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

Reported here: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-ui/issues/1968

Blockchain 🤮

I know it's wrong, but there's something about the forbiddenness of JS that makes it sexy.

Oh, baby, you wanna do what with my strings?

Jokes aside, Scala or Haskell, hands down. Those are sexy languages that make gorgeous code.

Seriously, who are these people commenting on CBC articles? I don't usually even look at the comments anymore, simply because any time I did, they were full of the shittiest, dumbest assholes I've ever seen. I'm embarrassed to even share a country with people who comment on CBC articles.

By comparison, comments on Reddit and Lemmy are usually okay. Not good by any means (especially in the right leaning mess that was r/Canada), but miles better than CBC's comments (which I can only assume are completely unmoderated).

They definitely wouldn't. But if push came to a shove, I wonder if they'd really be able to stop them? I'm not really clear on the finer legal points. But I know that for the American Civil War, the south all left the federal government (which presumably would have made it easier to pass any bills regarding the south) and they also basically forced armed conflict (both by attacking first and by seizing federal bases).

I'm not sure if a single state leaving would have the same effect, especially with how divided American politicians are. I don't fully understand if anything actually needs to be voted on (I do know that the American Civil War didn't formally declare war), but if anything had to be, it's hard to picture even a single GOPer doing anything (nor enough Democrats to pass anything -- never mind that in the Senate, the fillibuster means that if the GOP refuses to vote, that's the end of things).

So it's a pretty big worry, in my mind. With all the shit states like Florida have done, I wouldn't put it past them to try and secede. And no matter what, there's no way that would end well. Either things will get a lot worse for any Floridans that aren't cis, straight, and white, or there'll be a war that costs a lot of lives. It's a lose-lose for any decent person. Only fascists stand to gain and they have power in Florida.

1. I feel like this one is an issue either way. Even if it doesn't take out the entire community, taking out the largest community is pretty impactful. It worries me that the fediverse feels so fragile.
2. I think that case is a perfectly valid one to create a new community over. I'm not saying there should never be duplicates, just that we shouldn't have them without a reason.
3. Yeaaaah, I think defederation should be handled better and admins need more granular options so that they don't have to defederate except in the most extreme cases. The fact that some of the biggest instances can't be seen by some other instances (or at least one other) is weird and worrisome.
4. I don't think this would be a reason to avoid smaller instances, but admittedly people will generally create communities on their instance. I don't think you even can create a community on another instance? You have to have someone on that instance create it and set you as a mod.

I agree with you on those special weapons. I dunno why the heck they made those so rare or expensive while also not being that durable. I don't find it an issue for most normal weapons, though, especially with the fuse mechanic in TotK. I like how it forces me to vary things up and allows for regular treasure chests or drops to actually give you something you can use (even if it's basically like a short lasting consumable).

Does "people" mean the woman and her daughter? Reads like it. I think you're not considering how scary the average man is, especially when drunk. They're considerably stronger than the average woman and can easily hurt you. And drunk men are the absolute worst because they're usually more aggressive, less reasonable, and less predictable on top of all that. Often one of the biggest concerns is that they'll hurt you worse if you hurt them even the slightest.

I'm with you when it's generic, way too numerous items like those damned feathers.

I'm all for collectibles when they're interesting, meaningful, and not too numerous. But I think most games and especially open world games really just want to pad the completionist time.

Horizon is a game that did collectibles much better, with the exception perhaps of data points (which aren't marked on the map for some reason). The collectibles in Horizon are unique, have story, and are usually actually interesting to get to. I noticed often in Horizon, they were just so interesting to either get to (the case for ornaments) or had fascinating story (like the ones that unlock images of the past).

I usually dislike weapon durability (eg, in Fallout), but Zelda is the one game where I actually liked it. Perhaps because in Zelda, it was a central mechanic that the game was designed and balanced around.

For most games, durability is something that the game isn't really designed around and feels more forced in. When you can repair your gear (as you usually can), durability just means every now and then you gotta deal with the annoyance of repairing.

I really dislike being set back far when I die or mess up. I can handle a fair bit of repetition, but replaying the exact same thing over and over because I died is frustrating and boring.

Which means that I particularly dislike when games have lousy checkpointing or save systems. I also dislike when games are too difficult and I can't turn the difficulty down to at least get past whatever is giving me a hard time. And of course, unskippable cut scenes right after a checkpoint are a classic pain in the ass.

Examples:

1. I just finished Outer Wilds and found that game's checkpointing to be pretty frustrating. So many boring trips to Brittle Hollow because I lost my footing. I almost gave up because it was so bad.
2. I never finished GTA 4. I got stuck in some mission where there was like a 5 minute drive and then some difficult combat. I kept dying and having to redo the very boring drive over and over killed my motivation. I don't even know why it was so hard. I played GTA 5 twice with no issues.
3. I tried Dark Souls once. Lol, lasted maybe an hour before giving up. Now I'm very wary of any game that doesn't have configurable difficulty levels. Thankfully, most games these days are actually progressing to more granular or meaningful difficulty levels.

LiS is exactly what I came to suggest. I cried from every one of the LiS games and so recommend them all, but the original is hands down the best in pretty much every way.

It's bizzare that they haven't made raids act simply as "portals" to a match making system. That would somewhat solve the rural raiding issue while still encouraging people to get out.

IMO, moderators of communities need to merge their communities. Identify which community is bigger and quite frankly push users to just use that one, to reduce the ambiguity over which one to use. The software ideally would also have an officially supported way to just close your community and transfer everyone's subscriptions to a different one, so that we don't have these duplicates confusingly still showing up in the listings.

I personally did this. I tried to create and promote a community I thought I was the first to make. When I learned it actually already existed (and just... didn't show up in search because of course not), I shuttered the one I made and pointed it at the other one.

What's bizarre to me is that the Android community even did switch to a different one... and then switched back to having two?? It's weird and I don't understand why they did it.

I strongly agree that it needs to improve. Besides the sorting algorithm issues, one issue is that "all" depends on what people on your instance have subscribed to. So small instances might not have much or have a very biased all. I think Lemmy should at least default to basically subscribing to the N biggest communities for all instances, purely to seed the "all" view.

As well, most instances should default to "all", because "local" is usually going to be extremely limited and misleading. Defaulting to local will just make the fediverse look bad. New users aren't going to realize they can switch to all. They'll just think there's barely any content and leave.

Yes there is, and it's not that different from reddit. The sorting algorithm is what they refer to. Eg, hot is some balance of time vs votes, which greatly favours newer posts (too new, IMO -- posts it shows will typically no comments or maybe just one or two). Active favours high commenting rates and based on my observations, it seems to drop off around 2 days (too old, IMO -- a considerable number of posts shown by this algorithm seem to be around the 2 day mark). The top and new algorithms are straightforward enough.

All the algorithms favour big communities. There's a "best" algorithm in development, which would try to look at the top for each community and thus give smaller communities a chance. I can't wait for that, because right now, you'll rarely if ever see a small community hit the front page and it sucks bad.

But that's collective punishment. Not everyone is trying to sabotage things.

Ideally the voters would have the intelligence to recognize which politicians are acting in good faith and which are not, with only the bad faith obstructionist being voted out (ideally immediately, without having to wait the potentially years till their term is up). But ehhhh, we know how that goes.

Warning: the surgeon general has determined that this state contains government representatives whom are dangerous to your health.

I wonder if the removal is just Streisland effecting it? Cause certainly no way I would hear about an ad on Twitter otherwise.

I'm not sure if that's necessarily true. For one thing, thanks to ✨racism✨, who you kill will influence how you're viewed. And if you kill enough people, I think it often causes people to view the event less personally ("one person is a tragedy, a million is a statistic"). Of course, that also depends on how you kill them. Killing one innocent looking civilian with a trolley will go over a lot worse than sending a million soldiers to die in a war (no matter how pointless or wrong the war was).