Redacted

Redacted , 2 days ago

So they’ve failed at pushing full return to office and now they’re commissioning unscientific studies to try to make hybrid seem necessary?

These results really can’t be applied to all jobs. Some jobs obviously require in-person but many white collar jobs can be done entirely remotely saving workers time, money and freeing up infrastructure for those that need/want to go in. Not to mention other benefits to mental health and reduction of emissions involved in commuting.

Redacted , 3 days ago

Nowadays?!

Redacted , 3 days ago

One of the admittedly minor things I dislike about his tetchy interview answers is when he starts going “blah blah blah…that’s why we’ve done things such as…” and then proceeds to list the one and only example of said thing.

Redacted , 3 days ago

Oh yeah agree, he has the reverse Midas touch at the mo. Might add it coincided with the media flipping sides when they saw it was a foregone conclusion.

Redacted , 3 days ago

Right on cue, the descent into fascism begins ahead of the impending climate disasters.

It’s so depressing to see France like this, I always held it up as a prominent antifa nation.

Redacted , 3 days ago

We are just recovering from a similar situation here but the Overton window has shifted so far the supposed left-wing workers’ party now look like centre-right conservatives.

Redacted , 4 days ago

Cavity protection ain’t gonna cut it where they’re going.

Redacted , 12 days ago

Hard disagree. Most trailblazing console ever with one of the strongest lineups of first/second party games we’ve ever seen. Yes there were some shoddy third party ports but you didn’t buy it for those.

People moan about the controller but forget it was the first time a joystick was used and the only real issue was the redundant left prong. Loved the feel of the Z button for shooting games coupled with the Rumble Pak.

Redacted , 14 days ago

🇺🇸 “Baadel a waader” 🇺🇸

Redacted , 15 days ago

Least contrarian Linux user.

Redacted , 14 days ago

Mmmmm fresh pasta.

For me it is very weird, no one introduced me formally to Lemmy(no one I knew run or heard of it), it felt like it was a legend. I never really got to know how good it was and always felt Reddit and Twitter were lacking, never really in control of your memes, never happy with my content, always downvoting stuff. The years went by and my curiosity only became larger as Reddit and Twitter experience was getting worse and worse. I already had experience shit posting and trolling on 4chan since my school days, so last year I signed up to Lemmy and posted my first meme. Next thing I know my feed is breathing again, the grass was definitely greener here. So I switched for both reasons.

Redacted , 23 days ago (edited 23 days ago)

Woodwork dweller here, you seem to have forgotten:

Majora’s Mask

Star Fox 64

Jet Force Gemini

Donkey Kong 64

Diddy Kong Racing

Excite Bike 64

Paper Mario

Paper Mario: Thousand Year Door

Pokémon Stadium

Yoshi’s Story

Pokémon Snap

Mario Party

Felt at the time that there was always a high quality “AAA” release on the horizon interspersed with some of the greatest games ever made. Many of the gameplay techniques these games pioneered during the transition from 2D to 3D are still used to this day.

Obviously a lot of them don’t stand the test of time a quarter of a century on but we haven’t had a system with the same consistent quality of games for a long time, if ever, IMO.

Redacted , 23 days ago (edited 23 days ago)

Unlikely many of the games of the current gen will hold up in 25-30 years…

Many of the first party games on those systems broke new ground and much of modern gaming wouldn’t exist without them.

Redacted , 23 days ago

Good point.

Redacted , 23 days ago

Yes my list was not exhaustive either and tried to focus on exclusives to make the point.

Redacted , 23 days ago

This doesn’t track, Rare were banging out so many good games and as others have mentioned the Star Wars games were also awesome.

I feel you are also still missing the point about trailblazing. There was more gameplay innovation than anything since.

Redacted , 23 days ago (edited 23 days ago)

We referred to Rare as a “second-party” developer at the time. So sad when they got bought by M$.

To answer your question on third-party games, some of my favourites were…

Star Wars: Rogue Squadron

Star Wars: Episode 1 Racer

Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire

Vigilante 8

Extreme-G

Snowboard Kids

Turok

Bomberman 64

Resident Evil 2

San Francisco Rush

Redacted , 23 days ago

Pretty sure the aforementioned list makes up for one mid Castlvania game.

Redacted , 23 days ago

Yep, chuck Rumble Pak in there too.

Did platform fighters exist before Smash?

Did proper 3D platforming with free camera exist before Mario 64?

Did third person adventure games exist before OoT and has anything drastically changed the formula since?

Not to mention all these games shipped fully built with no updates and amazingly few bugs.

It seems as though OP didn’t actually experience these things at the time so making a post about nostalgia for them is strange. Firing up an emulator and going “These games don’t hold up now.” is entirely missing the point.

Redacted , 22 days ago

Can you list 20 great first party games on any platform?

Redacted , 22 days ago

I agree, not common, which is why I don’t understand the “only 20 or so great games” take.

Redacted , 21 days ago

Oh right I see it’s like a quality vs quantity thing. To me I’d pick quality (as that is what triggers my nostalgia).

If I want quantity there are thousands of modern indie games I’d rather play.

Redacted , 1 month ago

✅ Math is hard

❌ This math is hard

Redacted , 2 months ago

Nah it’s just SFA with extra steps.

Redacted , 2 months ago (edited 2 months ago)

I always gamed predominantly on PC but this generation I did the maths as PC parts had become over-inflated so decided to give console a try. I still think it was a decent decision for this generation…

Game Pass can be had waaaaaay cheaper than that and you can get it all back and more in rewards points.

I spent £450ish on the console at launch including controller and a game. Equivalent GPU was £500 or more at the time.

Spent £150ish on Game Pass sub from November 2020 to July 2026 which has allowed me to play countless games I never would have bought outright.

I’ve made over £700 back in vouchers with over 2 years left to accumulate more. Spent half of it on games, and controllers, headset, etc. all of which I can use on my PC. Plan on saving the remaining vouchers to put towards my next PC build.

This is without mentioning other console benefits like low maintenance, Quick Resume and the fact I can use one copy of a game to play with two players online.

eXpLaIN hOw im OuT oF pOcKeT.

Redacted , 2 months ago

That’s why I mentioned those other console exclusive features. Anyway the original point was about cost and I think the Series X was the best value for money at launch this gen…

• Half the price of building a similar PC at launch.
• Rewards are higher on console so recoup the cost more than PC.
• I use Game Pass on both PC and Xbox with a single account to play multiplayer so cheaper on that front.

We’re half way through the generation now though. PC parts have got cheaper, Game Pass Ultimate conversion ratio has dropped and rewards are drying up so probably wouldn’t advocate it anymore. PC likely to be better value next gen.

Redacted , 3 months ago (edited 3 months ago)

This article, along with others covering the topic, seem to foster an air of mystery about machine learning which I find quite offputting.

Known as generalization, this is one of the most fundamental ideas in machine learning—and its greatest puzzle. Models learn to do a task—spot faces, translate sentences, avoid pedestrians—by training with a specific set of examples. Yet they can generalize, learning to do that task with examples they have not seen before.

Sounds a lot like Category Theory to me which is all about abstracting rules as far as possible to form associations between concepts. This would explain other phenomena discussed in the article.

Like, why can they learn language? I think this is very mysterious.

Potentially because language structures can be encoded as categories. Any possible concept including the whole of mathematics can be encoded as relationships between objects in Category Theory. For more info see this excellent video.

He thinks there could be a hidden mathematical pattern in language that large language models somehow come to exploit: “Pure speculation but why not?”

Sound familiar?

models could seemingly fail to learn a task and then all of a sudden just get it, as if a lightbulb had switched on.

Maybe there is a threshold probability of a positied association being correct and after enough iterations, the model flipped it to “true”.

I’d prefer articles to discuss the underlying workings, even if speculative like the above, rather than perpetuating the “It’s magic, no one knows.” narrative. Too many people (especially here on Lemmy it has to be said) pick that up and run with it rather than thinking critically about the topic and formulating their own hypotheses.

Redacted , 3 months ago

Yep my sentiment entirely.

I had actually written a couple more paragraphs using weather models as an analogy akin to your quartz crystal example but deleted them to shorten my wall of text…

We have built up models which can predict what might happen to particular weather patterns over the next few days to a fair degree of accuracy. However, to get a 100% conclusive model we’d have to have information about every molecule in the atmosphere, which is just not practical when we have a good enough models to have an idea what is going on.

The same is true for any system of sufficient complexity.

Redacted , 4 months ago

We know Google Translate gets things wrong sometimes so I was just wondering if Russia means “Special” Military Operation in the same way the Americans mean “Special” Olympics?

Redacted , 4 months ago

David, is that you?!

Redacted , 4 months ago

Having been predominantly a PC gamer for 30 years… PCs more hassle to update and maintain. When I finish work I want to sit on my sofa and play with as little inconvenience as possible.

Consoles fit nicely in a living room and are better for local multiplayer. This generation they were also cheaper than buying the equivalent PC hardware at launch.

Redacted , 4 months ago

Ok but most of my games use Quick Resume so I am playing in under 15 seconds. To be honest the Switch has taken the crown for picking up where you left off since 2017.

I’ve used Moonlight but prefer not to stream really. Would be interested in how the latency is these days.

In the past I’d have said PC all the way but these days I’m glad both options exist. Biggest draw to the PC for me is mods. Would be tempted to make a dedicated SteamOS box next gen.

Redacted , 4 months ago

I mean desktop, wouldn’t really class the Deck as a PC.

Been tempted to get one but I use the Switch or cloud gaming on the go so have most bases covered already.

Redacted , 4 months ago

True, but if I’m spending thousands on a machine, I tend to want to be able to do other things on it so unfortunately Windows usually enters the equation.

Will consider a dedicated SteamOS box when I next refresh.

Redacted , 4 months ago (edited 4 months ago)

Yes hence why I corrected to desktop. Sorry, just always used to using PC and desktop as interchangeable terms but see why you’d want to differentiate these days.

My point is I don’t want a handheld that I have to plug in. If I’m going the PC route I’d prefer a desktop box I can upgrade so although the Deck is great, it doesn’t suit literally all use cases.

Redacted , 4 months ago (edited 4 months ago)

You are correct by the technical definition, I apologise for suggesting the Steam Deck is not a PC lol.

What sort of things do you run on yours? I’d have thought it being a handheld it wouldn’t be that useful for anything I’d want to run on it as it wouldn’t be always on or connected.

My preference is a dedicated desktop box I can upgrade and potentially run some services like DNS, PiHole and some automated scripts on. I’d rather spend the money on that and keep using the Switch or cloud gaming when I’m on the go.

Redacted , 4 months ago

Surely you still have to update drivers and OS?!

I dual boot Linux on my PC and run it on Raspberry Pis. Let’s not pretend it requires zero maintenance.

Redacted , 4 months ago

As always, it’s a trade-off between convenience and ability to tweak.

When it comes to gaming, the convenience slightly edges it for me at the mo. Enjoying Game Pass, play anywhere, Quick Resume and have made all the money back I spent on the Series X through Microsoft Rewards twice over.

Next upgrade will be a tough call though.

Redacted , 4 months ago

Have you ever considered you might be, you know, wrong?

No sorry you’re definitely 100% correct. You hold a well-reasoned, evidenced scientific opinion, you just haven’t found the right node yet.

Perhaps a mental gymnastics node would suit sir better? One without all us laymen and tech bros clogging up the place.

Or you could create your own instance populated by AIs where you can debate them about the origins of consciousness until androids dream of electric sheep?

Redacted , 4 months ago (edited 4 months ago)

I’d appreciate it if you could share evidence to support these claims.

Which claims? I am making no claims other than AIs in their current form do not fully represent what most humans would define as a conscious experience of the world. They therefore do not understand concepts as most humans know it. My evidence for this is that the hard problem of consciousness is yet to be solved and we don’t fully understand how living brains work. As stated previously, the burden of proof for anything further lies with yourself.

What definitions? Cite them.

The definition of how a conscious being experiences the world. Defining it is half the problem. There are no useful citations as you have entered the realm of philosophical debate which has no real answers, just debates about definitions.

Explain how I’m oversimplifying, don’t simply state that I’m doing it.

I already provided a precise example of your reductionist arguing methods. Are you even taking the time to read my responses or just arguing for the sake of not being wrong?

I’ve already provided my proof. I apologize if I missed it, but I haven’t seen your proof yet. Show me the default scientific position.

You haven’t provided any proof whatsoever because you can’t. To convince me you’d have to provide compelling evidence of how consciousness arises within the mind and then demonstrate how that can be replicated in a neural network. If that existed it would be all over the news and the Nobel Prizes would be in the post.

If you have evidence to support your claims, I’d be happy to consider it. However, without any, I won’t be returning to this discussion.

Again, I don’t need evidence for my standpoint as it’s the default scientific position and the burden of proof lies with yourself. It’s like asking me to prove you didn’t see a unicorn.

Redacted , 4 months ago

…or you might not.

It’s fun to think about but we don’t understand the brain enough to extrapolate AIs in their current form to sentience. Even your mention of “parts” of the mind are not clearly defined.

There are so many potential hidden variables. Sometimes I think people need reminding that the brain is the most complex thing in the universe, we don’t full understand it yet and neural networks are just loosely based on the structure of neurons, not an exact replica.

Redacted , 4 months ago

You say maybe there’s not much to understand about the brain but I entirely disagree, it’s the most complex object in the known universe and we haven’t discovered all of it’s secrets yet.

Generating pictures from a vast database of training material is nowhere near comparable.

Redacted , 4 months ago (edited 4 months ago)

Possible, yes. It’s also entirely possible there’s interactions we are yet to discover.

I wouldn’t claim it’s unknowable. Just that there’s little evidence so far to suggest any form of sentience could arise from current machine learning models.

That hypothesis is not verifiable at present as we don’t know the ins and outs of how consciousness arises.

Then it would logically follow that all the other functions of a human brain are similarly “possible” if we train it right and add enough computing power and memory. Without ever knowing the secrets of the human brain. I’d expect the truth somewhere in the middle of those two perspectives.

Lots of things are possible, we use the scientific method to test them not speculative logical arguments.

Functions of the brain

These would need to be defined.

But that means it should also be reproducible by similar means.

Can’t be sure of this… For example, what if quantum interactions are involved in brain activity? How does the grey matter in the brain affect the functioning of neurons? How do the heart/gut affect things? Do cells which aren’t neurons provide any input? Does some aspect of consciousness arise from the very material the brain is made of?

As far as I know all the above are open questions and I’m sure there are many more. But the point is we can’t suggest there is actually rudimentary consciousness in neural networks until we have pinned it down in living things first.

Redacted , 3 months ago (edited 3 months ago)

You obviously have hate issues

Says the person who starts chucking out insults the second they get downvoted.

From what I gather, anyone that disagrees with you is a tech bro with issues, which is quite pathetic to the point that it barely warrants a response but here goes…

I think I understand your viewpoint. You like playing around with AI models and have bought into the hype so much that you’ve completely failed to consider their limitations.

People do understand how they work; it’s clever mathematics. The tech is amazing and will no doubt bring numerous positive applications for humanity, but there’s no need to go around making outlandish claims like they understand or reason in the same way living beings do.

You consider intelligence to be nothing more than parroting which is, quite frankly, dangerous thinking and says a lot about your reductionist worldview.

You may redefine the word “understanding” and attribute it to an algorithm if you wish, but myself and others are allowed to disagree. No rigorous evidence currently exists that we can replicate any aspect of consciousness using a neural network alone.

You say pessimistic, I say realistic.

Redacted , 3 months ago

Once again not offering any sort of valid retort, just claiming anyone that disagrees with you doesn’t understand the field.

I suggest you take a cursory look at how to argue in good faith, learn some maths and maybe look into how neural networks are developed. Then study some neuroscience and how much we comprehend the brain and maybe then we can resume the discussion.

Redacted , 3 months ago (edited 3 months ago)

You don’t really have one lol. You’ve read too many pop-sci articles from AI proponents and haven’t understood any of the underlying tech.

All your retorts boil down to copying my arguments because you seem to be incapable of original thought. Therefore it’s not surprising you believe neural networks are approaching sentience and consider imitation to be the same as intelligence.

You seem to think there’s something mystical about neural networks but there is not, just layers of complexity that are difficult for humans to unpick.

You argue like a religious zealot or Trump supporter because at this point it seems you don’t understand basic logic or how the scientific method works.

Redacted , 3 months ago

You’ve just copied my arguments yet again.

Seek help, your projections are concerning.

Redacted , 3 months ago

And again…