Does it though? If all the players start on relatively equal footing with similar goals where only one can win, does it matter who is in control of the other players?
I will say, this topic also spurred a healthy discussion in my house. In the instance of civ, I firmly believe AI opponents who are playing the same game as you qualify it as inherently multiplayer even when playing alone.
You take turns against other players, real or computer. Doesn't matter who's in control of the players, even since CIV 1 this is how the game works. It's turn based, by nature it's multiplayer. The game is literally designed as a multiplayer computerized board game. This is absolutely not a first player game front and center. A game like that would be pure single player experience like a Mario or Zelda game
The game is designed to be played with multiple players. Even in single player mode, you take turns against the computer which is technically a player in the game. There is no mode where you're just playing with yourself, I would not by any means consider it a single player game and that's by its nature. Basically a computerized board game that requires you to play against an opponent human or ai
I'd probably say that money is better spent on more frequency on the route than trying to increase speed by a bit. Amtrak has the same "higher speed" service in Michigan to Chicago but the infrequent service keeps it from being truely competitive with driving.
While they do now have multiplayer modes thanks to their corresponding open source projects, I still think the spirit of these games is firmly in the single player pc game category. Best of all they're both free and available on any OS!
Not really. Each instance gets to decide for themselves wether or not to defederate. It is an active choice that has to be made for those which federation is on by default.
In a room where Facebook/Meta controls the entire algorithm, who gets to see what, and any astroturfing efforts they make? And where the fraction of people who will ever see your post is so tiny as to be insignificant
If it's either that or Im not in the space at all I'm going to take the option to try and expose the unwashed masses to the light of the fediverse.
By nature the fediverse is open. While I may not agree with exchanging my personal data to be sold to advertisersers in exchange for a fast browsing experience, if that's how people want to engage with the fediverse how is that bad? Would it be the same if a large pay for access instance arose that required members pay a fee but gave a browsing experience similar to what a large company like meta could provide?
It seems to me, unless I am fundamentally misunderstanding the concept, that defederation is a tool of last resort. It does more harm to the individual instance by nature unless the instance is proven to be disruptful or full or bad actors. I get the company meta itself meets that category, but I'm not convinced it's users or communities do. Defederation to spite an instance admin is only harmful to the instance doing the defederation.
If you really need to sell the idea of the Fediverse to Threads users, you can still make a Threads account, or spin up an instance for yourself to do that.
Idk if you noticed but I am on a private instance. There is no way in hell I'd create an account on a meta server. I'd prefer to interact with them from mine and that's what I'll do. It's what makes the fediverse so great. And it's why unless there's a unified defederation camp again making it's reasons and statements known, individual instances defederating with meta will have little effect. Basically we need to unionize and I don't see that realistically happening at this stage, for better or worse.
But theyve got the numbers to support their own echo chambers. I'm not saying what meta is doing isn't a threat, but isn't it better to be in the same room as their users to have a conversation with them than have them exist in their own echo chamber thinking the fediverse is only what meta wants them to think it is?
I don't think the average threads user would even notice if it's a repost. They'd see the content, and have the interaction. From what I know, if I defederate with threads, a user subed to one of my communities would still have the meta server pull in content from mine. I'm fairly certain their engineers can make it look more organic and allow seamless interaction between the 30 million threads users.
It still seems to me because of this, we would be doing ourselves more harm by defederating. At least right now. Even in light of embrace, extend, extinguish.
Why wouldn't they be able to interact with it, at least within their own ecosystem? The way I understand, if I defederate with them on my instance they can still see my content but I can't see theirs. There's nothing stopping Metta from taking that public data anyways and allow only their users to interact with it in their own sealed space. With how many users they have, it's possible it wouldn't even be noticed by the average threads user
For me, I think a system becomes "retro" once the hardware loses all form of official support from its manufacturer. The Wii U and 3DS would newly be retro now that Nintendo has closed down the eShop and has discontinued support
Hey, the speed issue is solely because the instance you're on, Lemmy.world, is way overcrowded. You can resolve this issue by joining a smaller instance or even hosting your own. The best part of Lemmy is you aren't tied to any one server. You can create an account on a different instance/site and never miss a Lemmy post. I'm on my own private instance and have zero issues with loading speed
The "all" stream would be all of the posts from the combined subs of the users on the instance. So if there's a community nobody is subscribed to, it won't appear on all. This is true of all instances. Many smaller ones will employ bots to crawl Lemmy and sub to communities to give the large instance "all" feeling.
That being said, yeah it's all preloaded onto your local server. There is no difference in speed. Doesn't matter if it's active/subed or new/all they all load the same
I'd highly encourage everyone to find smaller instances and leave lemmy.world for the immediate expats. Find something that aligns with your values. Or if you are technically literate enough host your own instance. If you have an old desktop computer you've already got everything you need.
Everything is faster. For the most part, your local instance will download posts and comments for any community you (or anyone else on your instance) is subscribed to. So when you log in, you log into your server and browse the content locally (posts from everywhere) while your server in the background constantly is receiving updates through the ActivityPub protocol.
I literally have no delay in using Lemmy in any way.
And here I am laughing on my speedy private instance. For real, the best part of Lemmy is if your experience is bad you can hop to a different instance and not miss a post
My "favorite" part of the majority ruling is how the loan forgiveness was struck down because it would harm the loan servicers. Not the government, not the people, the companies that have been contracted to collect the loans. That's who SCOTUS is most concerned with. Should tell us everything we need to know about who's interests are most important - capitalists
Adding an exclamation point at the beginning like that makes it friendly for remote instances. Anyone can click and subscribe no matter if they're on lemmy.world or not!
I can understand that too knowing the context. I personallay still think that article did was thought provoking enough to Garner discussion in the comments, which is half the point of a site like this.
But i agree, it's why I made the post! This is something to be discussed as a community as we all escape reddit. This is the time to be ironing these things out. We need these discussions and rules to prevent a mod from feeling they need to ban someone for "drama". Have clear defined rules agreed soon by the community and that problem is solved. Banning people trying to talk about getting a more clear ruleset in place is just asinine. Soon it's only going to be that mod posting and nobody commenting.
I also get things may have been one way on Reddit, but that also doesn't mean it automatically applies here. Even if it did it's not hard to copy and paste rules from reddit to here.
Also, did I see in the modlog they (
@ValueSubtracted@startrek.website is lurking and should really learn this site is way more transparent than reddit) banned you too?
EDIT: Just checked the modlog. They banned you for making this post I'm replying to on a different instance. How anyone could not see that as a red flag of petty retributive mod abuse then I don't know what is. For what it's worth, I banned them from my (much smaller but hopefully gonna pic up some Trekkies soon) instance so they'll never know what's being missed 😜 of course I'd happily reverse it if they cool off and explain their actions.
Does it though? If all the players start on relatively equal footing with similar goals where only one can win, does it matter who is in control of the other players?
I will say, this topic also spurred a healthy discussion in my house. In the instance of civ, I firmly believe AI opponents who are playing the same game as you qualify it as inherently multiplayer even when playing alone.