eerongal

joined 2 years ago
[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 1 points 3 months ago

yeah, its hard to predict what will happen to it, especially after gabe steps down or dies, but depending on how much of the company is broadly owned by employees vs individuals, it can help to shield it from bad decisions. Unfortunately, we don't know the exact numbers. If gabe + mike own 51+% then it could potentially lead to overriding employee will in a bad decision for money (either through their actions or through inheritance like you say). Or the employees could just collectively make a bad decision too.

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

AFAIK, most of valve's stock is held by employees, not private investors. It's usually a pretty hard sell of "make the company you work at shittier to make more money", especially since most of the employees probably know gabe personally (valve has less than 400 employees) and likely approve of his leadership.

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

FWIW, at this point, that study would be horribly outdated. It was done in 2022, which means it probably took place in early 2022 or 2021. The models used for coding have come a long way since then, the study would essentially have to be redone on current models to see if that's still the case.

The people's perceptions have probably not changed, but if the code is actually insecure would need to be reassessed

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That was changed a while back, the current restrictions are you can only have as many people playing any given game as you have copies in your current sharing library

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 7 points 5 months ago

I guess that would just be a GPU?

Actually would either be a TPU (tensor processing unit) or NPU (neural processing unit). They're purpose built chips for AI/ML stuff.

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 8 points 8 months ago

Depends on the person. It's very "old school" in it's gameplay, and very hard and punishing, grindy, has perma-death, etc.

I'd think most modern gamers would hate it, but I personally like wizardry to games (though it helps that I'm old enough to have played older versions). If you like old school d&d, it's very much in the same vein. The remake linked here is pretty good, I already own it from early access.

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 16 points 9 months ago (2 children)

MinuteFood on youtube did a video just yesterday talking about the science of cast iron, and why they're not dirty like many people seem to think.

https://youtu.be/w0R1jVN3LaY?si=HguOYRn19Hn6HyP6

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 5 points 11 months ago

I agree with the other poster; you should look into proxmox. I migrated from ESXi to proxmox 7-8 years ago or so, and honestly its been WAY better than ESXi. The migration process was pretty easy too, i was able to bring over the images from ESXi and load them directly into proxmox.

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 4 points 1 year ago

I now want to hear the English localization dub of the Japanese dub just to see how different it would be from the original. Think we can convince Crunchyroll to (re)dub it?

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Running arr services on a proxmox cluster to download to a device on the same network. I don’t think there would be any problems but wanted to see what changes need to be done.

I'm essentially doing this with my set up. I have a box running proxmox and a separate networked nas device. There aren't really any changes, per se, other than pointing the *arr installs at the correct mounts. One thing to make note of, i would make sure that your download, processing, and final locations are all within the same mount point, so that you can take advantage of atomic moves.

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 year ago

You're talking about XMPP, and it was google with google chat that people refer to with it.

That said, there's a lot of details that story people throw around about google killing it that lacks some details. Specifically that the premier service that used and developed the standard, jabber, was acquired by cisco like 8 years before google supposedly killed it, which i would argue affected it far harder than google chat did.

It's also lacking a lot of modern features that were becoming staple around the time that it was killed; i.e. QoS, assured delivery, read receipts, and a few other things. I still don't think the protocol supports them.

Also, the protocol still exists and is used. It's used by microsoft in skype for business, it's also the IM protocol for lots of gaming platforms like origin, playstation, the switch (for its push notifications for their online service), League of legends, fortnite, and others. It's still a reasonably popular standard when it comes to chat programs, though none of them that i'm aware of use the actual federation piece of it to talk to each other.

While the tactic alluded to does exist ("embrace, extend, extinguish"), i've never been necessarily convinced that google "kiled" xmpp, as its been around a long time and continues to be for various reasons. Even with google chat, it was never a 'front end' thing many users even thought about, because it's back end frameworks tech, and it continues to be so in lots of different places today. I'm reasonably sure that the people who get upset about it and proclaim google killed it are basically just upset that it didn't become the defacto chat standard today, which i would argue almost nothing is the defacto standard anyways, unless you count discord which kinda came out of nowhere like a whirlwind and took over the chat space and has nothing to do with any XMPP drama.

Ultimately, its up to you (whoever is reading this) to look into the facts of the matter and decide for yourself if that's what really happened, but keep in mind, the people who usually repeat the anecdote about how google killed it have an agenda to push. I'm personally skeptical, because there's reasons for google to have dropped it (see mentioned limitations above), and even back then, it wasn't that outrageously popular. In fact, i would argue its more widely used today than it was back then, but i have no hard numbers on that.

view more: next ›