conciselyverbose @ conciselyverbose @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

1,869

Joined

1 yr. ago

But you shouldn't have to actively fact check every headline from the BBC because their headline doesn't actually say what you read.

And there's very little value to "summarizing messages" if you aren't actually summarizing messages and the content doesn't match the summary.

Yes, you should do more critical thinking, but lowering the quality of information of every interaction with the internet very clearly makes things worse.

The core concepts that "they're stealing from us by linking our content" and "they're fucking us over by not including our content in their results" are mutually exclusive.

But somehow the same groups are consistently pushing both.

I have a couple authors I intentionally subscribe to, along with this and that other thing.

There are definitely bad faith mailing lists, but there are plenty that aren't.

It's both.

He's definitely not smart enough to understand that a "wrong" prediction about a probabilistic outcome isn't a failure.

Pick between the good place season 1, 3, 4 finales.

But I don't really look at shows as by episode generally.

Dear moron,

Forecasting isn't magic.

Also:

The firm launched this project after European publishers demanded more information about the traffic brought to their websites by Google search as part of the implementation of the EU Copyright Directive.

Because they're P2P. Just watching is also distribution.

So yes, in reality, they're sending legal threats asking for viewers to voluntarily pay fines to avoid being dragged to court.

Yep, documentation and a good base level default installation configuration/guide with minimal friction.

I'm perfectly willing to play around once I know at the basic level that the core flow is going to work for me. If it takes me digging through a stack of documentation (especially if it's bad) to even get something to experiment with on my own system? I won't bother.

There are actual reasons not to: allergies to a component, compromised immune system.

Somehow I don't think that's what he means though.

The problem is that there's a formula.

Games are supposed to progress over time, not just feel like annual copy pastes covered with RNG map spam.

Ignoring that that's complete bullshit, balatro doesn't even pretend to gamble.

You're not gambling🤦‍♀️

Gambling is what kids shouldn't be able to do.

They're complaining that it doesn't do fake GaaS treadmill bullshit.🤷🏼‍♀️

I would genuinely look at a parent saying their kid isn't old enough to learn poker hands exactly the same as if they said it about cribbage or rummy.

It's nonsense.

There's no possible rational standard where balatro could theoretically be age restricted.

It's dressed up solitaire.

There's no reason for the rest of the generation. It will just kill sales for those games. The "series" consoles are a completely lost cause.

If they want exclusives as a strategy, it needs to be at launch of the next generation. Until then even short timed exclusives just cost them money.

"Don't buy a game that ships with malware" is a perfectly correct decision, but it doesn't address the fact that games are shipping with fucking malware.

I'm ambivalent. I don't really care about titles generally, but at least software engineer clearly isn't anything else.

That said, while the term software engineer is a lost cause, I wouldn't be opposed to some comparable, regulated title where the person has to sign off on code bases and is responsible for major flaws. Obviously you wouldn't use that as a barrier for every piece of code, but as a requirement for handling personal information on a certain scale? (Obviously it would be pointless until you also regulated intentional sharing of information a hell of a lot better, but still.)

Wait, not "software engineer", just "engineer"? That's definitely bullshit.