• 13 Posts
  • 76 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2023

help-circle



  • Occasionally I’ll watch a playthrough of a game I’m interested in something about (the plot or aesthetic), but don’t think I’d enjoy playing.

    Mostly, though, I watch like the Drawfee stream where they do improv comedy and draw audience suggestions. I’d almost rather watch a vod of a game I’m curious about, but comedy streams with audience participation benefit from seeing them live.

    I think a lot of streamers are basically amateur comedians doing bits with something like a videogame to give them material. mst3k-like.

    Others will play a game early or right away and be able to review as you watch. They’ll say like the controls feel sloppy or the theme is grating and you’ll experience that with them. Not a big deal for most people, but for highly anticipated games people are excited about, it helps give a sense of whether a game is worth playing for them in a slightly different way than a written or recorded review.

    Watching people play a dnd game live gives you the energy in the chat while watching, which can make more exciting or interesting the play (do people in chat who know dnd think what’s happening was a good idea? is everyone freaking out at a roll? is there a person who explains things in there which helps you understand for your own game?) It also protects you from getting spoiled when something dramatic happens.

    There are people who play music or paint or work on a skill on stream, and that comes with a touch of the fun of watching a live performance. There’s some extra excitement when you see stuff in real time and they could fuck up or they could do something amazing.



  • I don’t know what I personally think, but my guess about the justification is that the state intervenes when it’s in the best interests of the child. Its purpose is to protect and aid the minor when families can’t.

    It is considered a harm to deprive children permanently of access to their parents, without showing that it’s more harmful for the kid to be around them. So crime doesn’t automatically remove access. Is the theory.

    The state isn’t supposed to treat permanent removal of access to a child as another criminal punishment. One thing I do agree on, though, is that people who rape kids shouldn’t have unsupervised visits with their minor children, since they’ve proven themselves harmful specifically to children. Not even supervised, honestly.

    I guess I’d want to see studies about outcomes of kids who are allowed around convicted adult rapist parents, vs those allowed access to parents convicted of nonviolent crimes. Or a study designed by people who know how to design studies well. Instead of my rambling suggestion.

    I worry that our vibe checks get warped around kids, and we ignore what’s proven right vs what feels right. Like people who feel really strongly that kids need their parents specifically have warped the narrative on this issue, and I don’t want to warp it in a different way.


  • I’ve always enjoyed reading about people’s dwarf fortress games, but I could never decide if I’d like it. If you’re a fan, what kind of other games are like it? Is it mostly fun, or 90% frustrating with great fun moments? How long did it take to start to have fun if the learning curve is high? If anyone is in the mood to sing its praises, I would love to hear them. If no one does, that’s cool, too! Just been thinking about playing it for years but never committing.


















  • Trust in what sense? With computer security? You probably can’t. To diagnose you and find a proper course of treatment? You probably need to research the individual doctor.

    My mother worked at a hospital for years helping doctors use computers to keep up to date with research in their fields. By and large, doctors 10-15 years ago sucked at using computers. Doctors who helped save the lives of relatives of mine by diagnosing cancer early would struggle doing simple searches.

    I knew a psychologist who would openly chat about patients - names included - in casual party settings. Doctors don’t have to be bad at computers to violate your privacy.

    If you think their computer security could be better, you’re right, but the more they have to learn, the more room for error you’re introducing during the changeover. Do they spend millions replacing a diagnostic machine because no one knows how to switch it to better software? When it works and those millions could go towards equipment that needs replacing?

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5996174/

    My suggestion is to do research on tech security in hospitals. Read up from people who are experts in the subject, because it’s deeply complicated. Figure out what current recommendations are and contact your local doctors and hospitals to find out if they’re investing in patient information security. They might still not use linux, but it’s more important they be doing what research shows works.

    When you find doctors and hospitals that are working towards those recs, give them what trust you can muster, keeping in mind any of them could just be like “my lung cancer patient Joe Smith said the funniest thing yesterday” at their next cocktail party.

    Most won’t. But these are human run systems. You need to give them enough trust that they can monitor your health, but be prepared to withdraw it when they prove it’s undeserved. Tech-wise, pay attention to actual recommendations from experts and keep in mind that the doctors themselves aren’t the experts there.

    Just, like, don’t let yourself die because your doc thinks a linux is a kind of hybrid animal.