliest good points, but it'd probably identify the best sections.

For the kinds of YouTubers I've been mostly watching, it's apparently Nebula, Curiosity Stream, and... Hello Fresh? That one's the odd one out for how often it shows up in sponsorships.

I'm often a little suspicious of companies I see too frequently in ads like that. It gives me the vibe that they are struggling to have any natural word of mouth spread and I wonder why. Nebula and Curiosity Stream I can understand since those are pretty niche products (subscriptions for people who enjoy educational videos). But Hello Fresh I also get offers in the mail every few weeks. They push hard to try them out and it makes me wonder what the catch is.

We give copyright for much less.

I find this an interesting point. My understanding is that AI art just isn't considered enough work on the part of the human creator, presumably because of the idea that you only need to come up with a prompt.

But at the same time, most photographs and videos are copyrightable even if you literally just pointed your phone at whatever without any talent at all. IIRC, the idea of photographs being copyrighted was originally a controversial one, but these days is generally accepted. As long as a human took the photo (and not, say, a monkey, as a famous case found).

Is pointing a phone and clicking a button more of a human contribution than coming up with a prompt? What about if they had to iteratively tune the prompt and mask out parts of the image? In my book, I'd say that's more human contribution than many photographs.

Only thing I can think of is if you are developing a website or extension and need to make sure there isn't some subtle browser difference. Though since it uses the same engine as Chrome, that use case should be a lot more niche than it used to be.

Pretty much. Though also any security questions or other private info you have saved, some of which is much more annoying to protect.

Though one annoying thing is that even if you change everything, what they find might help them social engineer an attack.

I second Bitwarden, BTW. Best password manager I've used.

I'm sure they were encrypted. But attackers have the vaults and many people have bad passwords. Brute forcing these days is less about trying every combination and more about trying all known leaked passwords, because people reuse passwords like crazy and also just aren't as original as they think.

If you have millions of password vaults, I'm sure you can crack open a small number. And the ones you can crack are probably the most likely to not be following best practices, meaning it's more likely they haven't changed their passwords since the breach was announced a while back and they probably are less likely to have 2FA. 150 victims is such a tiny number for how many vaults were stolen when LastPass got compromised.

Similarly, I think it's dumb that places are always starting with decriminalization instead of legalization. Let's be honest. We all know why they do both of these things. They're scared of not appearing hard enough on "crime". They know that there's a ton of scared voters who associate drugs with bad things and they are afraid of losing those voters.

We see the same thing happening in countless places with marijuana, too. Despite many places having already proven that legalization works and does not, in fact, open a portal to hell.

If we accept that shrooms shouldn't be illegal, it doesn't make sense to keep them illegal for longer. Similarly, it doesn't make sense that it's still illegal to sell them. Like, are they expecting that they just magically appear in the hands of consumers? No, I think they know exactly what they're doing and it's all just catering to the older voters who scare easily.

I disagree. I think anyone who's worked with either will recognize i18n or k8s. They're unambiguous, memorable, and search well. That's more than can be said about most acronyms. The alternative for single words is to use just part of the word (like intrn or kube) and I think those are less memorable and more ambiguous.

IMO, it would show the power and value of the EU. The UK would be far more willing to admit that they shouldn't have left if they can get back in. The EU stands to gain from such a prominent country (and one that can say so from experience) undeniably admitting that it's better to be in the EU than to leave. That's some stellar advertising of the economic value of the EU.

Though they definitely shouldn't bend every rule to let them back in. The pound should be replaced by the euro. It's dumb that the UK got that exception.

Sure, but in this analogy, your ex wife was great partner that was good for you and you only broke up because you thought you could do better. Only after your divorce, you realize you aren't actually doing better on your own and want your ex wife back, but are too afraid to admit it. And also your ex wife might not want you back anymore (if she does, she's gonna ask you to really prove you're committed).

Naw, practically everything is copyrighted if it meets some fairly simple rules. Copyrighted is the default and the rules exclude works from being copyrighted.

Copyright can't stop what you're saying. People obviously are shaming Trump and other criminals. News articles typically use mugshot photos. Copyright can't stop memes (and trying to do so usually just causes the Streisand effect).

Gravity bends space itself (which makes it able to bend light). It's really fucky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity#Deflection_of_light_by_the_Sun

It also fucks with time. If you saw the movie Interstellar, you know what this refers to.

I love that channel. It's one of the best channels I've discovered all year. A perfect balance of entertainment with deep dives into current hot topics. It's like John Oliver but triple the length and even more sarcasm.

But by that logic, there's a terrifying number of adults who also shouldn't vote.