Muehe

@Muehe@lemmy.ml

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Muehe,

(not actually everything, but I get your hyperbole)

How is it hyperbole? All artificial neural networks have “hallucinations”, no matter their size. What’s your magic way of knowing when that happens?

Muehe,

What the fuck kind of argument is this? Courts aren’t supposed to play politics, they are supposed to enforce the law. And if you want to do that in a genocide case you have to prove intent. Gallant made several public statements that can interpreted in that way.

Muehe,

This is an Opinion article, not a news article. In particular, the NYT likes to hide behind these

Well that’s very much by design though. News articles are supposed to be as neutral and factual as possible, so with early newspapers a convention arose to mark any article that delivers an interpretation alongside the pure facts as an opinion piece. That doesn’t mean it’s not a news article and I actually think it’s commendable when a news source still tries to follow this convention. Many don’t anymore or never even tried to begin with.

Muehe,

So the “as possible” part of the statement is really a kind of magic

Not really, it’s just a reminder that every human has inherent biases and writing an entirely neutral article is thus virtually impossible. That doesn’t mean journalists should go around and give into these biases without clearly stating that, and making this effort despite knowing you will fail in it is one of many indicators which can help separate serious news sources from propaganda and advertisement outlets.

Who’s not an environmentalist?

Fossil fuel companies?

It was envisioned as a “neutral” term - as factual as possible - but it said on the face of it, “environmentalists said …” meaning not us.

I don’t know, I see it as media needing a term to apply to a (back then) relatively new societal movement, and environmentalist seems sufficiently descriptive and neutral to me to fulfil that role.

Are you an environmentalist? You know - one of them?

Yes. Are you? I don’t see the problem here.

Maybe the journalist is one themselves. They didn’t say? That’s the point.

Muehe,

I think you’re probably saying that’s what an Opinion article is for.

Correct.

But a news article that doesn’t state its biases is not unbiased. And I haven’t seen any news articles where bias is stated.

True, no human produced piece of writing can ever be truly free of bias.

That said:

Normal news article: Best effort of not applying your biases and just reporting raw facts.
Opinion news article: Intentionally applying bias to contextualise the raw facts.

That’s all there is in this distinction, but that’s nonetheless important I would say.

I don’t know what ‘an environmentalist’ is - as discussed, the news made it up. But as one, would you please define it and explain your bias, y’know, like a news reporter would?

As per: dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=env…

1 definition found for environmentalist

From WordNet ® 3.0 (2006) :

environmentalist
n 1: someone who works to protect the environment from destruction or pollution [syn: environmentalist, conservationist]

My bias is that I have been hearing from reputable sources that we are destroying or at the very least damaging the ecosystems that supports our species for all of my conscious life. Literally all of it. Doing so seems like a bad idea.

By the way, today I learned there is apparently an older application of this term in the nature-vs-nurture debate amongst anthropologists for people who favour the nurture side of the argument (n2): en.wiktionary.org/wiki/environmentalist

Anyway, people make up new words when they need them, I still don’t understand the confusion…

Mmmnnoo, they didn’t say. You’re suggesting they would? Or that that is normally done?

No, I’m saying they wouldn’t self-identify as such unless it’s an opinion piece, because that would be introducing bias into their articles instead of reporting on the facts.

Muehe, (edited )

But if the Vietnamese video game industry is actively harmed by Steam, an American company, using its vast resources to outcompete Vietnamese publishers, then what is your opposition to this that doesn’t encompass a de facto defense of free market capitalism?

Not GP but the article didn’t say that Steam outcompeted local developers by “using its vast resources”. On the contrary, it alleged that local developers cannot compete on Steam with international developers, because those do not have to apply the local regulations:

Citing it as “an injustice to domestic publishers”, Vietnamese studios reportedly say that local game development “will die” if Steam is able to keep releasing games without the same government scrutiny as domestic games.

A somewhat shaky argument considering that the same is true for many other countries applying their own local regulations, which Vietnamese developers do not have to follow.

But anyway, what is my opposition that doesn’t encompass a de facto defence of free market capitalism? The damage to the users. What about all the Vietnamese people losing access to Steam’s online features, which are arguably necessary nowadays for many games, especially multiplayer ones. And for what? To benefit Vietnamese businesses? Not very socialist of you comrade Vietnam. smh

In any case, this is all pure speculation at this point, since both parties have yet to make a statement about the situation:

At the time of writing, there’s been no formal word from Vietnamese authorities or Steam about the “ban”, […]

That said, my current head cannon goes something like this:

Vietnamese devs: Dude, these regulations on games are killing us. We can’t compete on Steam with games like these.
The Party: Okay we hear you. bans Steam
Vietnamese devs: Wait, what? (← we are here)

Edit: formatting

Muehe,

That’s not really contrary to the point, but orthogonal to it.

What? According to the article based on which we are discussing this news that is the point (allegedly). And it is unrelated to your point yes. I’m not entirely sure where you even came up with your point to be honest.

Your argument is the same kind of “consumer rights” argument that I’ve seen everywhere on the internet, because you are implying that there is material harm to the people of Vietnam caused by Steam’s banning. Which is a fairly specious argument. It’s the loss of a luxury item. No one is materially harmed by it.

I guess the consumers, i.e. the people of Vietnam in possession of this luxury item, would disagree with that assessment. Especially if they have sunk significant finances and/or time into their Steam account.

It’s not like Vietnam banned insulin.

Nobody said it is?

And while you may not use the same language, you are effectively saying that every consumer on the planet should have free access to the best products available for whatever “thing” they want. In this case, video games.

Again, what? I’m saying people will want to keep access to something they already paid for, their games on Steam and the according metadata like savegames, multiplayer access, and such. Not sure how you managed to pull this interpretation out of what I said, but be assured it’s incorrect.

It’s a de facto argument for free market economic policies.

Since the whole logic chain that led you to this conclusion was already riddled with errors from the very beginning this is simply a non sequitur.

Muehe,

Not to say that I’m leaning towards the conspiracy interpretation, but all those questions have somewhat plausible answers. So let me play the devils advocate here.

Why would boeing go from plainly assassinating somebody, to then trying to kill somebody with influenza b, a usually easily survivable infection for somebody in his age range?

Well if you conjecture that both deaths were indeed a murder then that means Boeing’s hitmen just fucked up the oldest trick in the book, making it look like a suicide. Makes sense to switch methods.

Why wouldn’t they just assassinate him too? Everybody already thinks they did it, it’s not like they saved any face by using such an unlikely method.

Plausible deniability. One whistleblower “suicide”? Suspicious. Two whistleblower “suicides” shortly after each other? Very suspicious. They may be an immensely powerful company, but that doesn’t mean they are entirely invincible.

And how the hell did they even manage to do it?

Maybe they just saw the victim being in the hospital with a naturally occurring influenza infection and helped an already likely secondary infection along, virtually guaranteeing a fatal outcome? Not sure how lethal MRSA is exactly, but doesn’t look all that friendly from a quick Wiki glance.

Again, not that I’m saying this conjecture is true. But the circumstances and the timing of it all are just a bit too suspicious to not at least entertain the hypothesis. I mean it’s not exactly statistically relevant, but 2/14 is still a ridiculously high mortality rate for being a Boeing whistleblower.

So people will speculate. Presumption of innocence is a law seldom obeyed in the court of public opinion. That doesn’t mean the conspiracy theory is either true or false.

Muehe,

pet open source projects that no one else ever seems to contribute to, not […] software that holds up civilization

SamePicture.jpeg

Muehe,

Given that you have already received some replies which I largely agree with I’m going to focus on some of the specific points of critique you raised.

The mystery and intrigue gets overshadowed by sexism,

I mean I can’t really say that this isn’t portrayed in the show, especially in the first few episodes, but I can’t recall any instance of it being portrayed as a good thing. Quite the contrary actually.

jingoism,

The show is indeed rather militaristic, but given that the antagonists are a species of parasitic aliens with a god-complex

spoiler(a plot point which gains more nuance in later seasons as well by the way)

I always saw this as a thinly veiled metaphor for armed resistance against the divine right of kings. So I wouldn’t go quite so far as to call it jingoistic, although overtly militaristic is certainly a fair assessment.

characters that can be summed up on a postage stamp

As you already surmised this gets fleshed out a bit more later on, but stays more or less the same. Most characters, certainly the main cast in any case, stay rather archetypical with some character development happening though.

and plots and scenes that are contrived and clumsy.

This happens throughout the entire series unfortunately, but it varies a lot from episode to episode rather than from season to season. There are some rather interesting interpretations of common and uncommon sci-fi tropes throughout as well.

do they ever solve how the female token character is being treated?

Since you didn’t exactly point out your problem with her portrayal I can only guess what you mean, but yes, I do think so. There are also other women joining the supporting cast (and even main cast in the last few seasons), leading to less frequent failure of the Bechdel test.

Does it ever stop feeling cheap and schlocky?

Not quite, but the first two seasons are certainly the worst in this regard, mixed in with most of the retconning happening to their content.

All that said, there is a reason the original show has 10 seasons at 22 episodes each, three movies, and four spin-offs, and if you can stomach early Star Trek TNG (or even TOS), you will probably enjoy at least the SG-1 series overall.

IMHO the first season is the weakest, second season is not great not terrible, 3-8 is the peak, 9, 10, and the two TV movies trail off a bit although still better than the first two seasons.

If you want to skip some seasons you should be aware that most of them have a “clip-show” episode towards the end that recaps the season and embeds them into the larger narrative happening in the background. I’d say the bad episodes are worth stomaching for the context though.

Atlantis spin-off is worth the watch if you liked SG-1 overall. Chronology is a bit weird though, SG-1 season 9 and 10 and Atlantis season 1 and 2 overlap.

Universe spin-off you can skip unless you got really invested.

spoilerUniverse ends without wrapping up its underlying narrative in any way since the show got canceled.

Haven’t watched the animated spin-off, Origins was meh.

In conclusion, it’s probably worth giving it a shot if you can manage to not take it too seriously.

Muehe,

Sam is a woman with reproductive bits on the inside, but she can hold her own. You have shown us this many times. Why do you insist on both showing and telling us over and over and over. Sam kicks ass on her own, it doesn’t need to feel forced.

Given that most of this happens early on I always saw it as a somewhat heavy-handed approach to make it unequivocally clear to the machos in the potential audience that they aren’t welcome to the fandom. I mean have you met the patriarchally inclined? They aren’t the brightest bunch. Reading between the lines is hard for them…

Muehe,

Agreed. Sad it was cancelled right when the background plot (heh) was picking up some speed and the show seemed to have found its stride, but overall it was a bit too Battlestar Galactica for me anyway.

A lot of the narrative structure was further developed by Brad Wright with the Travelers (2016) series in which it worked quite well from the start. Also sadly cancelled before its time though.

Muehe,
Muehe,

Well if I learned one thing about biology it is that it eludes simplistic notions as the one presented in the meme, so I get where you are coming from here. However I very much doubt the sudden disappearance of viruses would end complex life or evolution, since there are other avenues of intra-species mutation and inter-species gene transfer. It would doubtlessly upset the balance of pretty much every existing ecosystem of course.

That said, don’t overthink it, it’s just a meme about the (slightly modified) Agent Smith reference so neatly lying around in the parent comment.

Klimawandel treibt Inflation: Werden Rekordpreise im Supermarkt neue Normalität? (www.n-tv.de) German

Olivenöl, Kakao und Orangensaft werden immer teurer. Schuld an der Preisexplosion ist auch der Klimawandel. Die Landwirtschaft müsse darauf jetzt zwingend reagieren, sagt Experte Höhne ntv.de. Ansonsten könnte es noch teurer werden....

Muehe,

D’accord. Ich trage ja schon länger die Hypothese mit mir rum das mehr als nur ein bisschen des zu beobachtenden zivilisatorischen Niederganges der letzten Dekaden ursächlich auf den Klimawandel zurückzuführen ist, inklusive des globalen Rechtsrucks in der Politik.

Die Kausalkette scheint da ziemlich offensichtlich. Mehr und mehr Ökosysteme kollabieren → Druck auf die restlichen Ökosysteme steigt → Noch mehr Ökosysteme kollabieren noch schneller → Druck auf politische, wirtschaftliche, und soziale Systeme steigt mit.

Und, typisch Mensch, greift man dann in Reaktion darauf (lies: politisch reaktionär) nach altbewährten “Lösungen”, weil früher war ja alles besser also lass uns alles so machen wie damals™, dann wird das schon wieder. Wird natürlich nicht funktionieren, denn hat es sowieso noch nie plus die Problemlage ist jetzt grundlegend anders.

Das führt natürlich zu der Frage was denn eine Lösung wäre, und die erschütternde Antwort ist wahrscheinlich das es keine rechtzeitig umsetzbare Lösung gibt. Ein evolutionärer Ansatz ist zu langsam und ein revolutionärer Ansatz zu zerstörerisch um effektiv zu helfen. Der einzige Weg den ich sehe der vielleicht helfen könnte wäre der UN oder einer vergleichbaren Organisation globale Exekutiv- und Legislativgewalt in Klimafragen zu übertragen, damit sich der Kampf gegen den Klimawandel halt nicht nur in Lippenbekenntnissen erschöpft die aus dem Fenster fliegen sobald man den wirtschaftlichen Wettbewerbsnachteil darin erkennt. Aber dafür ist das internationale Misstrauen zwischen den Nationalstaaten wahrscheinlich (schon/wieder/noch immer) zu groß, und die bereits beginnenden Ressourcenkriege und Massenmigrationen werden in der Hinsicht auch nicht helfen.

Tja in der Tat.

Muehe,

Did that too a while back, but anecdotally it feels lees buggy through Steam, especially regarding updates.

Also clicking the Stop button in Steam doesn’t leave behind zombie processes off Battle.net.exe and Agent.exe, which I had to manually kill when using Lutris. Assume that’s due to Protons(?) pressure-vessel thingy.

Muehe,

AFAIK you can set Lutris up to use GE or Proton builds.

Muehe,

Oh so that’s what you meant. Thought you meant don’t use Lutris at first because of how you worded it. That makes much more sense.

Muehe,

The WINE_SIMULATE_WRITECOPY=1 %command% is the Steam launch option you set, with %command% meaning roughly “what Steam would do without any launch options set”.

The whole process was a bit finicky and I did it a few month ago, but from what I remember it went something like this:

  • Download battle.net installer
  • Add it as non-Steam game to run it
  • Locate the newly created prefix in Steam directory
  • Add the Battle.net.exe in it as a non-Steam game, then remove the installer (not the other way around or the prefix will be deleted)
Muehe,

Neither. Battle.net is Blizzards game launcher and store. They also own that domain, but the name usually refers to the binary.

Muehe,

I’m involved in the development of an addon for the Classic WoW versions (Questie), and the thing I do there is such a convoluted process that not doing it feels like letting my fellow devs and the users down. But you can do development on the PTRs and beta servers, so I haven’t given money to Blizzard in a long time. Now you could argue that this is even worse in regards to supporting Blizzard than just paying for a game, but I rationalise it to myself with the fact that the newer clients will inevitably be used for private servers just like the old ones were (some already are actually).

Polizeigewalt: Der Schlächter von Hamburg (www.kontextwochenzeitung.de) German

Er freut sich darauf, im Einsatz linke Zecken zu verprügeln und gilt polizeiintern als Menschenfeind: Kontext liegen Chatprotokolle vor, in denen der Beamte Rainer Jäger (Name geändert) mit Gewalttaten prahlt. Konsequenzen hatte das bislang nicht, aber das könnte sich bald ändern....

Muehe,

Wundert mich leider nicht sonderlich. Kannte mal jemanden der gerne dritte Halbzeit gespielt hat (Fussballhooligan) und der erzählte es gäbe eine direkte Pipeline von da in die Polizeihundertschaften. Hobby zum Beruf machen sozusagen. Warum Leute für lau verprügeln wenn du jede Woche jemanden siehst der dafür Tariflohn bekommt?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • megavids
  • rosin
  • thenastyranch
  • tester
  • DreamBathrooms
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • tacticalgear
  • Youngstown
  • ethstaker
  • osvaldo12
  • slotface
  • everett
  • kavyap
  • JUstTest
  • khanakhh
  • ngwrru68w68
  • Leos
  • modclub
  • cubers
  • cisconetworking
  • Durango
  • InstantRegret
  • GTA5RPClips
  • provamag3
  • normalnudes
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • All magazines