I watched The Princess Bride and couldn’t understand why it gets so much love. I found it really gruesome and unfunny, and Robin Wright’s princess was bland and unlikable.
All militarists know that war is horror - they relish the horror of it.
That’s why they love movies like Saving Private Ryan (which justifies the horror by ascribing justification to it) while disliking movies such as The Thin Red Line or Catch 22 (which strips any kind of justification away from it).
Ah, I see your point. I didn’t relish the horror. I didn’t even understand the horror. When I was growing up, I was taught in a way that minimized or disregarded suffering. SPR did not do that. It showcased it and in a horrendous way. While some may relish in that, I didn’t and it made me reconsider my childhood support of any armed conflict as justified. I didn’t understand the costs involved. While I’m sure the movie didn’t capture everything, what it showed was horrendous.
Idk about your point of justification. It’s been a while and I don’t remember that.
Weaponized masculinity portrays the horrors of war as some kind of “test” of masculinity - you’ll see this in a lot of fascist propaganda. It’s literally what fascists mean when they spew their “blood and soil” bullcrap. It’s pretty sick - I grew up in Apartheid-era South Africa, and they brainwashed us like that.
While I’m sure the movie didn’t capture everything, what it showed was horrendous.
The problem I have with movies like Saving Private Ryan is that they don’t address the central conceit of the vast majority of “war media” - ie, that war is an activity primarily waged by armed combatants against other armed combatants. This is absolutely not the truth - wars are primarily waged by armed combatants against unarmed non-combatants. This is especially true when we discuss colonialist warfare - it is being literally demonstrated right now in Gaza.
Idk about your point of justification
You remember Tom Hank’s little line about “earning it?” The more you think about it, the sillier it becomes.
I personally refuse to watch the film again. Not because was bad which it is not, but because it depicts war so graphically I’m opposing war even more since I saw the opening scene.
I made a similar post about this a few days ago. I’m not sure if you were inspired by that post or if there’s just something in the water. Overall, I believe that activity creates activity in a snowball effect. For small sites like Lemmy or other fedi groups, I think having so many dead, bot-driven communities hurts the overall activity of the group as a whole.
I browse /all/new pretty much exclusively, and I see all the time posts in communities made for specific TV shows, made by the same person every time, getting zero traffic or engagement. The communities themselves usually have only a few subscribers. Just to address the elephant in the room, I think this type of behavior is carried entirely from Reddit refugees who read online and thought that Lemmy was a 1:1 substitution for Reddit, without realizing that the Fediverse’s user base is just a percentage as Reddit’s, and that fractalizing groups into such specific topics out the gate hurts discovery and engagement.
Honestly I have no idea these days. I don’t directly remember reading that post but I certainly may have and I have no problem crediting you with it.
I’ve encountered and complained about the problem from a UX perspective pretty much since coming over. It’s obviously not that I can’t figure it out, it’s that I’ve reached the point that I no longer think I should have to. I remember when I first started walking around university computer science departments and being surprised that about 90% of the computers were Macs and when I would talk to a CA professor with (say) a Windows convertible laptop (when those were brand new) they’d say how much they hated it because of how much work it took. I ended up on exactly the same page, after having started using Linux in 1994 when just getting X Windows running was a feat.
Now look at the average non-technical reddit user. They’re going to bail as soon as they realize they have no idea how to choose a server. Even after that, they’ll have 10 /politics to choose from.
In any case, I started to think about it from a network theory perspective. Let’s say we’re going to use some kind of preferential attachment network (PAN), like Google used when it launched. New nodes will preferentially attach to already more popular nodes. That’s (in a very broad brush sense) the way the Internet and social networks grow. If I want to read /politics, I want the canonical one, not the one with one post from six months ago.
The same approach would potentially apply to the user wanting to make a post. They’ll want to make their post where it’ll get views (obviously, because even if we’re not competing for karma we wouldn’t bother to post if we didn’t want it seen. Same discovery problem.
So the cost of building a PAN is going to be dominated by the cost of a new node finding its preferred attachments. That’s what goes up with fragmentation, and that’s what I think would dictate the fitness function in the evolutionary model I was proposing.
If you write it up, I’ll work on it but want to be co-author :)
Ha, this is me. I did exactly that (with a community for the TV show Andor) and am guilty of the behaviour you describe.
I’ve probably been thinking along the same lines as you and OP though, 'cos I deleted the community a couple of days ago. I realized that if I had something more to say about that show, it doesn’t belong in it’s own niche community, or ‘Star Wars TV’, or ‘Star Wars’, or even ‘Television’. Perhaps a ‘Movies&TV’ comm, although - at this rate - maybe even ‘entertainment’ would be best.
I’m starting to think that instances that limit community creation to admins have the right idea (e.g. Beehaw, or - to use a non-federated example - tildes).
Some instances have started ‘Community Teams’, but I sense that anytime they discover a dead community, their instinct is to find ways to promote it, get new mods, drive engagement etc, whereas I’m more of the opinion that they should be nuked and consolidated (along the lines of what the ‘cooking’ communities have tried to do, I suppose).
Probably not for everyone, but Facebook marketplace with local pickup is really good for some parts. YMMV
I was planning on buying an RX 6700XT from Newegg for $450ish, but instead managed to get a 6600 (non XT) for $80. I then found a 6700XT a month later for $300, bought it, and gave the 6600 to my cousin’s kid.
I also bought a shitbox I turned into a Plex server for $75.
Can’t comment on the 3rd person shooter/3d platformer hybrids, but games like Mario Odyssey are fantastic modern 3d platformers. Meanwhile I’ve recently replayed some 3d platformers from the n64-gamecube eras and found they didn’t hold up as well as I remembered.
I agree the N64 and GameCube ones aren’t as good as the PS2 ones from an objective standpoint. All the best platformers exist on PS2, I really don’t know why. They just went on a roll.
There are no 3rd person shooter-platformers on the other consoles, I’ve used a bunch of consoles including N64 and GameCube. They just don’t have the same kinds of games. I wish people would look past the fact they’re old and assuming it’s just a nostalgia thing… I can explain why the PS2 platformers are more complex and detailed and better
I can explain why the PS2 platformers are more complex and detailed and better
Then why haven’t you? The whole problem is you keep saying that this is objectively true without providing any evidence that comes anywhere close to being objective.
Super mario odyssey is the most polished and impressive 3d mario game ever made. Not sure how people think that n64 mario is better except for nostalgia.
I think it comes down to the combo of nostalgia in combo with iconic games. For example, Mario 64 was so cool when it came out. Even the feel of it was new and different to anything else available.
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.