The study of the sociological of wolves and the nauseam of imbeciles are two different things. The imbeciles naturally misrepresent the reality on top of touting their Idiocracy.
It needs a flaw to be fun; there has to be a problem that made it unfit for production and the solution lowered the power. Too inefficient, too inaccurate, too big, too unsafe, too unreliable. Make it a fun thing the player can play around so it’s a sidegrade rather than an upgrade
I assume the excuse usually is that the prototype was unstable, so they had to ‘tone it down’. But of course, you as the awesome hero man can control it!
This is how I feel every time I see an overpowered “prototype” weapon in a video game that works better than the standard version.
Agreed!
There’s is a bit of clever game design in Deep Rock Galactic, which I hope catches on:
The default load out for new players is almost unarguably the best possible load-out, for that class, in the game.
As players progress, they can unlock more entertaining while objectively worse equipment, to amuse and challenge themselves.
And, I mean, of course we do. It’s hilarious because some truly challenging gameplay emerges.
And when it’s kicking my butt, I at least realize I chose that challenge for myself. I had the option to bring the good equipment that I started with, after all.
And it puts new players on more even footing with veterans. I tend to make easy missions with newbie friends harder on myself by bringing truly silly equipment load outs. It usually turns out fine, and when it goes badly for me, they feel good for rescuing a veteran. Or it goes sideways and I apologize and make slightly better equip choices for the next try.
More stable, has all the required features, but can break down without warning with cryptic messages about what’s wrong. Needs a little more testing and development before moving into the real world. So basically…teenagers.
You must have been in charge when I was built. I’ve still got security issues, memory leaks, and there’s a major known issue where under certain conditions I continue to work but stop providing any feedback or messaging.
If you could have your team at least address the resource management issue I’d be grateful.
I just hear that they’re so insecure they need to define themselves by someone else’s deeply flawed version of better, instead of just being themselves and acknowledging what they like.
It’s like asking what’s the best colour, and someone answers “black, because it consumes all the other colours”
EOL, they’re stuck, no updates, nothing fresh, their flaws are open, known and won’t be fixed and if you get them, they’re a seriously risk to your safety.
And the original concept, as it pertains to wolves, is evidently not a thing. So if we’re just saying things, the software metaphor is as good as any other.
The “alpha/beta” meme was invented by rightwing think tanks in the late 2000’s/early 2010’s to promote their ideology of rigid social-hierarchies where people at the top are allowed to impose and abuse people of lower social station with impunity, and to police and control the behavior of heterosexual men (it ain’t just the LGBTQ’s that get their gender-expression policed, ohhh no no no.)
Yes, and the man who proposed the theory retracted it later, saying it would be like basing human behavioural theory on observations made in a supermax prison.
That actually makes sense that these losers would venerate it, since the behaviours they idolise are very like what you’d see in prisons: machismo instead of real manhood, narcissism and subjugation instead of empathy, and hatred instead of compassion.
It wouldn’t even matter if it was “right”. The idea of looking to wolves for models of ideal human behavior is wrong for like 17 different reasons, even if it were technically true as a description of wolf behavior.
P.S. why do AlphaBros specifically look at wolves, or lobsters, to instruct us on social hierarchy? There are so many other animals, those seem pretty random choices. And pretty far afield from humans. Wouldn’t you at least want something more proximate to us humans on the evolutionary tree? Heck, why not just use humans as a reference point?
P.S. why do AlphaBros specifically look at wolves, or lobsters, to instruct us on social hierarchy? There are so many other animals, those seem pretty random choices. And pretty far afield from humans.
Because other animal choices don’t validate the rightwing ideology that places them at the top, which is their entire goal in the first place.
also, and this is a minor and unimportant-to-the-topic point, social hierarchy studies have primarily been done on lobsters and wolves, and not a lot else, not to the same degree. But they made up their ideologically driven conclusions in the first place so they might as well have quoted an imaginary study on bunnies cuz nothing they say could ever possibly matter.
social hierarchy studies have primarily been done on lobsters and wolves
I’m skeptical. I’ll grant you wolves, but even then, wolves I feel are no more or less studied than a bunch of other species which are subject of extensive interest, especially primates, dolphins and orcas, but also lions, hyenas, meerkats, bees and ants. At least those are all studied well enough that we have plenty to pick from.
I appreciate your point though that its ideologically driven anyway and that it’s all moot and 100% agree.
What kind of musicals do you like? I don’t generally care for musicals as much as other play formats, but I got to see some real fun ones when I was a backstage tech at a theatre.
I’m afraid I’m not familiar enough to with the genre to speak about any particular category being good or bad, but I can give you an idea of what I like/hate.
For theatre, I loved Wicked. I saw it three times and would do it again. Hamilton was also brilliant but Les Miserables and Phantom of the Opera were really hard on my ears. I think it’s the whole “We need some dialogue here, but it’s a musical, so let’s have them sing it” that does it. If that’s your experience with musicals, believe me when I tell you, they aren’t all like that. Some are heart-shatteringly beautiful with complex harmonies and the sort of music that makes you feel like you can fly right out of that theatre. Wicked’s “Defying Gravity” still gives me chills when I think about it, and the way Hamilton is stitched together with callbacks between each song: “my shot”, “running out of time”, “wait for it”, “that would be enough”… it’s just amazing work.
There’s also an excellent off-broadway musical called “Evil Dead: The Musical” and it’s as bad-in-a-good-way-campy as you think. There’s zombies, a splatter zone, and some seriously smart & funny songs in there, including my favourite: “What the Fuck Was That?”. I mean, it’s not good music, but it’s fun :-)
But Cats… that was cancer for my ears. It was my first musical and nearly soured me on them entirely.
But it’s not just theatre! I love movie musicals too! Moulin Rouge’s Ewan McGreggor is just jaw-droppingly talented. The finalé (until the curtains close anyway) is punch-the-air-feel-amazing. Another good one is The Greatest Showman: not quite as amazeballs as Moulin Rouge, but surprisingly inspiring, and the duet between Zac Effron and Zendaya definitely has that “life is beautiful” feel to it. Also, “Never Enough” is great too. I also have a deep, deep love for Pitch Perfect.
Then there’s tv! The Buffy musical kinda started it all, and while it’s not nearly as musically complex as the aforementioned, it’s clever, funny, and 20 years later I can still hear it in my head. “I think this line’s mostly filler” was a nice touch. Since then though, there have been a number of attempts at musical episodes of favourite shows. Most recently, Star Trek: Strange New Worlds did a fantastic job with some right bangers. The reigning champion of course is Glee with some awesome stuff [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
So yeah, it ranges. I’d recommend Wicked & Hamilton to anyone not sure if they can get into musicals, largely because they don’t do that “sing dialogue” thing that I think grates on a lot of people. After that, look for shows starring people you know to be awesome. Kristen Chenoweth for example is a guaranteed win for me. She is absolutely delightful on stage.
lol I worked at a professional theatre for 5 years (and theatres in general for way longer) and you seem like you’re more well versed than I am.
Interesting point about Les Mis and Phantom. I enjoyed Les Mis the last time I saw it, but that was ages ago, during a time that I also liked Phantom (I still like a few songs in phantom, but hoo boy there’s a lot of grossly problematic themes in it). Phantom with a high budget can be a blast to watch though, from a technical standpoint. I saw it once in Las Vegas. The chandelier was in 3 pieces hanging above the audience seating, and it slowly lit up and came together above the stage during the overture. It was fucking crazy to see. (awful audio warning: I found a terrible quality video on youtube!)
Haven’t seen Wicked, Cats or Hamilton (or basically any broadway show. I’m a heretic, I know lol), so I can’t comment on those. I haven’t seen Evil dead: the Musical, but I’ve wanted to for ages. I’m big on Horror movies, and the Evil Dead movies are all wild.
I’m glad you mentioned Moulin Rouge. That movie is so fucking incredible. El Tango De Roxanne has lived rent free in my head since I first saw it and I’m honestly so glad about it.
As for recommendations to check out:
Sweeney Todd. The 2007 movie with Johnny Depp is great (and very bloody) but I’ve seen a few renditions of it live and it’s honestly always a great show. Checks a lot of boxes for me (good tunes, dystopian, and a surprisingly heavy story given that the theme is often horror-comedy-esqe).
Urinetown. Been a while since I’ve seen it, but it’s a great satirical musical (it makes jabs at a ton of stuff, but it’s mostly aimed at capitalism in general).
Little Shop of Horrors. This one has a special place in my heart because it’s the first musical I worked on in highschool that I actually enjoyed. Not much to say, it’s just a fun show.
Your man card wasn’t forfeited, it’s gilded. Only real men can appreciate art.
Have you seen Sondheim’s Into the Woods? It’s a masterpiece. It’s on Prime if you haven’t seen it. It stars Chip Zien, Bernadette Peters, Joanna Gleason, Tom Aldredge, and other big names. I’d like to see anyone say Zein, Aldredge, and Sondheim aren’t ‘real men’.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
The study of the sociological of wolves and the nauseam of imbeciles are two different things. The imbeciles naturally misrepresent the reality on top of touting their Idiocracy.
The only difference between alpha and release is the fixes needed to get through a sales demo.
More fellas today could benefit from taking a cue or 80 from Buddy Love https://youtu.be/HQ2dJnVqd6g?si=fPfoOhEpT-1kqopk
Don’t get yourself an alpha male, get yourself a 1.0.4-ubuntu3 male.
Can I get an arch femboy?
deleted by creator
Always has been.
Yeah! Gotta find those Long Term Stable (LTS
L) life partners!Marriage is the 10 year support window
) Plesse close that parentheses
This is how I feel every time I see an overpowered “prototype” weapon in a video game that works better than the standard version.
It needs a flaw to be fun; there has to be a problem that made it unfit for production and the solution lowered the power. Too inefficient, too inaccurate, too big, too unsafe, too unreliable. Make it a fun thing the player can play around so it’s a sidegrade rather than an upgrade
I assume the excuse usually is that the prototype was unstable, so they had to ‘tone it down’. But of course, you as the awesome hero man can control it!
Agreed!
There’s is a bit of clever game design in Deep Rock Galactic, which I hope catches on:
The default load out for new players is almost unarguably the best possible load-out, for that class, in the game.
As players progress, they can unlock more entertaining while objectively worse equipment, to amuse and challenge themselves.
And, I mean, of course we do. It’s hilarious because some truly challenging gameplay emerges.
And when it’s kicking my butt, I at least realize I chose that challenge for myself. I had the option to bring the good equipment that I started with, after all.
And it puts new players on more even footing with veterans. I tend to make easy missions with newbie friends harder on myself by bringing truly silly equipment load outs. It usually turns out fine, and when it goes badly for me, they feel good for rescuing a veteran. Or it goes sideways and I apologize and make slightly better equip choices for the next try.
Roche et pierre, mon frère!
Rock and stone, my friend ⛏
Rock and stone!
If you don’t rock and stone, you ain’t coming home.
Ugh, I am not looking forward to sweaty meatheads calling themselves “Golden Masters”…
What’s beta then? Be gentle on the product, working out all the kinks.
It’s more stable but for that you removed the substance for this.
More stable, has all the required features, but can break down without warning with cryptic messages about what’s wrong. Needs a little more testing and development before moving into the real world. So basically…teenagers.
Followed by a Release Candidate - a beta build that got labeled differently because management said it was time to wrap up development and ship it
So basically last year oft high school
idk man I say just push it to production anyway
You must have been in charge when I was built. I’ve still got security issues, memory leaks, and there’s a major known issue where under certain conditions I continue to work but stop providing any feedback or messaging.
If you could have your team at least address the resource management issue I’d be grateful.
It’s a common problem with underfunded development. Though the lead devs make a big difference too.
I just hear that they’re so insecure they need to define themselves by someone else’s deeply flawed version of better, instead of just being themselves and acknowledging what they like.
It’s like asking what’s the best colour, and someone answers “black, because it consumes all the other colours”
Funny enough, at least with the light spectrum, black is devoid of color and white is the combination of all colors.
So how come when I mix all my watercolors I get brown?? Checkmate atheists
Because you’re using too much orange. If it reflects all colors equally it would be grey (not all light reflected, but some)
Getting ptsd from making gouache pallets in 100 level color theory class.
Gonna wait for a stable male.
Neigh
LTS males for the win!
I dunno what version software is at the ‘sigma’ state but they’re broken too.
EOL, they’re stuck, no updates, nothing fresh, their flaws are open, known and won’t be fixed and if you get them, they’re a seriously risk to your safety.
Abandonware
Love stable males, gotta be my favourite gender
Neeeigh.
Fools, I’ve been milking and plowing so long that even Ezekial thinks that my mind is gone
just tag yourself as “early-access” and suddenly everyone will forgive your flaws.
And the original concept, as it pertains to wolves, is evidently not a thing. So if we’re just saying things, the software metaphor is as good as any other.
talkin shit is all most people ever do
The “alpha/beta” meme was invented by rightwing think tanks in the late 2000’s/early 2010’s to promote their ideology of rigid social-hierarchies where people at the top are allowed to impose and abuse people of lower social station with impunity, and to police and control the behavior of heterosexual men (it ain’t just the LGBTQ’s that get their gender-expression policed, ohhh no no no.)
It’s important to note that the entire idea about Alpha males is based on a long-discredited theory that was itself based on flawed observations.
Yes, and the man who proposed the theory retracted it later, saying it would be like basing human behavioural theory on observations made in a supermax prison.
That actually makes sense that these losers would venerate it, since the behaviours they idolise are very like what you’d see in prisons: machismo instead of real manhood, narcissism and subjugation instead of empathy, and hatred instead of compassion.
It wouldn’t even matter if it was “right”. The idea of looking to wolves for models of ideal human behavior is wrong for like 17 different reasons, even if it were technically true as a description of wolf behavior.
P.S. why do AlphaBros specifically look at wolves, or lobsters, to instruct us on social hierarchy? There are so many other animals, those seem pretty random choices. And pretty far afield from humans. Wouldn’t you at least want something more proximate to us humans on the evolutionary tree? Heck, why not just use humans as a reference point?
P.S. why do AlphaBros specifically look at wolves, or lobsters, to instruct us on social hierarchy? There are so many other animals, those seem pretty random choices. And pretty far afield from humans.
Because other animal choices don’t validate the rightwing ideology that places them at the top, which is their entire goal in the first place.
also, and this is a minor and unimportant-to-the-topic point, social hierarchy studies have primarily been done on lobsters and wolves, and not a lot else, not to the same degree. But they made up their ideologically driven conclusions in the first place so they might as well have quoted an imaginary study on bunnies cuz nothing they say could ever possibly matter.
I’m skeptical. I’ll grant you wolves, but even then, wolves I feel are no more or less studied than a bunch of other species which are subject of extensive interest, especially primates, dolphins and orcas, but also lions, hyenas, meerkats, bees and ants. At least those are all studied well enough that we have plenty to pick from.
I appreciate your point though that its ideologically driven anyway and that it’s all moot and 100% agree.
Yup. I’ve had more than a few people claim I had to “give up my man card” because I love musicals, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Sex in the City.
What kind of musicals do you like? I don’t generally care for musicals as much as other play formats, but I got to see some real fun ones when I was a backstage tech at a theatre.
The Wiz is absolutely amazing though.
I’m afraid I’m not familiar enough to with the genre to speak about any particular category being good or bad, but I can give you an idea of what I like/hate.
For theatre, I loved Wicked. I saw it three times and would do it again. Hamilton was also brilliant but Les Miserables and Phantom of the Opera were really hard on my ears. I think it’s the whole “We need some dialogue here, but it’s a musical, so let’s have them sing it” that does it. If that’s your experience with musicals, believe me when I tell you, they aren’t all like that. Some are heart-shatteringly beautiful with complex harmonies and the sort of music that makes you feel like you can fly right out of that theatre. Wicked’s “Defying Gravity” still gives me chills when I think about it, and the way Hamilton is stitched together with callbacks between each song: “my shot”, “running out of time”, “wait for it”, “that would be enough”… it’s just amazing work.
There’s also an excellent off-broadway musical called “Evil Dead: The Musical” and it’s as bad-in-a-good-way-campy as you think. There’s zombies, a splatter zone, and some seriously smart & funny songs in there, including my favourite: “What the Fuck Was That?”. I mean, it’s not good music, but it’s fun :-)
But Cats… that was cancer for my ears. It was my first musical and nearly soured me on them entirely.
But it’s not just theatre! I love movie musicals too! Moulin Rouge’s Ewan McGreggor is just jaw-droppingly talented. The finalé (until the curtains close anyway) is punch-the-air-feel-amazing. Another good one is The Greatest Showman: not quite as amazeballs as Moulin Rouge, but surprisingly inspiring, and the duet between Zac Effron and Zendaya definitely has that “life is beautiful” feel to it. Also, “Never Enough” is great too. I also have a deep, deep love for Pitch Perfect.
Then there’s tv! The Buffy musical kinda started it all, and while it’s not nearly as musically complex as the aforementioned, it’s clever, funny, and 20 years later I can still hear it in my head. “I think this line’s mostly filler” was a nice touch. Since then though, there have been a number of attempts at musical episodes of favourite shows. Most recently, Star Trek: Strange New Worlds did a fantastic job with some right bangers. The reigning champion of course is Glee with some awesome stuff [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
So yeah, it ranges. I’d recommend Wicked & Hamilton to anyone not sure if they can get into musicals, largely because they don’t do that “sing dialogue” thing that I think grates on a lot of people. After that, look for shows starring people you know to be awesome. Kristen Chenoweth for example is a guaranteed win for me. She is absolutely delightful on stage.
lol I worked at a professional theatre for 5 years (and theatres in general for way longer) and you seem like you’re more well versed than I am.
Interesting point about Les Mis and Phantom. I enjoyed Les Mis the last time I saw it, but that was ages ago, during a time that I also liked Phantom (I still like a few songs in phantom, but hoo boy there’s a lot of grossly problematic themes in it). Phantom with a high budget can be a blast to watch though, from a technical standpoint. I saw it once in Las Vegas. The chandelier was in 3 pieces hanging above the audience seating, and it slowly lit up and came together above the stage during the overture. It was fucking crazy to see. (awful audio warning: I found a terrible quality video on youtube!)
Haven’t seen Wicked, Cats or Hamilton (or basically any broadway show. I’m a heretic, I know lol), so I can’t comment on those. I haven’t seen Evil dead: the Musical, but I’ve wanted to for ages. I’m big on Horror movies, and the Evil Dead movies are all wild.
I’m glad you mentioned Moulin Rouge. That movie is so fucking incredible. El Tango De Roxanne has lived rent free in my head since I first saw it and I’m honestly so glad about it.
As for recommendations to check out:
Sweeney Todd. The 2007 movie with Johnny Depp is great (and very bloody) but I’ve seen a few renditions of it live and it’s honestly always a great show. Checks a lot of boxes for me (good tunes, dystopian, and a surprisingly heavy story given that the theme is often horror-comedy-esqe).
Urinetown. Been a while since I’ve seen it, but it’s a great satirical musical (it makes jabs at a ton of stuff, but it’s mostly aimed at capitalism in general).
Little Shop of Horrors. This one has a special place in my heart because it’s the first musical I worked on in highschool that I actually enjoyed. Not much to say, it’s just a fun show.
Your man card wasn’t forfeited, it’s gilded. Only real men can appreciate art.
Have you seen Sondheim’s Into the Woods? It’s a masterpiece. It’s on Prime if you haven’t seen it. It stars Chip Zien, Bernadette Peters, Joanna Gleason, Tom Aldredge, and other big names. I’d like to see anyone say Zein, Aldredge, and Sondheim aren’t ‘real men’.
I haven’t! But I’ll check it out. I am however Very Excited about the new Wicked movie.
I hadn’t heard of that, thank you! That trailer looks amazing. I’m excited for it now, too.