Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)ZA
Posts
0
Comments
301
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • And what does this existential respect look like?

    Having a bit more joy in life and living a day longer in a cage which is one squaremeter larger until they get slaughtered?

    Still no freedom and an unnaturally early end of life.

  • Growing children will literally starve to death without protein

    Everyone will die without proteins. And you can get all of the required protein from plants and plant based foods. This is not only the case for adults and children but also for pregnant people.

    don't kid yourselves; if we don't eat that cow, another omnivore or a carnivore will

    You know that we breed a crazy amount of animals into existence for the sole purpose of killing and consuming them, don't you? And you know that a lot of times we even throw away a lot of what's edible from the animal? No other species on earth does this.

    Furthermore, even in the wild predatory carni- or omnivores usually don't kill a whole population of animals. They kill some, yes for the purpose of survival. But by far not all. And even if that happens, those predators will starve and die until more prey is available again. That's how predators and prey are balancing. Meanwhile we kill basically every animal we breed for food and we wouldn't even need them for our survival. There is no such balance. To the contrary. It is one of the major factors of environmental destruction and pollution.

    while dogs, cats and ferrets are obligate carnivores and at least need meat-derived pet kibble in their diet to live

    First of all that might be a reason not to get a pet. Secondly, dogs, cats and ferrets can be fed on a plant-based diet. It might not be as easy and should definetly happen with support of a veterinarian (as most people won't know for sure what they are doing), but it is proven to be possible without inflicting harm on the animals.

  • If there was sufficient funding and enough people on it, we surely could have gotten so much further in so much less time.

    Of course you can speed up such developments only up to a certain degree. But given the state of so many important research fields, we've surely not scooped out the whole potential.

  • The source of this post might be. But the study is solid as far as I can see. It was published in Nature Biomedical Engineering last week.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41551-023-01086-2

    As phase I clinical trials are underway, we'll see how far this can get. But sure, don't expect too much, then you won't be disappointed. Let's hope it can really help people.

  • Meh, weak argument in my opinion. If one happens to run into the problem of having no browser, there are other ways around it. E.g., using your smartphone to download the installer of a browser and transfer it to the PC. People, who run into situations where they could end up with no browser are usually those who are overwhelmed with the internet anyways.

    That they don't make it easy to uninstall edge, while it's easy to fuck up your system in other ways, clearly shows that it's not about helping DAUs, but about forcing edge onto users.

  • We need to remind people that they work for the employer, not the other way around

    Oh and I was sitting here thinking, that employers and employees share a mutually profitable relationship. Employees provide services to employers and employers provide financial gains for their employees.

    But no, modern slavery it is. Alright.

  • Okay, but from my understanding, in order to change galaxies, I have to find a portal, figure however to use the portal, and then switch galaxies.

    As soon as you can use the space anomaly (which happens very early) you already have a possibility. But apart from that, sure, it still takes a bit of effort and is not an option available when starting the game. The latter would be a nice idea though.

    I didn't know about portals or even that switching galaxies was even a thing. [...] How am I suppose to know that after going through 6 more galaxies that I can get what I wanted from the start?

    By using an internet search engine of your choice.

    https://nomanssky.fandom.com/wiki/Galaxy_Centre#Travelling_to_other_galaxies

    But I get what you mean as this is not clearly communicated right from the beginning in the game and something to be discovered. So your best chance to know this, besides doing the story missions, is to talk to other players or by curiously clicking on some suitable links in the NMS wiki.

  • No Man’s Sky still has the same problem it began with, although the landscapes are vastly improved. It doesn’t matter what planet it is, there’s nothing to distinguish it from the last planet other than what species owns the system, the flavor of hazard present, and the overall color.

    Regarding the variety and interesting features of the bare planets, I tend to agree. My point was rather that there is more to do now and the fun with - even familiar planets - lasts longer.

    No Man’s Sky honestly has not enough planets with just dead barren empty planets.

    This is not correct. The amount of more dead planets immensely depends on - spoiler alert - ::: spoiler spoiler the galaxy you're in. NMS has different galaxies with different distributions for lush or dead planets. This also has some effects on the difficulty. :::

  • Disclaimer: My comment is a reaction to the stuff Todd and his minions said in the article, not necessarily about the game itself. I haven't played Starfield yet. I just find the statements really weak and want to express why I see it that way.

    Yeaaahh that's nice for maybe a couple of hours, but then it starts to get boring. That's not how you keep players engaged, although there are of course those who don't find that boring at all.

    We're not astronauts, we're not there. Astronauts had the thrill of the voyage through space, stepping on the moon and feeling with ones own body how it is to walk on the moon's dust in low gravity. Also astronauts had and have a shitload of scientific equipment and experiments to carry out, i.e., a purpose beyond the mere jolly walking.

    If they were just there for walking and that for days, weeks, months, they would get bored pretty fast as well.

    Take a look at No Man's Sky. Similar problem. The procedural generation algorithm made planets look familiar after you've seen a couple. There is nothing new. Exploration became unrewarded. But Hello Games has massively improved on that over the years and produced a game where you can sink dozens of hours without getting bored so easily.

  • Besides "pure" Psychology, Aesthetics research is dealing with such kind of questions and has been going on for a while.

    This does not only encompass visual features in humans to which people feel some form of attraction, but also stuff like music or visual art.

    It's not my field and it has been some time since I read good literature on this, which is why I am not giving you any possibly erroneous summaries. But I am sure that this has been investigated and is still a topic of active research. So you can take my comment as a pointer.

    First hit, when searching for: "cultural differences in visually appealing facial features"

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982221003523

    Have fun researching and reading.

  • at least it's not photos of actual people

    Just a side note: Those are generated based on a data set of real people on which the AI methods are trained on. It is – to some degree and with specific AI models – possible to reconstruct the original photos of the training set. This has risen a lot of concerns; privacy among those.

    See, e.g.: https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.13188