Less pixelated, so either they got it from another place to shop it or its legit.
The main picture has both eyes on the same position, as if the eye was copied, while this one has one slightly opened. This can be done in photoshop so idk but noticed it so I wanted to mention it.
Having these two pics, the second one has more chances of being the real one mainly because of 1.
Not saying it’s good, but context matters. Early humans would be seeing each other naked nonstop, if it’s not about forcing someone to do something harmful then it’s probably not a “send them to jail” situation
Personally I'd say an adult exposing themselves around children is harmful. Not to mention basic violation of people's right not to see your junk. What the hell kind of apologist bs is this?
As I said, context matters. Just for a second, let’s imagine an elderly person in hospice care, living with their adult child. In the course of the adult child caring for their parent, a grandchild sees that person naked. Is that harmful? What specifically is it about seeing an adult naked that is harmful to a child?
There are many cases where seeing an adult naked would be harmful, and the scenario I just outlined is different than this picture. Seems like it’s maybe a dad or uncle with bad taste who thinks it’s funny. If that’s what it was and those were my kids I’d be fucking yelling at the guy. But I wouldn’t be like “you’re a sexual predator, time to go to jail.”
The naked human body is our natural state. I don’t want to see a bunch of naked people, and don’t get naked in front of random people. But that’s because of our culture, and what being naked signifies about our intentions, not because there’s some natural law that doing so is harmful.
Do you mean the book is accessible through the Libby app or do you mean to physically go to the library and get a DVD or something? Because my library for example has a very limited number of books in Libby and the last time my PC had DVD-ROM was in 2008
These people thrive off any attention, even negative. Even if it’s as a joke, he’s still going to feel like a main character. The right course of action is giving them the irrelevance they so truly deserve by paying them zero attention.
He’s saying lay off to 150k, not by 150k. He says getting down to that would be a 20% reduction, so that puts the then-current headcount at ~188k, so get rid of about 35-40k people.
I’m saying his complete disregard for these employees as people, with families, and lives, is unaffected by the difference. He’s proposing to fire 30,000+ people so that a number in his portfolio can grow. A number that he doesn’t need, and will never spend. He’s a fucking psychopath, regardless of it being 30k, 40k, or 150k.
35k is a pretty huge amount better than 150k. Are you just trying to say that it sucks either way? Because that I agree with, but when we criticize things, we should at least have the numbers right.
Yes, I’m saying he’s a psychopath regardless of the numerical error. He’s talking about destroying the livelihood of tens of thousands of people, just so he can make some more money he doesn’t need, and could never spend. So it doesn’t really matter if it’s 30k, 40k, or 150k. He would propose anything that benefits him personally, regardless of the suffering it causes.
Kinda glad I work in government/heavy industry. The highs aren’t very high and the lows aren’t very low. I will never be rich but I also will never be unemployed for over a week by choice.
Maybe. If I was hiring someone new under me I would tend to avoid people who worked for Alphabet. Frankly controls+automation is a not a fun field to be in. If you want to get into it you have to be willing to endure it. Can’t exactly have someone who spent their childhood riding horses on their private estate working in a slaughter house.
The average time a software engineer, regardless of level, stays at a big tech company is around 18-24 months. That, surprisingly, hasn’t changed with the market slowing. Many are still taking jobs at a higher level at smaller companies, or leaving to do other things.
Given the severance paid out for many of these employees, alongside the operational damage caused, it’s likely that the people they laid off or forced out would have already left for another role. Funny enough, many of the companies that laid thousands of people off are still hiring external candidates, or people on boomerang deals to return to the company after 6-12 months.
It was always a short-sighted move, triggered by everyone else doing the same thing. While you’re not wrong, I don’t have enough faith in these companies to run things for the benefit of their current employees.
I actually shelled out for the invisible-ink “strategy guide” (i.e. cheating instructions) just to finish the damn thing. I suspect the guide was written by Adams as well, because it was almost as entertaining as game itself. Halfway through the section on how to get the Babel fish—the single toughest puzzle I’ve ever encountered in a game—it tells you that “it is at this point that grown men begin weeping uncontrollably.”
Hmm… I definitely had at least one of those for an Infocom game… Maybe I had that one? But I don’t remember getting to the end of the game. It was so long ago, I don’t remember. I just remember it was basically a FAQ where you had to use a special marker to reveal the answer.
There were a number of books back then like that (mysteries and such), with the idea that you only revealed the answers to things you couldn't figure out.
As for the game itself, the one part that I have a continued memory about is where you could press the button labeled "Do Not Press". Only doing it a few times gave you the same "nothing happens" message, but being persistent got a different one. Infocom games were so great and full of humor, even the non-Douglas Adams ones.
Yes! I remember that too! And yes, I was a huge Infocom fan. I think the only one I got all the way through without help was Wishbringer, but I can’t remember one I didn’t enjoy playing.
I remember working that one out with my brothers. Every step you take just leads to further problems getting the fish. It was easy to figure out to put the towel over the perfectly towel-sized grate and hang your robe on the hook. Blocking the cleaning robot access panel with Ford’s satchel also seemed to make sense as well. But when we put the stack of junk mail on the satchel and it actually worked? Well holy shit, were we ecstatic. It opens up some of the best parts of the game, though I would argue not as much as figuring out how to get the spare improbability drive to work. I think one of my brothers bought that same guide book long after we retired the C64, so though he knew how to finish it, I don’t think any of us ever did. I remember getting to Magrathea and not ever being able to figure out the proper tool bit. Tried taking the proper tool, and storing another tool in the thing your aunt gave you, but never seemed to work.
The idea that population numbers are all it takes is so stupid. Mozart is not just one guy who was really good at writing music. I mean, obviously, he literally was, but he only existed and wrote what he did in the way he did because of not only his own “genius” but also the circumstances he was raised in, his education, the musical traditions that he drew from, the fact that he was wealthy and had time… Etc etc.
Adding more people living in poverty, with poor education, no connection to musical or artistic tradition, and no time… Will not add more Mozarts.
"I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops"
Most of the super famous classical composers were born with in 90 years of each other. On one hand thay were brilliant musicians, on the other hand It was also this thing that was happening right then.
I’m fairly certain if the circumstances were different we still have a bunch of people doing the same work.
Those composers are famous because they were pioneers in the development of music and their work has been used to educate musicians in virtually all countries during the last century. There are composers creating similarly valuable music today, sometimes working in cinema or video games, and composers doing pioneering work, usually in experimental music. They aren’t as famous because their work isn’t being used worldwide to educate musicians, but they might be by 2123, provided society hasn’t collapsed.
That’s part of what I’m getting at. The musical culture at the time arose through the work of many, many composers, and through the listeners who talked about it etc. Cultural development is complex and requires much more than just a handful of geniuses.
Seriously I’m 15 minutes into the history of computer generated sound and am still wondering wtf this has to do with cracking music. This is some next level autistic shit. 10/10.
I smell the same and can’t help but to mention just a few off the top of my head.
rgba / elevated
Conspiracy / Chaos Theory
Bran Control / Memories from the MCP
Andromeda Software Development / Lifeforce
Farbrausch / fr-041
mfx / 1995
pouet.net - go there, download and watch it yourself. Youtube is cool but real stuff is so much better, especially when you check the file size. Though be aware, some of these old ones don’t play well at non-96 dpi display settings.
This is art and I’m not even joking. This shit should have replaced wars.
This whole discussion is within the context of trackers specifically, not the mainstream definition of “chiptune” which can refer to any music, made using whatever, that have some bleeps and bloops mixed in.
The mainstream definition also includes music that isn’t tracker music, which isn’t what we’re talking about, and hence, it’s not the right term to be using.
Bringing up the word in its general meaning within a discussion about tracker music, is even more confusing and unhelpful, because in the context of trackers, the word chiptune refers to a specific type of tracker music.
Chiptune only “specifically” means music produced the same way as retro games, which necessitates a tracker. If they’re using a standard DAW, then it’s basically “cheating” lmao.
That “lmao” is really doing some heavy lifting for your credibility there…
Which definition are you even using when saying that a tracker is necessary? In the age of trackers “chiptune” referred to a music style from before trackers. If chiptunes existed before trackers, then someone obviously made that music without one.
To consider same sound produced with newer tools “cheating” or “fake” is an stupid distinction. Would not using trackers to create chiptunes then be cheating, too, since chiptune referred to tracker music that was emulating the even older style of 8-bit computer music? (Since again, trackers are a 16-bit era thing)
I’m starting to think you don’t even know what a tracker is, because while trackers could be used to make other styles of music from their time, plenty of retro games used other ways to produce music, such as MIDI sound cards or direct instruction of synth voice chips. All of which would be called “chiptunes” by most people today, not just trackers.
Trackers were created to take advantage of the new and unique audio hardware available in the Amiga.
Trackers use sample-banks, while both the NES and SNES heavily relied on voice chips.
The NES only had 5 voice channels, and they were each stuck with their initial synth-type, and while SNES could reproduce samples, they were used sparingly due to the space audio samples would take up on the cartridge.
Trackers could create music using actual audio samples. While the samples couldn’t be long or high quality due to RAM and CPU constraints, the way they functioned from the audio systems of the NES and SNES is fundamentally different, and more capable.
While it is possible to re-create the style of music produced by the NES and SNES with a tracker, that’s hardly what they were developed for. Trackers had far fewer technical limitations and could do so much more.
You’re telling me shit I already know and trying to twist the facts. Whether the NES and SNES used synth or samples is immaterial to how the music was programmed. Trackers are literally made for programming MIDI instructions, just as those old games had their music programmed.
The number of voices and voice type changes nothing. You’re just trying to add in immaterial facts to add false weight to your assertion.
You’re telling me shit I already know and trying to twist the facts
I’m sorry, but if you already know all this, why can’t you make sense? You’re again coming in with a new claim that falls apart the second I add context:
MIDI is a digital standard for musical notation, one which trackers DID NOT USE. Lots of trackers use their own formats which can’t even be opened by other trackers, let alone any MIDI compliant software. Not to mention that MIDI files don’t come with samples, while tracker modules had to in order to reproduce a track correctly.
Trackers are as related to MIDI as they are to dots scribbled onto five lines on a piece of paper. All music can be represented using MIDI, because MIDI is just notes. That doesn’t mean all digital music uses MIDI. Especially when MIDI doesn’t store actual sound data.
Trackers, and I apparently have to say this again, USED SAMPLES. As in, NOT SYNTHS (like the NES). They played back recorded audio data from actual sound files according to a pattern input by the composer. Which yes, you could argue is equivalent to MIDI. But the samples are not, and they are a fundamental part of how trackers work. In order to even get started with using a tracker to create NES/SNES style music, you’d have to configure it with a sample-bank that contains the noises they would make.
Perhaps you are confused because MIDI sound cards did something similar. They used MIDI data to play music using the preset sample-banks that different MIDI cards came with, meaning the track would sound different depending on what sound card was used.
Tracker modules meanwhile came with their own samples, meaning they always played the same. Composers could also use whatever audio files they wanted to create their sample-banks.
“Those old games” also most certainly did not use MIDI, they either had their music produced using direct hardware instruction or whatever tools the game developers created for themselves.
But we’re getting off track. You’ve kept making new claims about trackers, what they are related to, the terminology around them, and what they are for, each of which has been subtly off.
To recap:
Tracker music is tracker music. The word “chiptune” can either refer to a sub-genre within tracker music, or “retro” music in general, which includes lots of other music aside from tracker music. However, it cannot be used to refer to tracker music and only tracker music. Those two terms are not interchangeable. That doesn’t change because “it’s much later now m8”.
Trackers were also not created to “replicate” or “reproduce” anything, they can, but they can also do more. They were developed specifically to take advantage of the new 16-bit sound card introduced in the Amiga, and worked by playing back recorded audio samples, while older computer music was produced by instructing synthesizers to bleep and bloop.
Of course you can use samples to play the notes in a MIDI, MIDI is just a digital standard for storing a sequence of notes. You can do whatever you want with those.
But now you’re grasping at straws, trackers didn’t use MIDI, and unlike MIDI, shipped the samples with the tracks, so they’d sound the same wherever they were played.
That there’s a superficial similarity is inconsequential, and that you’d bring it up at all, just further crushes your previous claims that trackers were related to earlier 8-bit synth-based music.
Mate you’re not gonna convince me that “tracker music” is anything but a vague term. You might have a point in it describing music made wth a tracker, but with Renoise existing these days, that isn’t exactly very specific is it? We call these pieces “scene music”, or even “keygen music” if you’re new to it. It’s as useful as saying “DAW music”. The music made in the style of old retro games is more specific than just “it was made with a tracker”. That is exactly why the term “chiptune” exists; it’s music that is made with those old sound chips, or emulations of them. That gets to the heart of the issue.
Does it need to be more than a vague term, if it, when entered into google or youtube, results in the exact thing I was talking about? Music, made using a “tracker”.
Scene music or chiptune, meanwhile, both lead to far less specific results. Same for DAW.
As for retro computer music as a genre, I never claimed it should ALL be called “tracker music”, you’re the one who went “which necessitates a tracker”.
I’m perfectly happy with chiptune as a word for any and all retro music. Tracker music can be called chiptune, but not all chiptune, is tracker music.
Yeah, trackers are what we had on the Amiga, and it was mostly just sound samples played at varying pitches. It’s definitely got an old school sound to it, but it’s only a low track limit that makes it different to what we have now.
Real chip tunes are where you torture an AY-3-8912 chip until it sings for its master.
My intro to chip tune was a guy I met in the mid aughts whose hobby was using old electronics to make music, so yeah, I always thought chip tune was like ripping apart old toys and torturing them to hear their screams
I had no idea what I was getting into clicking that link. Saw another comment about it being 40some minutes long but I watched the whole video, it was very interesting! I was tickled by all the things that I can remember from growing up that were referenced
An aside, do you have first hand knowledge of tinkering with trackers?
Especially the longer ones like “POLYBIUS - The Video Game That Doesn’t Exist”, “Nuclear Fruit: How the Cold War Shaped Video Games”, and “The First Video Game”. His iconic arms series is also, well, iconic.
People ITT hating on null coalescing operators need to touch grass. Null coalescing and null conditional (string?.Trim()) are immensely useful and quite readable. One only has to be remotely conscious of edge cases where they can impair readability, which is true of every syntax feature
Oh yeah I forgot, first you have to make a blog post, then a devlog, then review the top 10 best features of JS es6 (9 years after it was released…). Then shitpost on social media network for the other half of the week, and boom! You’re officially a Master Programmer!
Because languages need to be able to handle the very common edge cases where data sources don’t return complete data.
Adding null coalescing to a null-safe language (like dart) is so much easier to read and infer the risk of handling null than older languages that just panic the moment null is introduced unexpectedly.
For old languages, null coalescing is a great thing for readability. But in general null is a bad concept, and I don’t see a reason why new languages should use it. That, of course, doesn’t change the fact that we need to deal with the nulls we already have.
How are we supposed to deal with null values though? It’s an important concept that we can’t eliminate without losing information and context about our data.
0 and “” (empty string/char) are very often not equivalent to null in my use cases and mean different things than it when I encounter them.
You could use special arbitrary values to indicate invalid data, but at that point you’re just doing null with extra steps right?
I’m really lost as to how the concept isn’t neccessary.
I’ll point to how many functional languages handle it. You create a type Maybe a, where a can be whatever type you wish. The maybe type can either be Just x or Nothing, where x is a value of type a (usually the result). You can’t access the x value through Maybe: if you want to get the value inside the Maybe, you’ll have to handle both a case where we have a value(Just x) and don’t(Nothing). Alternatively, you could just pass this value through, “assuming” you have a value throughout, and return the result in another Maybe, where you’ll either return the result through a Just or a Nothing. These are just some ways we can use Maybe types to completely replace nulls. The biggest benefit is that it forces you to handle the case where Maybe is Nothing: with null, it’s easy to forget. Even in languages like Zig, the Maybe type is present, just hiding under a different guise.
If this explanation didn’t really make sense, that’s fine, perhaps the Rust Book can explain it better. If you’re willing to get your hands dirty with a little bit of Rust, I find this guide to also be quite nice.
TLDR: The Maybe monad is a much better alternative to nulls.
Not quite, because the Maybe enum is neither int nor null, but it’s own, third thing. So before you can do any operations with the return value, you need to handle both cases that could occur
Isn’t that also true with compile-time type checking though? Eg. 0 + x where x is int|null would be detected? I don’t have much experience here so I could be wrong but I can’t think of a case where they’re not equivalent
Most languages that let you do ambiguous return types don’t do compile-time type checking, and vice versa. But if it’s actually implemented that way, then it’s logically equivalent, you’re right. Still, I prefer having things explicit
you could take a look at what Rust is doing with the Option enum. Superficially it looks similar to using null, but it actually accomplishes something very different.
A function that classically would return a value, say an int, but sometimes returns null instead, becomes a function that returns an Option. This forces explicit handling of the two cases, namely Some(value) or None. This way, it is next to impossible to try to do an operation on a value that does not exist.
Who said anything about panicking the minute we encounter incomplete data? Just do what Rust does and, instead of having all types be able to be null, statically enforce that all variables have an initialized value and have a value have a separate type Option<T> which can either be Some(T) or None, and have the compiler not let you access the value inside unless you write code to handle the None case. There are standard library helper functions for common operations like null coalescing and, as you say, panicking when you encounter a null, but you have to explicitly tell the compiler you want to do that by calling myOption.unwrap()
What makes this really cool is that you can have an Option<Option<T>> where Some(None) is not the same as None, so an iterator that signals end of list by returning None can have None elements in it.
Say what you will about the functional programming people but they were spot on with this one. Having an Option monad in place of the ability for null is absolutely the way to go. I’d say it’s the future but Lisp and APL had this figured out in the 60s
You’ve got 8 buns there so buying 4 more patties would take the whole thing to $28 for 8 burgers and cutting the danish into 8 slices which is probably the serving size anyway. Or $3.50 per burger and slice of danish.
And you grabbed the most expensive versions of things too.
But no toppings (lettuce, tomato, cheese, onions etc.) So a plain burger and a piece of Danish for 3.50 isn’t exactly great value nutritionally. But yeah this could be done cheaper and probably could have gotten at least some store brand cheese too.
I think people who are just weirdly anti vegetarian/vegan just assume they’re like celery patties or some shit that taste like celery but the whole “burger” thing kinda makes it obvious they’re supposed to taste like faux beef.
lemmy.world
Top