Supervisor194

joined 1 year ago
[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Huh. Well, everybody I hung out with knew about it. IIRC moderation was tacked on after USENET had already taken off. If a newsgroup wasn't proposed with moderation then it couldn't be moderated, so most of them weren't. It's pretty wild that they didn't understand how desperately necessary it would be. In order to get a group to be moderated you'd have to get a proposal for an entirely new group through the committee, which was nearly impossible. The process was so slow and bureaucratic that the web literally just showed up and stole it all in what seemed like overnight. I remember when I switched over... it was like 2002, 2003? I've never had as much fun on any web forum as I had on USENET though. Those were fun times. And don't get me started on the web's lack of threaded discussions. Drove me NUTS.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Yes pardon me I left off the word "largely" before "unmoderated." We all knew it was possible, but it didn't matter because, as you point out - nobody really did.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 7 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

Google buying Dejanews, the largest archive of all messages, and merging it with the travesty that was (and still is) Google Groups just about killed the whole thing.

Well that and the fact that it was unmoderated which eventually led to it being populated almost exclusively with mentally ill troll savants. USENET by the end was the digital equivalent of a horror zoo of abused monkeys slinging shit all over everyone and themselves.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 51 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Now if only they could do the same with the stock market. But the conspiracy theorist in me believes that all this manipulation is being done hand in hand with certain arms of the government in order to maintain the government's appearance of solvency and to control inflation in the face of what appears to be nearly unlimited spending. Just keep moving around fake money using a million different utterly opaque methods.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Nice straw man. Nobody said the community was going to "Linux-sized" nor that it was going to be built in a "few days," nor that it was going to have paid devs. It's like you're being intentionally obtuse.

There are already multiple supported forks of Firefox and while it doesn't take much to maintain such forks when they are being fed a large part of the codebase by Mozilla, if you think such a project would not pick right the fuck up where Mozilla left off if Mozilla tried to pull a Google and get behind Manifest V3, you are, I believe, mistaken.

Mozilla itself owes its existence to Netscape's failure in the face of unfair competition by Microsoft's Explorer. Netscape released its source code, Mozilla was founded and the power of open-source created Firefox. Chrome's halfhearted support of Mozilla is itself owed to the fact that they don't want to get spanked over Chrome like Microsoft was over IE.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As if installing and using something else means you can't have Chrome lying around for that one stupid website.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yes, and we will drop Mozilla when it drops uBlock as well. We will all get behind whatever open-source browser stops ads, and it will very quickly become the most widely used browser. Why? Because everybody despises fucking ads and you can't curb-stomp them into liking ads, that's why.

Google can spend all the money it likes trying to piss on users and tell them it's raining but at the end of the day, a new king will be crowned and if it isn't Chrome and it isn't Firefox, then it will be something else.

And no, FOSS doesn't need money behind it. FOSS needs a dedicated community behind it. Assertions to the contrary are FUD constantly being seeded by Google, Microsoft and their ilk to destroy competition. This is an existential necessity for Google, you can bet they are doing everything in their power to maintain the status quo.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I've literally never seen any of these except the top symbol.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 29 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Nope, been playing it for a couple days now. It's just the same as it ever was. The web port itself is seamless (been playing on Firefox with a 10-year-old Macbook), but the game has a clunky, PITA UI.

It's kinda maddening in that no matter how well you clear every level, your character is likely to stall at some point and you'll have to start over. For anybody who doesn't know, you can start the game over again using the same character and re-loot the same levels; they don't respawn once you clear them otherwise. In this way you can continually train up your character to make it further into the dungeon. At first it seems like this was a mistake, but then it seems that it actually was a design decision. It was the first of its kind, so it gets a pass I suppose.

The shopkeepers inventory also does not cycle until you buy something and then that slot refills. So whatever you've got is what you've got. Unlike most of the games that came after, you are actually somewhat dependent on the shopkeepers for decent gear.

That said, it's still fun. Really fun. It's not hard to see why it started something.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This happens very rarely, but it does happen from time to time. When a website starts acting weird out of nowhere I keep a copy of Chrome installed just for that use and then promptly return to Firefox.

view more: next ›