There should be another half with Hamas doing the same to a slightly different subset of the West. Both have tuned their propaganda to 110%, Hamas is even slightly more successful.
the meme is referencing a quote from marx that is greatly useful for dunking on idealist leftists who believe that the revolution can simply be wished into existence without all the dirty work.
Obviously they do, they are dunking on armchair leftists that judge every leftist movement on how perfect it is, but judge all liberal structures with supreme nuance.
I mean, Telly is giving away TVs that have a camera and second screen to play ads. Sony might not think they could get away with it a decade ago, but consumers seem to slowly accept more bullshit over time so I could definitely see their calculus changing in the future.
Oh it has a second screen… have to answer ~100 questions about your viewing habits to get it… so they must only ship to likely profitable demographics. Yeah pretty much hate it :D
Honestly I think it’s just a shit idea. Only way I could see it flying is if you heavily (or completely) subsidized the cost of the television. There’s already a company giving away free ad supported TVs.
Oh yeah it’s obviously a shit idea, but that generally doesn’t stop executives when they think there’s money to be made – considering how eg. YouTube’s trying to stop you from blocking ads and will apparently start showing ads when videos are paused, requiring attention seems like a logical next step to drive that CPM up to fund the CEO’s new yacht
It’s crazy that this is real. It looks like a comic someone would make to make fun of the idea. Like the fact that they’re watching some guy shoot someone, then the burger commercial comes on and the guy stands up and cheers “McDonalds!” Before sitting back down to watch more of guy shooting other guy.
This is peak “dumb Americans” humor, and they’re using this unironically to describe their business idea.
Gary M. Zalewski is listed as the inventor. He is listed on 99 patents, several of which are related to increasing advertising proliferation and penetration. He’s basically a driver of enshittification. My favorite was “System and method for taking control of a system during a commercial break”. Can’t have the plebs changing channels!
I miss multiplayer in PC games being done by joining a server and playing. No match making bullshit, it was fun to be in a server with a mixture of skill levels. As compared with a lot of game snow, when ever your skills improve, you just get thrown into a harder tier of match making until you reach your limit and burn out.
This is because tech bros only read pop-psy without any regard for context or nuance. So they read a bit about Flow state and ranking for gamification, and as usual they just botched it. Most ranking is typically calibrated for engagement, not fun. Mind you, they are two different characteristics. If you graphed difficulty and skill, flow is a band, not a point, of difficulty, in the middle. The idea is that when you are challenged slightly over your skill, there is something in you brain that stimulates you to keep going under the promise that overcoming the challenge will be rewarding. Too high and people rage quit, too low and people get bored. The problem is that they want maximum engagement and for that the difficulty has to be on the higher end of the band. A frustrated person will return, a bored one most likely won’t.
They also want to keep people engaged with random and variable reinforcement. The other psychological theory that drives game design, much how behavioral scientist cheat pigeons to keep them engaged pulling a lever or pushing a button. Mix both theories poorly together and you get the awful implementation we see on multiplayer. People are tricked into believing that just because their brain chemicals are screaming at them to keep doing something, it means they are having fun. But that is obviously not true, just nobody ever occurred that those pigeons might be having a awful time. Ask most people on ranked MP or grinding for builds on MMOs if they are having fun and they have no idea why you’re asking them. It has nothing to do with fun, they just want the carrot being dangled in front of their nose.
I just don’t do online MP anymore because of this. 99% of the time, I’m not having fun. Now if I want to play with my friends or other people, we play tabletop board games. Infinitely more fun and far more satisfying than any online game ever.
It has nothing to do with fun, they just want the carrot being dangled in front of their nose.
This might explain the marketing that seemed to start with mobile games and now infects AAA MP titles:
“PLAY NOW AND GET 34 GAZILLION WORTHLESS EMERALDRUBYGEMCOINS and a RARE DROP POPSICLE MAGIC DOMINO”
Like…a newcomer would have zero idea what the heck they’re even talking about but somehow it seems to work, to entice players with worthless free…server database adjustments?
Hardly any focus is on the games being unique or exciting (Surprise, they aren’t!) It’s all about a reward-based impulse, like training a bunch of rodents to use a casino.
That’s not my experience, and I’m an elder millennial. The only time tiering up has encouraged me to quit a game was when the higher ranked players were just more toxic. Being challenged can be part of the fun.
That’s not to say I think matchmaking is simply better than persistent servers. Having a group of regulars and developing a bit of a server culture is good fun. I guess I like both options depending on the mood.
But then newbies would get killed a lot and cry, and stop playing. For some reason, this didn’t happen 20 years ago but now, it’s appearently a big fucking problem if a player doesn’t feel powerful in the first five minutes of the game…
I think gamers are just really entitled now. They expect awards for turning on the game. And God forbid if someone else kicks their butt because they have more experience.
I was playing quake and unreal tournament growing up and I got absolutely wasted in the beginning. Made me laugh so hard. Then I got good, very good, because I had to be to not die.
My match making in Quakeworld late nineties / early two thousands went from LAN with dad and brother at home, to LAN at compsci lab at HS after school, to local PC cafe, to regional LAN tournament to international scene once ISDN & ADSL became ubiquitous.
We were always welcoming newbies to the scene. But then starting 2003 the Nordic players became increasingly cliquey and started refusing to play anywhere further south than servers located near the Stockholm datacentre.
Anti-communists thinking that by doing blanket condemnations of past mistakes instead of historical and material analysis of why it happened, how much was necessary, and how much was the excess, they can totally avoid them in the future and bring down capitalism with the power of love.
How many times does the same mistake have to repeat? Communists didn’t invent revolutions you know. Peasant rebellions were a thing in medieval Europe, and many different kinds of uprisings were tried during the centuries. And there’s the same pattern repeating again and again - it either fails in bloodshed, or succeeds only for the winners to establish a new tyrannical system.
The only exception was started by rich landowners because they didn’t want to pay taxes to the king. (American)
Note that I’m talking about violent revolutions - there were quite a few examples of non-violent or semi-violent revolts/uprisings that didn’t end up catastrophically. India, South Africa, Portugal, post-communist Eastern Europe come to mind.
The only exception was started by rich landowners because they didn’t want to pay taxes to the king. (American)
You really think the US is the only American colony that seceded from its colonial authority by means of violence? And are you implying that the current US government isn’t tyrannical?
or succeeds only for the winners to establish a new tyrannical system
You’re just making that up. You’re tautologically defining any successful violent revolution as failed because it didn’t eliminate every single hierarchy overnight. Even if I’m a Marxist-Leninist I can conceive why you’d make that argument about the USSR (though I’d disagree with you), but if you make that argument about Cuba too you’re just wrong. Cuba is a state much more democratic and much less oppressive by every metric than its predecessor. You’re just falling into that mentality that “the only acceptable revolutions are those which failed”.
Additionally, you’re failing to acknowledge that non-violent revolutions, such as Allende’s Chile and the Spanish Second Republic, can end up in bloodshed and a more authoritarian and repressive form of government not as a consequence of violent revolution, but as a consequence of the lack of it. As a Spanish myself, I’d have much rather seen a version of my country where there was an armed socialist repression against fascism (for example by the CNT or some Bolshevik party), than the history we lived, where a democratically elected, non-violent leftist government was nevertheless couped, plunged into civil war, and eventually turned into fascism. An armed revolution could have actually possibly prevented that. (Funny historical note: the only country that really supported the struggle against fascism in Spain was the USSR, despite the Italian and German fascists helping their Spanish counterpart.)
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.