[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

I specifically called out not 'difficulty' in making friends, but 'desire' to make friends. As far as I'm aware, autistic people still desire friends usually.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I'm talking about the stuttering, caused primarily not recalculating shaders. Something I just dealt with the entirety of my first playthrough of ER. But the fact that it still isn't fixed really makes me not want to play, or to pay them money.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Big disagree about burgers and jerky.

Those beyond/impossible meats are fine I guess, but they're not good. Weird taste, long lingering aftertaste. Solid C+ in my opinion.

While I prefer vegan jerky actually. That super tough peppery gluten jerky (pleather brand is what I've been getting) is great, as are the softer soy or mushroom jerkies. They are different, so no shade if you don't like them, but there's no tier for 'you can tell the difference, and they taste better'.

Nuggets idk much about, as I'm not really a fan. Same with mayo.

Milk is another one where oat milk is better tasting than dairy milk imo.

agree about cheese generally. I can't have nuts, so I've never had cashew queso, but that queso you can make with potatoes and carrots, while sounding weird, is actually pretty great. Maybe A- tier imo.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

It really depends.

I'm thinking about 3.5 in particular, where an optimized wizard will be able to do the job of the rest of the party (assuming they're built to be fine, but not power-gaming), better than them.

There's no real in-world way to balance that. Either the DM Fiats the power-gamer weaker, the DM tells the power gamer "no", or the rest of the party power games to. Its just too unbalanced.

If we're talking 5e, that's all out the window then. If 3.5's power runs from 0-10, the strongest 5e build is like a 6, and the weakest is like a 3. Its still extra work for the DM to balance, but can be done all in-world without needing to rely on metagame fiat.

And, of course, there's lots of other systems out there, where the above can be more true or less true depending on what kind of game it is, though 3.5's power ceiling is probably higher than 95% of the systems out there.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah. It was worse in 3.5 ironically; despite casters having more downsides than 5e, spells were overall stronger. It did leave this narrow window at levels 1 and 2 where martials were basically strictly better, but caster quickly skyrocketted in power, especially if you were playing with prestige classes.

Spell power was reigned in for 5e, and pretty sharply at that (most notably from adding Concentration). But, they also washed away caster downsides, by making cantrips at will, casters not quite so fragile, and by softening Vancian casting. 5e is still absolutely more balanced than 3.5, but that's not saying a lot; 3.5's power level was all over the place.

Still, I feel like 5e's levels 1-5 are pretty balanced, and the martial/caster imbalance doesn't really become painful until like, level 12.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

In the older editions, like the ones you're talking about, casters had serious downsides. Between being very fragile, spells being interrupteable, and sometimes having different XP amounts, casters were kinda 'glass cannons', and needed a martial frontline.

In 3.5 and 5e, casters have had these harsh downsides decreased or removed, while not otherwise losing power. They are more or less strictly better than martials, in the sense they can do 90%+ of what martials can do better than they can do it, while also doing several other things. And the few things martials do do better, it's by slight degrees.

It's not just that casters are powerful, it's that they're powerful and flexible, able to be top tier in several different roles at the same time, and can change what roles they cover by resting and swapping spells.

Whereas martials can sometimes build to be top tier in one role, but they're largely locked into that one role, or can build to be okay in several roles (and be outclassed by casters in all of them).

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah. I love fallout 1 and 2, and NV is... fine. But at this point, I don't think I'm a 'fallout fan', since I've just had zero interest in the series after hating 3 and 4.

And same thing with elder scrolls, and Morrowind. I just don't like their modern formula, at all.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I dunno, I really don't get either of them. They just seem like dreadfully boring games. Played like, 6 hours of each, and I just, don't get the appeal, at all.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Okay, but what if nut allergy :(

Its hard out here, being a vegan allergic to nuts.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

None? I've never really understood the appeal of 'rewatching stuff'. My favorite movie(s) are the LotR ones, and I've probably watched it through... three times over my life?

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Consuming content illegally is by definition a crime, yes. It also has no effect on your output. A summary or review of that content will not be infringing, it will still be fair use.

That their use is infringing and a crime is your opinion.

"My opinion"? have you read the headline? Its not my opinion that matters, its that of the prosecution in this lawsuit. And this lawsuit indeed alleges that copyright infringement has occurred; it'll be up to the courts to see if the claim holds water.

I'm definitely not sure that GPT4 or other AI models are copyright infringing or otherwise illegal. But, I think that there's enough that seems questionable that a lawsuit is valid to do some fact-finding, and honestly, I feel like the law is a few years behind on AI anyway.

But it seem plausible that the AI could be found to be 'illegally distributing works', or otherwise have broken IP laws at some point during their training or operation. A lot depends on what kind of agreements were signed over the contents of the training packages, something I frankly know nothing about, and would like to see come to light.

[-] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean, you can do that, but that's a crime.

Which is exactly what Sarah Silverman is claiming ChatGPT is doing.

And, beyond a individual crime of a person reading a pirated book, again, we're talking about ChatGPT and other AI magnifying reach and speed, beyond what an individual person ever could do even if they did nothing but read pirated material all day, not unlike websites like The Pirate Bay. Y'know, how those website constantly get taken down and have to move around the globe to areas where they're beyond the reach of the law, due to the crimes they're doing.

I'm not like, anti-piracy or anything. But also, I don't think companies should be using pirated software, and my big concern about LLMs aren't really for private use, but for corporate use.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

BedbugCutlefish

joined 1 year ago