How is national socialism a mask for capitalism?
So they were proven right, got a lunch, and paid nothing… The conclusion is that there is a free lunch.
As a background, I loved the Ezio games and also enjoyed AC3 somewhat. I also love open world RPGs in general. But I hate grinding and mandatory generic side quests.
I tried it years ago, but did not like it and stopped playing after some hours. Assassinations via sneaking up and one-shotting were not possible AFAIR, which ruined the fun on assassinations for me. RPG mechanics like leveling and skills were present, but were designed in a way that added nothing of value to the experience while requiring a boring grind. There were many side quests, but they felt boring and generic and. I could have overlooked these things and concentrated on the main story, but engaging in the level grind and the generic side quests was to a large degree mandatory to be able to continue the story. That made me feel like I’m wasting my time and made me stop playing.
Overall I felt that the game tried to find some compromise between story-based action adventure and open-world RPG, but just ended up combining the worst of both worlds. It felt like the RPG features were pushed in top-down (“everyone is doing open world, levels and skill trees now, we should put that in the game”) without any regard to WHY these features work well in some games and how they have to be integrated in order to make the experience more fun.
In that case it actually makes sense because the main goal is to make an artificial entity appear intelligent to the player. This is not the same as calling all ML algorithms/models AI.
Well maybe we should ‘hack’ his limbs off
I love playing this with my cat. Works especially well when you audibly drag your feet and when you move around corners or behind objects a lot. I learned this by watching my cat play with her son. However she only lets me play the prey role and gets aggressive when I do the same to her. Her son also used to let me hunt him a bit, but he disappeared one day :/
I see a lot of hate against the concept of doing one’s own research on the internet and it really bothers me. The problem is not doing one’s own research. The scientists that wrote this paper also did their own research. All scientists (should) do their own research. That’s inherent to science and that’s part of what got humanity this far. The problem is that some people lack the capabilities to properly assess information sources and draw correct conclusions from them. So these people end up with incorrect beliefs. Of course they could just “trust the experts” instead, but how are they supposed to know which experts to trust if they’re not good at assessing sources of information? Finding those experts is in itself a task that requires you to do your own research.
TL;DR: I think this hate on “doing your own research” is unjustified. People believing nonsense is a problem that is inescapable and inherent to humanity.
Users be like “I’m encountering mostly promotional articles in my RSS feed”
My brother in christ, you curated the feed
The very fact that they’re able to do all of this is also an effect of the mitochondria in their cells. But if people tell me to stop talking about mitochondria 24/7, then I should just find a group of other mitochondria enthusiasts to interact with instead of ranting about how I’m ““right”” to make everything about mitochondria.
I hate him so much bros