• 1 Post
  • 21 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 7th, 2023

help-circle

  • This is utterly fascinating. Thank you for providing this link. Funnily enough, my thoughts immediately went to “is Milgram any better?”. Seems like he might be, somewhat. The question for me then becomes:

    • can people be trusted with authority, on a general level? Are there studies to prove / disprove the adage that power corrupts / that people with personality disorders such as psychopathy or narcissism seek out (or thrive in, or are promoted to) positions of power?

    Thank you again, I shall revise my opinion from now on and seek out more studies on the matter.


  • What I find interesting is that reigning in abuse at the behest of bosses / management / leadership would solve a gigantic number of problems in today’s society. ‘Nobody wants to work anymore’ is actually ‘nobody wants to be treated like shit by power-hungry psychopaths’. BUT, it is so difficult / impossible to change the intrinsic human assholification of anyone with power (see Stanford prison experiment), that companies will try anything else.





  • German here. Lived in Hamburg and Munich for about half my life each. They call Bavaria the Texas of Germany, but that’s just in relation to the rest of Germany politically. German conservatism is nothing like American conservatism, thank God. Right-wing disinformation cancer is spreading in Germany, like it is anywhere else (AFD in the east). Any LGBTQ folks don’t need to worry in any big cities. I’d recommend Munich over Berlin, but that’s personal preference (Berlin is like Germany’s London, loud, dirty, exciting, more crime than any other part of Germany, which is still less than most places in the US). Like, you won’t ‘feel’ the difference between Hamburg and Munich politically. In Berlin you might find a few more people openly displaying their left or right leaning tendencies. It’s also much cheaper than Munich, not sure if that matters.


  • setInner234@feddit.detoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlWhy are folks so anti-capitalist?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Capitalism requires coercion to function. Capitalists openly admit this by being staunchly against removing ‘incentives’ (read the coercion) to work. The ‘incentive’ is goddamn starvation and being exposed to the raw elements with no shelter. And apparently, if this was a basic human right provided to everyone, we’d all stop working over night and become lazy. It’s just such an ass-backwards way to look at the world. People are not inherently lazy. But they need to be forced to work shitty jobs under unacceptable conditions. That’s the crux of the matter. The ultra-rich require wage slaves. Not free-thinking, educated people who go after their own interests and are productive in their own ways. I’m interested to see how the system will hold up when all the shitty jobs have been automated away. My guess is that the rich will flee to some kind of Elysium type paradise, while robot police keeps the masses in check and ‘poor’ people, aka 99% of humanity goes extinct.


  • This feels closest to the response I would have written. I would perhaps add, that one of the consequences of this system is, that money insulates you from having to improve. Someone like Trump will never go to a therapist to fix whatever mental illness made him turn into who he is, precisely because he doesn’t need to. Money can prop up the most evil, stupid, useless people for generations and generations. If they had to live examined lives, they’d stop being evil. The only ways to fix this, that I can see, are all utopian sounding, but shouldn’t be. Wage ratios for example. As CEO you simply shouldn’t be able to hold more shares or earn more income than, say, 10x that of the lowest paid worker in your organisation. And that needs to include subsidiaries and 3rd parties. This system would have to be implemented globally. Never going to happen though. We can fight a pointless global war on drugs, but we definitely won’t reduce CEO income.





  • You are completely right that the games industry is a joke, and it’s a tale as old as time that hardware manufacturers love unoptimised shit, so that they can sell more expensive crap.

    As for the 60fps, or should I call it saturating a 60hz display, I have noticed that some games are fine at 60hz and some games feel terrible up until the higher 90s, and around that level I’m usually fine.

    I used to play a lot of quake 3 back in the day and going from 60 to 120 is like two different worlds entirely.

    I think some people pick up on it and others don’t. I used to work in an office where all the monitors were connected via 4k over HDMI 1 and therefore they were all 30hz. Out of a team of 50, only one graphic designer complained about the laggy monitors and everyone else was moving their mice around saying they couldn’t tell.

    To me it was torture. I don’t know where the truth in the matter is. I think console manufacturers long tried to convince everyone that the eye can’t perceive over 30hz, which is insane.

    Maybe now that’s shifted to trying to make everyone believe they need 240hz, but obviously you’re getting diminishing returns at that level. I’ve never seen more than 144 myself, but even in my own testing, I find more than 100 imperceptible. So I know where my personal limit lies.

    For others, maybe younger people, those limits could be higher, who knows. You often hear of people saying they can see monitors and LEDs flicker. I rarely can.

    Back in the 90s I used to play games at 20fps at 640x480, so perspectives can also shift rather dramatically lol

    Lastly, I can only reaffirm that I’d much rather have well optimised, well designed games with a beautiful art direction than the latest SSAO implementation. Beautiful games from 10 years ago are still beautiful games. Whereas path tracing can’t fix your hot pile of AAA garbage…


  • Hmmm, your tone is a bit edgy, but perhaps it was unintentional. The difference between 120fps and 60fps is pretty huge to me. I once had a 4k monitor (on 1440p now), and played on my other 1080p one instead, just for more FPS. Isn’t it a question of preference? Some people prioritise image quality over FPS, some do the opposite. Either is fine, no need to ‘prove anyone wrong’…