Some in the SS13 community hold a strongly negative opinion about Sseth's video, since it appears to give the wrong impression of the game as a sandbox where you can do anything. In contrast, the most popular servers have a strict set of rules for what kind of behavior is appropriate, and randomly killing people for non-roleplaying purposes is a bannable offense. Regardless, the increase in attention to the game caused a lot of new players with no intention of following the rules to flood the servers, lowering the quality of the playerbase. (Sseth himself acknowledges in the video that the veteran players will blame him for the ensuing problems.)
Evidently so. I'm not quite up to speed, but ever since SS13 was first created there have been maybe a dozen attempts to move it off of BYOND: SS14, SS3D, RE:SS3D, UnityStation, Griefly, Bluespess...
I do remember stumbling across this issue[1] by one of the lead developers of SS14 calling out one of the devs of another project. I think it illustrates that the stories of people trying to remake SS13 alone are numerous and fraught with tension at times. But it speaks volumes about how passionate many individuals are about this specific game.
There is also this very interesting writeup[2] by another SS14 dev about four years ago about how the project got started.
Also interesting about SS14 in particular is that they use a completely custom engine called RobustToolbox, written in C#. This was after trying to use SFML, scrapping everything, and eventually spending a year "waiting for Godot", in someone else's words. One of the devs apparently spent two years mostly learning OpenGL just to finish the engine.
My belief is that they're trying to find a way to remain profitable. VCs expect returns, and with Dropbox's main feature now included by many other services like O365 and Drive, I would think that they're finding themselves forced to make such changes whether or not they want to.
This articulates exactly what I've been thinking about technological progress for a long time. When Discord stopped marketing itself as a chat service "for gamers," suddenly huge swathes of chat groups from high schools to electrical engineering projects moved their discussions there. It was giving me a strange feeling, maybe because Discord was a product instead of a protocol, and also because it means that all the domain-specific knowledge produced in those chat rooms becomes siloed inside the servers of a single proprietary company, unable to be indexed publicly. But that was a point in time where a company improving the quality of its product and its market reach gave me hesitation for some reason. Improving your service and having more people talking about it and using it is supposed to be a good thing, right?
The notion of a baseline of satisfaction required for consentual opting-in to monopolies seems to have produced this perpetual equilibrium where even if people don't like a service they still throw up their hands and use it because everyone else happens to use it since it is the one and only place that this one crucial discussion about X or Y is taking place in the entire world, and the subject matter has nothing to do with the platform itself, but that platform was the one that happened to win out, because it was superior.
It's caused me to think that just because you are fixing bugs or legitimately making improvements to a product, or have big dreams and an idea that actually does change the world, it doesn't mean that you are necessarily mean that you are doing the world a favor overall. The people in control or the incentives could rule what actually happens.
And the scariest thing is, people don't want to outlaw or regulate innovation or growth. People are fine with Amazon improving its marketplace to the point where there are no other marketplaces left offering a comparable set of products. A lot of people seem to be fine with letting social media grow to dominate our lives if it's reframed as "making it easier to keep in touch with your distant relatives."
Now it really is easier to keep in touch with your relatives than ever. And now, social media is also starting to dominate our lives.
It sounds like this is similar to Kite, but actually competent as a service and not associated with a brand that has destroyed all trust. But it has to come with the same privacy caveats, right? Uploading your private code to a third-party server could result in business or regulatory violations.
And even if you're okay with sending your code, what about hardcoded secrets? What's to prevent Copilot clients from sending things that should never leave the user's computer? Heuristics? Will we be able to tell what part of the code is about to be sent? And is the data stored?
I'll probably get flak for this, but here is my experience.
I was fired from my first internship in college. An internship. And the reason apparently had to do with these really subtle ways I interacted with the high level employees that nobody told me about. For example, it appeared to be that getting up and leaving at lunch break while a C-level is talking about his vacation to Cancun without saying "I'm leaving, it was nice to see you, thanks for the chat about Cancun" was a firable offense. So offensive, apparently, that immediately after my manager pulled me into a room and absolutely grilled me for it in the most direct, robotic language he could. The point was clear. Don't just get up and leave if a C-level is making small talk, even if it's on break. I should mention that this was a company that prided itself on its "startup mentality".
At the time this scared the shit out of me. My college age self started to believe: is this just how the real world works? You think all is fine until it isn't, because nobody told you their specific rules for what is acceptable to do or what they really think of you?
By the time they told me it was my last day I completely failed to be surprised. This was what they actually wanted to tell me to my face for so long. But the only place and time they were going to tell it to me was five minutes out of their busy schedule out of the sight of all the people programming and shooting the shit about Cancun and having a good laugh together. Building relationships with each other. Tangible, valuable relationships. "Real" relationships.
Today, with some added experience I more or less understand: Yes, that org was dysfunctional if that's what it came down to, all those unwritten social rules I had no way of understanding if nobody was going to tell me I would be fired for breaking them. I contrast this with my current job where this kind of thing would not be tolerated in the slightest, and instead their policy is tolerance of absolutely everyone and their thoughts and feelings, so long as they aren't disruptive.
But how was that manager talking to me before that lunch break?
With great rapport. I had found him very likeable up to that point. He guided me through the steps to set up my devenv and introduced me to the members of the team who he gave nicknames and shot the breeze with them and me and laughed and talked to me about his opinions on marriage and having children and appeared to be having a nice time with me, until he apparently started believing I was dead weight because of whatever unspeakable thing I did and the subsequent lack of any programming-related direction or input from him, leaving me stranded doing essentially nothing on clock time and a better case for firing, I guess.
Yet from his positive tone and the way he was talking about social things and such, I would hardly guess that if I crossed a line at some point that that would be the end of our relationship, and my relationship with the company, period.
So my understanding is that business relationships are different from completely social relationships with no strings attached. If you're perceived to be not fulfilling the duties that your manager expects, then no matter how much rapport or friendly conversations you have with them there will come a point where the gloves will come off and they have to speak in a completely functional manner, because that's what the business wants in order to optimize, and ultimately that's the most important thing when it comes to business relationships: getting things done and saving face, as opposed to being social and speaking from the heart, without pulling punches.
Here is my failing: this causes me to stray away from rapport, especially with higher ups, because my thought process cynically declares "it doesn't matter what emotions or expressions they use with you. If it comes down to it, they'd fire you in the end in spite of it all." I end up thinking because I am strictly in a business relationship with my coworkers, that trying to make social progress is futile, because I'm there to do work, and what I am mainly being judged for in going to work is how much effort I put in to solving the problems the org has and my abilities to actually accomplish the things they want, not how many witty stories I tell or small talk about hobbies I have. I am not saying it doesn't have its place, on break or even any time there is a meeting. It's just that I believe the only reason such social rapport is possible is because I'm still employed, and that is because I'm good at my job, not my social skills.
I don't really mean people who are assholes can get away with it, because they impact productivity. I just never felt the need for something that was putting on airs and obscuring the real reason I'm at work.
https://www.amazon.com/Yedi-Programmable-Pressure-Steamer-Ac...