Khrux

Their success came from it being specifically longer. It’s much harder to visualise a bigger surface area, like how a 10 inch pizza is bigger than two 7 inch pizzas. Subway on the other hand only stretches it in one axis, so the number goes up faster.

I don’t want long burgers, although I don’t know why. Big fan of the circle.

Weirdly I’m always unfairly judgemental when I see someone in very I door wear in public. Unless it’s somewhere lawless like an airport, pajamas or super comfort sports wear in public always irks me. But on the other hand, it literally makes more sense to be as comfortable as possible and for some pointless reason, I feel very beholden to the fashion standards that make it feel weird.

Oops, you’re right. It is copying something of its time because it’s all my dad would tell me when watching it growing up, but I can’t remember which film.

In time is absolutely an idea that I wish would get revisited for a TV show.

When I was a kid, for some reason, I loved the original West World movie, which is about 20% high concept and 80% “how do we copy terminator when all we have are a bunch of random Wild West, medieval and classical back lots?”

Obviously a few years ago HBO picked it up for a show, and that first season explores some of the richest philosophy I’ve seen on TV, in the way only Sci-Fi can; by building characters and technology directly around their philosophical takes and stress testing them. Also simultaneously it created an incredibly compelling story and characters. All of this stemmed from the idea “what if there was a wild west theme park manned by perfectly realistic animatronics?”

In Time may not have the cult classic reputation of the first Westworld but it’s got appeal and charm, while being basically only interesting in it’s high concept, and therefore perfect to pull apart and explore an HBO style branching plot. I bet you could get Justin Timberlake to appear in it again too, for added audience appeal. A show like this can also explore multiple characters in different classes, and those who interact with both. It’s just wasn’t that suited to a movie.

Just to ask, nobody understood the full picture of what they were making? Or was there someone who created the concept but intentional obfuscated it from everyone else via bureaucracy?

I’d love to know how much it costs to build each cybertruck, and visualise the other revenue loss of storing these, designing the machinery to build this shit and anything other costs that were factored into sales.

Also worth addressing that people are using large language models exactly because the ad driven web was enshitified enough that people clambered for this new option.

There will be at least one LLM that’s good for web searching and doesn’t give in to advertising, and in the meantime, we’ll just need to keep jumping ship whenever one becomes awful, as we did with the old web.

I have a surprisingly forgiving opinion on AI. There are many cases that I think it’s purpose is stupid or defeats the point but it has the potential to cause such a large break to employability and capitalism in general that it has it’s upsides.

People are right to take issue with the fact that it is causing people to lose their jobs or be unemployable by no fault of their own, but underlying that issue is the fact that society shouldn’t function on the employment being necessary (which I am aware is an opinion).

Even in its absurd energy and water usage, this is largely an issue with how we currently get our energy and water. Having our technocrats suddenly more invested in new and better forms of energy, even just for powering AI has the potential to be a path to better clean energy options.

AI is fundamentally a neutral tool, but as much as it may be sued for evil, it may accelerate flawed economic and environmental systems to a breaking point where a redesign of those structures will be required, which could be the greatest opportunity to implement better structures that we’ve had since the industrial revolution.

Back in 2013, I bought an old PS3 + GTA5 for £150 or so just to play the game, then once I had it, picked up two more exclusives, before never touching it again pretty quickly.

Getting a console for GTA6, plus the game, this time may set me back more than my expendable income after rent and bills. It will absolutely sell consoles but I’d wager people are actually able to buy a console much less than in 2013.

I had it from release and honestly, even day 1 it smoked the competition in the city sim genre, releasing with features and scale than Sim City ever had.

The DLC often introduced more systems, but they did feel ‘extra’, the game was perfectly functional before parks or tourism or natural disasters etc.

The reason CS:2 felt so necessary is because the first was bloated and had underlying issues in it’s simulation logic, like unrealistically inefficient driving, or a large expansion to residential areas causing all the new residents to die of old age at the same time, crippling the city. Every part of the GUI and logic just felt clunky compared to modern, polished games.

The main thing I’ve heard online is that it’s a pro-europe movement, particularly in support or rearming the EU, particularly in response to current US actions.

I was speaking to an Italian guy at the pub on the weekend and he said that’s totally wrong and it’s just protesting general government corruption. I don’t know if he’s more credible than the internet, being Italian is a big plus but being a man at the pub means it’s likely wrong. Maybe there are protests for both.

The Reddit alternative from before Reddit was big. At one point they were comparable in size and had a friendly rivalry, I believe in the late 2000s. Digg is no better than Reddit, they have had numerous migrations to Reddit from admin issues, if I remember right.

This is what the US have encouraged Taiwan to do. Taiwan wanted to purchase a few incredibly expensive fighters and ship from the USA, but basically all war simulations just had China target these and secure a fast win. The USA instead encourage Taiwan to take the “porcupine” technique, spreading many small weapons, particularly handheld anti-aircraft type weaponry across the country. The plan is to make invasion too inconvenient. The flip side is that without a reliable way to show a display of strength, anywhere the larger aggressor does pick on (USA to UK China to Taiwan) can focus on one part of the country and reliably cause massive damage there.

The chances of a future where the UK and USA go to war where those military bases aren’t long since gone is nearly impossible.

I’ve never understood what twitter style websites are actually for. They seem to have a tiny niche of celebrities and known personalities making a statement with no reasonable conversation stemming from it.

I don’t understand how that structure was once one of the largest social media platforms in the first place.

Id assume that’s a liability thing? I’m not too sure as I believe it’s legal to be topless in NYC, although probably not Dublin, but it’s almost definitely not a crime to show 9/11 imagery.

I started using Reddit when I was 13, I’m currently 24 so still a kid depending on who I ask.

For years in early Reddit, it always felt like everyone on the site was just people browsing it in work, to the point where ‘summer reddit’ was a thing because the quality would drop when the kids weren’t in school. You could feel the difference in the website between work days and weekends.

That’s exactly how Lemmy feels now. I bunch of people in their 20s and 30s who all have jobs Infront of a computer, sometimes I’m sad that this site isn’t filled with Gen Z because they are the critical generation. It’s much less progressive for the internet if this site is filled with old fogies nostalgic for the golden age of the internet, than it is if it’s equally filled with enthusiastic kids who never saw the unfiltered internet but want to ride the fediverse train regardless, because they believe in it.

I hope everyone on Lemmy didn’t grow up with the old internet, because it means they believe in something they haven’t seen.