Davin @ Davin @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

67

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yes, I who knows a lot about programming, only use one file per application.

You can host the server on the same machine the game is running on, it's not uncommon during development especially the early stages.

I don't have a problem if someone wants to turn a battle royale into a 4 player game.

If someone wants to host something bigger, that's cool too.

I think there would be room in the market for a group to host servers for abandoned games.

It's not terribly difficult or costly to set up a cloud host if you remember to put the cost restrictions on, so there's one more option for multiplayer games.

That's for games in the past, games going forward could be designed better. But for games that have already been made, there's no reasonable way to redesign games that have already been published. Any redesign will change the game instead of preserving it, and you'll never get the original devs back together with the original tech stack in order to do any major changes. But smaller things like getting old games to be able to point to different servers isn't a big problem.

Or just let someone else host a fucking server and let the game get pointed to that one or any other they want. They could even sell the server software and make money on that. I'd love to host my own servers of some old online only games where I could play with just my friends and family.

It served its purpose, it cut aid to those who needed it and gave money to those who didn't. I think maybe they thought that cutting the social safety nets would have saved more money, but that's all they're going to be upset about.

The cop was armed and was already known to shoot someone in the back, the father was afraid for his life and had to make a split second decision.

A guy I used to work with would, at least I would swear it, submit shit code just so I would comment about the right way to do it. No matter how many times I told him how to do something. Sometimes it was code that didn't actually do anything. Working with co-pilot is a lot like working with that guy again.

Weird, guy who breaks laws with impunity doesn't care about laws.

He's in the class of people protected by the law but not bound by it, and we're in the class of people bound by the law but not protected by it.

My point is, what the law is doesn't matter if the law is not enforced. Good luck fighting a team of lawyers that make more in a minute than you do in a year.

Legally you can't be forced to hand over your money, so just tell the armed robber, "no."

I think Trump's actions are not particularly unique, but he's doing actions that have been previously condemned and in the minority. I'm not so naive as to think that all corruption can be eliminated, but when it's out in the open and the people are getting away with it in the open, that's much worse than what had happened before. Trump is a unique phenomenon in that sense and the sheer number of illegal things he's doing.

We were heading towards something like Trump eventually if you track what monied interests, through the GOP, have been doing since at least when Nixon resigned. I'm sure the GOP were hoping to pick their guy instead of Trump, with Russia's help, taking advantage of what they were setting up.

I get that there have also been corrupt Dems, and there so are, like Nancy Pelosi, but they're not the primary avenue of the oligarchs to enact their agenda. Though they have captured the Dem leadership as well.

But I would welcome a more robust system to root out corruption. And for laws to be applied equally. If that takes out a significant portion of the government, then I think that's fine, as long as it's not some bullshit like what's currently going on.

It's nice to see some good news from time to time in these troubling times.

And it's so frustrating that they are not in jail.

It can always get worse. I agree with you.

I don't see the Democratic leadership making the right moves, they're not going to align themselves with the general public. They keep trying to woo moderate Republicans instead of the huge amount of voters who they could easily get.

I don't consider Libertarians or Greens a real third party, they only come out every four years and only care about fund raising by taking advantage of voter frustration with the Dems and GOP.

I think it's worth a shot, but there's only a year left to go for it. If it can't get the ground swell in a year to get a bunch of candidates ready to get local gov positions, it's unlikely to work by the midterms. And I think the midterms are the best shot to gain ground.

But what do I know? If I was smarter and more knowledgeable, I'd be able to help start it. But I'd certainly help the movement.

Ah yeah. It would take a lot. Even at 90% $100m from a billion is still way more than most of us.

If the tax bracket for no taxes is $10k, you don't get taxed if make under that.

If the tax bracket for 5% is $10-20k, and you made $15k, the first $10k is not taxed, but the $5k is taxed at %5.

So you would never make $0 after taxes, even if you made it into the hypothetical 100% tax bracket.

No excuse for the DNC, but I think seeking the "moderate Republicans" is a condition of their big donors. Every time the Democrats lose, since Reagan won, they move right because they think they lost because they weren't conservative enough. And despite all polling that suggests otherwise, they keep doing it.

In general, they would get more money and power if they won, so why do they keep shooting themselves in the foot every fucking time? In my mind, even if you factor in that they don't give a shit about the common people and are motivated by money, it only makes sense if they are being manipulated by their big donors to do this stupid shit.

It's like these billionaire CEOs' salaries aren't merit based.

Everything that has been privatized, has ended up costing us more for shittier service. This will not be different.