That's one of the things I find most annoying about the whole "deepfake AI" thing. You could doctor photos and videos long before AI automated the process. People did it all the time. In fact, I remember when I was a kid in the 90s, there was a whole commercial about a house hippo whose whole point is that even back then you could do a really good job making footage that was totally fake so people should think for themselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvPwJQXzHm0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvPwJQXzHm0
I started with the second game in the series, and although it's not the classic the first one is, it was still a lot of fun too.
Breaking: Justin Trudeau just announced his resignation. He just prorogued Parliament and is resigning as head of the liberal party. Still PM until the next election though.
Yeah, only positive thing is he immediately went back to posting normal content.
I swear shit like "the guy who discovered DNA was a double helix was tripping on acid" is a psyop.
Don't do drugs frens, and if you do, keep your streaming equipment locked up.
I swear shit like "the guy who discovered DNA was a double helix was tripping on acid" is a psyop.
Don't do drugs frens, and if you do, keep your streaming equipment locked up.
Here's a (low quality to make it work ok over the fediverse) video of some of the engine at work. I managed to get just enough cycles out of dosbox to get it to run at full speed.
The first bit is a slice of the gameplay from the first section, the second is from a cutscene where I had the shadows and rain active.
Doesn't look like much today, but most games on QB back then used tile*tile scrolling or pixel*tile scrolling, you'll notice the scrolling here is fully pixel*pixel, full screen, and has some neat effects like transparency -- the message box just darkens the spot it's in rather than drawing over it. I didn't actually change the default palette either, I created a lookup table and would read the current pixel value, look up the darker version, then write the darkened value.
The wavy water effect was particularly interesting. I've added footage showing it on its own.
The first bit is a slice of the gameplay from the first section, the second is from a cutscene where I had the shadows and rain active.
Doesn't look like much today, but most games on QB back then used tile*tile scrolling or pixel*tile scrolling, you'll notice the scrolling here is fully pixel*pixel, full screen, and has some neat effects like transparency -- the message box just darkens the spot it's in rather than drawing over it. I didn't actually change the default palette either, I created a lookup table and would read the current pixel value, look up the darker version, then write the darkened value.
The wavy water effect was particularly interesting. I've added footage showing it on its own.
No, but I was heavily involved with qbasic around that time. I was working on quest for a king which is one of the class (I'd like to think) of pureqb games that were really above and beyond in terms of what it did. The dos version is still up along with FBXL magazine (which was previously qbxl magazine but I failed to renew the domain)
https://fbxl.net/oma/qfak/index.html
I think I tried playing it in dosbox -- the dos version -- and it really is product of its time, it doesn't really want to run in an emulator.
https://fbxl.net/oma/qfak/index.html
I think I tried playing it in dosbox -- the dos version -- and it really is product of its time, it doesn't really want to run in an emulator.
Especially near the end where you might have a Pentium, that's a lot of power to play with even without assembly or a library.
Actually, in retrospect I probably could have sped up the jrpg engine even more by spending more time optimizing the sprites to write to each of the planes at the same time as the background, reducing the number of plane switches, but unfortunately it was always something with a limited time span. If I really wanted to get that project done in retrospect I probably should have focused at that point less on polishing up the engine and more on completing the story and gameplay. The engine was already perfectly fine for the RPG I was hoping to make, but it was more fun making crazier and crazier features on the existing engine. Who does transparency and shadows and weather effects on pureqb? A dummy who doesn't want to finish his game, that's who.
I'm working on a replacement for that game engine in Freebasic, but my eyes are bigger than my stomach and so we will see if I ever even get into a point of having a basic gameplay slice in front of me, let alone finishing the game. And by the time I actually get to building the game I might already be finished my second book, and at that point I can't really say for certain that the original story that I created will look much like the sort of story I would like to create.
Actually, in retrospect I probably could have sped up the jrpg engine even more by spending more time optimizing the sprites to write to each of the planes at the same time as the background, reducing the number of plane switches, but unfortunately it was always something with a limited time span. If I really wanted to get that project done in retrospect I probably should have focused at that point less on polishing up the engine and more on completing the story and gameplay. The engine was already perfectly fine for the RPG I was hoping to make, but it was more fun making crazier and crazier features on the existing engine. Who does transparency and shadows and weather effects on pureqb? A dummy who doesn't want to finish his game, that's who.
I'm working on a replacement for that game engine in Freebasic, but my eyes are bigger than my stomach and so we will see if I ever even get into a point of having a basic gameplay slice in front of me, let alone finishing the game. And by the time I actually get to building the game I might already be finished my second book, and at that point I can't really say for certain that the original story that I created will look much like the sort of story I would like to create.
Given that it's a tech entrepreneur who is done work on ai, I feel like this is a live by the sword die by The sword sort of situation.
One of the elements of postmodernism is moral relativism. It permeates our thinking and our storytelling in the west, but it's a luxury of a safe and rich society. Contrast the demons in frieren who are depicted as totally evil. Some people regardless claim they are not evil.
In the Graysonian Ethic I wrote a lot about what we could consider to be evil or good, and I considered hypotheticals of creatures that were completely unlike humans. For example, a black widow who is sentient. For them, the idea of our pro-social morality would be completely alien, and to us ideas like eating your meat after copulation would be considered horrendous.
So does that mean that morality doesn't exist and something can only be considered evil if it allows itself to accept within itself the concept that it is doing evil?
I think that it's beyond any reasonable question, if you are in a human society, and you act in ways that are evil to humans, then you are evil.
For the demons in frieren, they are intentionally duplicitous, they exist solely to eat humans, they have nothing to protect with themselves, the only social contacts that they have with other demons are based on fear and dominance, and even the way that they look is solely intended to deceive humans. The human metrics, demons are of course evil. You can say that they aren't evil because they don't think that they're evil, that sort of moral relativism is the sort of thing that people can do when they are safe and not under threat of being eaten by demons. The reality is that they are unrequitedly evil, and that's why narratively there's no problem with Freiren doing what she does.
In our ancient stories, often animals are considered evil if they intentionally go after human communities whether they are doing so I would have hunger or malice or whatever. They are evil because they exist to harm us or will harm us. In some cases that extends to creatures that are clearly not out to harm us in any way such as rats, those rats represent filth and unclean conditions, and so they represent evil because we know what will happen if they are around, people will get sick and die. We can afford not to see animals in this way today because we have largely tamed the natural world as we see it, but to a human, even the mindless and thoughtless force of entropy can be considered evil because eventually it will mean the end of everything, and it is the force against which we toil at all times.
Now, if our stories were not meant for us but were meant for someone else, then maybe you could make an argument that within the frame of that story nothing and nobody was evil. But the thing is, everyone who is going to read a story that we are aware of on planet Earth is a human, and so the inherent lens of any story that is written for us and by us will be us, even if we are trying not to.
It is interesting that the posterchildren of postmodernism, globalist neoliberals, have found their moral absolutism for example in the war in Ukraine. The Trudeaus of the world who saw every moral position as equally acceptable just a few years ago magically found their moral foundations again once a powerful country started invading their puppe-- I mean once a big country was attacking a small country and that's bad. They also seemed to find a use for moral absolutism during covid -- they sounded like George W. Bush, "you're either with us or you're with the virus!"
In the Graysonian Ethic I wrote a lot about what we could consider to be evil or good, and I considered hypotheticals of creatures that were completely unlike humans. For example, a black widow who is sentient. For them, the idea of our pro-social morality would be completely alien, and to us ideas like eating your meat after copulation would be considered horrendous.
So does that mean that morality doesn't exist and something can only be considered evil if it allows itself to accept within itself the concept that it is doing evil?
I think that it's beyond any reasonable question, if you are in a human society, and you act in ways that are evil to humans, then you are evil.
For the demons in frieren, they are intentionally duplicitous, they exist solely to eat humans, they have nothing to protect with themselves, the only social contacts that they have with other demons are based on fear and dominance, and even the way that they look is solely intended to deceive humans. The human metrics, demons are of course evil. You can say that they aren't evil because they don't think that they're evil, that sort of moral relativism is the sort of thing that people can do when they are safe and not under threat of being eaten by demons. The reality is that they are unrequitedly evil, and that's why narratively there's no problem with Freiren doing what she does.
In our ancient stories, often animals are considered evil if they intentionally go after human communities whether they are doing so I would have hunger or malice or whatever. They are evil because they exist to harm us or will harm us. In some cases that extends to creatures that are clearly not out to harm us in any way such as rats, those rats represent filth and unclean conditions, and so they represent evil because we know what will happen if they are around, people will get sick and die. We can afford not to see animals in this way today because we have largely tamed the natural world as we see it, but to a human, even the mindless and thoughtless force of entropy can be considered evil because eventually it will mean the end of everything, and it is the force against which we toil at all times.
Now, if our stories were not meant for us but were meant for someone else, then maybe you could make an argument that within the frame of that story nothing and nobody was evil. But the thing is, everyone who is going to read a story that we are aware of on planet Earth is a human, and so the inherent lens of any story that is written for us and by us will be us, even if we are trying not to.
It is interesting that the posterchildren of postmodernism, globalist neoliberals, have found their moral absolutism for example in the war in Ukraine. The Trudeaus of the world who saw every moral position as equally acceptable just a few years ago magically found their moral foundations again once a powerful country started invading their puppe-- I mean once a big country was attacking a small country and that's bad. They also seemed to find a use for moral absolutism during covid -- they sounded like George W. Bush, "you're either with us or you're with the virus!"
Yeah, the dental and drug plans they are bragging about are explicitly against the working class. If you're working a full-time minimum wage job then you don't qualify for these plans that they keep on screaming from the hills for.
I'm not even necessarily saying that it's a bad thing to help out the poorest people in our society, but they are absolutely lying about what they've done here. None of it has anything to do with the working class, and jagmeet singh going to a union plant and bragging about how they don't need to pay for dental care just shows how little those idiots understand what they've done in their own legislation.
Of course, we're going to lose a lot more than this program once we start having to pay for the spending binge the liberals have been on for the last 10 years.
I'm not even necessarily saying that it's a bad thing to help out the poorest people in our society, but they are absolutely lying about what they've done here. None of it has anything to do with the working class, and jagmeet singh going to a union plant and bragging about how they don't need to pay for dental care just shows how little those idiots understand what they've done in their own legislation.
Of course, we're going to lose a lot more than this program once we start having to pay for the spending binge the liberals have been on for the last 10 years.