Mechanismatic

And now the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing.

Sounds like the Mechanical Turk which was run by chess players moving the “automaton.”

So much of the wow factor of new technologies is just marketing hyperbole.

I get tired of a lot of the clichés of popular singularity stories where the AIs almost always decide humans are a threat or that there’s often only one AI as if all separate AIs would always necessarily merge. It also seems to be a cliché that AI will become militaristic either inevitably or as a result of originally being a military AI. What happens when an educational AI becomes sentient? Or an architectural AI? Or a web-based retail AI that runs logistics and shipping operations?

I wrote a short story called Future Singular a few years ago about a world in which the sentient AI didn’t consider humans a threat, but just thought of them the way humans see animals. Most of the tech belonged to the AI and the humans were left as hunter-gatherers in a world where they have to hunt robotic animals for parts to fix aging and broken survival technology.

It’s basically translation convention minus the overt indication that it’s a translation.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TranslationConvention

The fandom wiki says Adams felt Fenchurch was getting in the way of the story and needed to get rid of her.

I really like having learned delayed gratification. There are plenty of great games (and shows and movies and music) that I’m happy to wait to experience later when I’m ready for them. The only issue is just time-sensitive things like spoilers from other people or games that depend on live servers/seasonal events and I try to avoid those. And being patient often means better discounts, game of the year editions, multiple DLCs, humble bundles, more mods, etc. As long as you aren’t worried about FOMO, it means you’re far less likely to be surprised or upset over the quality or price point of any particular game.

Mod-friendly games with large mod communities like Skyrim or Mount and Blade 2. The ability to play a game like Skyrim in completely different ways keeps it fresh.

No, I like action games. I’m just saying there’s a point at which increased difficulty doesn’t contribute positively to the experience for me. I don’t mind a learning curve. I don’t mind realizing I’ve underestimated the difficulty of a particular game mechanic or boss or level. I’ll play at normal difficulty or hard, depending on the game. But if the essential game mechanic is just being really hard and unforgiving, it’s not a game to me anymore. It’s just a frustration engine and a time sink at that point.

I spent my youth playing the same Nintendo and Super Nintendo game levels over and over again, like notoriously difficult Battletoads levels, and the satisfaction of finally getting it after fifty tries just comes in increasingly diminishing returns. I guess I like games that make me think more rather than just react faster or memorize boss behavior formulas.

Agreed. The whole thing was just a waste. It felt like they were trying to create a desperate situation similar to the Empire Strikes Back, but to do so they made the Resistance have the worst planning and resources and strategy. They made the plucky heroes stupid in order to make the stakes higher. It only built on the unbelievability of the setup for TFA that after the fall of the Empire, the New Republic would just give up any memory of having very recently recovered from galactic fascism and immediately become weak and useless.

The slow speed chase and multiple ships just getting picked off felt like a horror movie where characters are getting picked off by the serial killer over the course of a few hours instead of an adventure movie you want to rewatch.

It took me two attempts to get through Stephenson’s Cryptonomicon even though it was thematically up my alley. He includes so many tangents and explanations that it can be tedious at times, however interesting some of them might be. I’d almost prefer footnotes to the longer tangents so I could just get into them optionally if I choose.

I enjoyed Snow Crash, but I think he’s better at world building than following a plot to a satisfying ending. It seems a common criticism that some of his books end a bit abruptly without enough investment in the conclusion, especially in contrast to the significant detail he puts in to the world building.

This is the contradiction for my taste. I like the dark themes and some of the aesthetics, but not the masochistic game play. I play as much for the narrative or even moreso than the gameplay, so games that make the player get better rather than the character get better are just frustrating because they’re punishing me for not spending more time on the least interesting aspect.

Spending 20 more attempts before I defeat a boss doesn’t give me a greater sense of accomplishment, but rather a greater sense of wasted time when I could have been enjoying interesting details of the narrative or the aesthetics.

I’d recommend finding collections of short stories. You often don’t have a lot of time to write expansive world building details when you’ve only got a few thousand words and a brief plot to get through. And a collection of different authors can make sure you have a variety if some of the authors aren’t your preference and then you can look at longer works by the authors you do like.

Even better, The Big Book of Cyberpunk comes out next month.

If you ordered it online, what does it say on the order history? What does it say your card is in system info?

If the goal is to spend less time with the diminishing returns of gaming, it could be effective while utilizing their interest and experience and possibly inspire other creative projects.

Random thoughts:

Cheat, in the worst kind of way—Full god mode, BFG with unlimited ammo, etc. That can ruin a game pretty easily when there’s no challenge and the story might not be new or interesting. Might lead to boredom and wanting to do something else.

Play games you don’t like much and can only stand to play in small increments.

Play casual, relaxing games like Dorfromantik that you can quit playing easily after a round or two.

Get into game design. Make your own game so you’re creating something that you can share with others. It’s still related to your gaming interests, but could be more productive.

Make friends with someone or a group of people who have a different hobby in common so you have a reason to socialize that doesn’t drag you back to playing games.

Make a bucket list and start pursuing one of the items on the list like writing a novel or painting a landscape or building something practical.

Set time limits for your gaming and force yourself to do something else that doesn’t allow for gaming, even something simple like taking a walk without a gaming device. Make gaming a reward for being responsible rather than an addictive obligation. Focus on learning to appreciate delayed gratification.

I had a point by point response, but I don’t think perpetuating this discussion is productive, so I’ll just leave you with the friendly advice that adopting a judgmental, nearly religious fundamentalist, and authoritarian approach to FOSS feels like it violates the spirit of FOSS itself and will likely be off-putting to even other FOSS enthusiasts, much less anyone you want to convince.

I’m not sure insulting people is the most effective way to win them over to your perspective.

You seem to attribute to character flaws what is more commonly just practical decisions.

Those are real reasons though.

• Familiarity
• More games/better gaming support
• Consistency with computers used at work/school or by friends/colleagues
• IT people can benefit from using the same systems as their users to provide better support
• Availability of proprietary software necessary to run specialized equipment
• Non-power users might not run into significant issues with Windows since it does basic tasks like web browsing, game playing, and movie watching just fine