/cy/ - Cyberpunk

I've had the good fortune of seeing a few healthy communities: ChiefDelphi, a forum about a robotics competition, LessWrong, a forum about AI and rationality, and Lobste.rs, basically Hacker News but invite only.

I'm not sure if this is enough to draw conclusions from, but I'd guess that being specific or niche or small, having an input stream of content like news or blogs, and having a core of people who know eachother in person are major factors that make these communities work.

hey i think its a bunch of idealistic crap but u r not alone

i read ur post and so on
hang in there

maybe well meet in the wired again
u r seen

>>2530
>>2529
i see the forums and are comfy, sites like this are to try to say, a niche or small but comfy comunitys, without the problems of social media like twitter, tik tok, youtube etc, and i know comfy sites in more mainstream platforms like discord comunitys, no all is lost

other example is the imageboard comunity like lainchan or arisuchan before die, why no to try to build a comfy cyberpunk comunity like in the past?

>>2530
well, the internet are slowly die but, what do we lose by trying to do something good on the internet?

i am fed up to see how internet dies and do nothing to stop this sad and shitty era

>>hey i think its a bunch of idealistic crap but u r not alone

i am happy to hear thath, in cyberpunk forums like this, lainchan and other i see similar ideas and opinions, for ideas like this i like to visit cyberpunk forums and y like to try to build a forum like this or lainchan before dies

>>2527
The internet and SM died, when they changed from chronologic to algorithmic feeds. This is the root of all problems, simple as. I have thought about this for years and that was my final conclusion.
before algorithmic feeds the internet was a representation of reality - social media was a personal representation and vlogs were about what happens in your life or what you want to talk about.
After algorithmic feeds the reality became a representation of your feeds. because your feeds manipulate you. They show you successful, beautiful, influencal and most important: most viewed content IN YOUR BUBBLE. So youll be shown the most dramatic, obscure, attentionwhoring content possible and this creates trends, because what works will be copied.

Before algorithms the internet was a representation of reality, since algorithmic feeds we live in a hyperreality

>>2532
wow bro, that is dramatic and sad

>>when they changed from chronologic to algorithmic feeds. This is the root of all problems

i agree with you but we can try to fix that? for example, with little comunitys like this?

>>before algorithmic feeds the internet was a representation of reality - social media was a personal representation and vlogs were about what happens in your life or what you want to talk about

thats the reasons of why people like the old internet, because internet are more authentic, honest and even innocent, now all feels like artificial and soulles, the worst part are the NPC mentality and see myself and ask me what i am, ¿am i a NPC? and if is true, what do y should to do to stop being a NPC

>>After algorithmic feeds the reality became a representation of your feeds. because your feeds manipulate you. They show you successful, beautiful, influencal and most important: most viewed content IN YOUR BUBBLE. So youll be shown the most dramatic, obscure, attentionwhoring content possible and this creates trends, because what works will be copied.

thats the big problem and the terrorific mass manipulation like 1984 novel

i understand the problem but you dont feel frustated to see how internet dies and do nothing to stop it? i dont say to fix the problem, becaues is imposible to one person change a society but it doesn't make you want to do something good on the internet? what happesn with comunitys like this, comfy, little and cyberpunk sites like this, lainchan, arisuchan, wired-7 etc, They don't feel like they're in an oasis when they find a good place like>>2529

I don't think corporation will ruin FOSS, federated apps will definitely be ruined by them though. True FOSS requires being open source and allowing users to modify it as they see fit. That inherently goes against a lot of the spooky stuff corporations like to put in their software. The only way it might be ruined is by copying what some smartphones running Android do, where proprietary additions to FOSS code prevent alterations without voiding the warranty or something similar. And yes, people are getting more tech illiterate day by day.

>>2488
But let's just look at the current state of Linux since Microsoft discovered its "love" for the kernel: The quality of the project is declining with each new release, and given its ever-increasing complexity, as well as realistically very small active user base, it's all but impossible that the thing will be forked. Believing that Big Tech will be very successful in undermining FOSS, I don't really, but I'm sure they will at least try, otherwise there will always be a potential threat to their business model.

>>2489
In what way did the project quality decrease?

Linux has always had endless forks, that's how it's developed. Plus it is pretty much unavoidable for vendors that need to put stuff in it that upstream won't take.

Open Source is already a corporate corruption of Free Software.

>>2495
>Linux has always had endless forks, that's how it's developed. Plus it is pretty much unavoidable for vendors that need to put stuff in it that upstream won't take.
Only hard forks matter in this case though. μClinux, vendor specific forks, or distro specific patches will never abandon upstream, because it has the momentum in regards to hardware support and testing.
Competitive forks will either consist of a sizeable portion of the former upstream developers and/or need reliable funds proportional to their problem domain (which is substantial for a general-purpose kernel). Even then an unambiguously technically superior fork with experienced developers may stagnate eventually (see lucid/xemas).

Debian+Canonical or Freedesktop+Redhat could maybe pull of a successful hard fork, but they won't want to.

I would recommend using an engine as it will save you lots of time and effort, both of which you probably have a short supply of, as a lone, amateur, aspiring game developer. That way you can focus on actually creating the game.

I would only recommend doing it from scratch if your game is very simple or if you are more interested in how to do it from scratch than actually ever finishing it.

That's my recommendation but it's been like a decade since I last tried making a game and I don't even play anything other than SuperTuxKart so idk. I never used Godot but it's free as in freedom so you can claim to be virtuous for enduring it if it sucks.

>>2512
yes wood. carve something out of wood :3

use engine, if you're a programming noob you already have a huge hurdle in programminf FOR the engine

>>2510
use c or c++
python will be absolute shit for performance

>>2510
Considering unity just offed itself, I'd say use godot. Unreal is fine too.
Otherwise, I agree with >>2513

>>2517
This largely depends on what kind of game you're making. For a simple game like snake, python(pun intended) would be perfect.
C and C++ is fast if you know how to use them properly, but in most cases it is unnecessary. So you might as well make use of the advantages of other languages.

>>2480
The point of the China though experiment was to show just how fragile our supply chain is. There is basically nowhere in the modern world that isn't totally reliant on people continents away for things like food and energy. Modern society simply cannot exist without the worldwide apparatus working at all times. Once things do collapse it will be over before anyone realizes it started. One day there just won't be the latest shipment of food to your area and people will starve. In the before times self-sufficiency was the rule, only the largest cities could get away with importing necessities. Now we have things like plastics with an absurdly complicated manufacturing process being the basic material for all consumer goods. As for soc ail collapse, that IS happening. About a third of the male population is simply not engaging in society. They don't work and spend their days watching tv and jerking off. People aren't forming relationships, marriage and birthrates near extinction levels of low; with millions of third worlders being imported to make up the difference. Most Americans have never had a real friend. And this trend started long before the internet, it's a result of humanity attempting to excise it's tribal nature. One of the few peoples in America to actually retain a healthy society is the Amish. Seriously look into them if you haven't; they basically escaped modernity. They are absurdly more healthy; physically, mentally, socially, and spiritually than the average American because they as their ancestors have for centuries; they live in a way fitting humanity.

>>2482
I'm just going to pop in here and fundamentally disagree with you on nearly every point. Except maybe the short-term fragility of supply chains (which is basically a truism).
I think the core of your misunderstanding is that you are confusing governments and social relations with what is actually the structure and prime mover of modern society: capital flows and capital accumulation. In this way your claim that current societal problems portend of some major systems collapse is both right, on a surface level, and wrong in a crucial way. Since, the collapse of the federal government, although I am deeply skeptical of this, is in no way a collapse of the actual systems of control and domination, which are truthfully in the hands of corporate elite and transnational capital.
It is also in this way that you are only correct to point out the short-term vulnerability of supply chains; the fluidity of transnational capital means it is only answerable to the whims and decisions of separate governments in superficial ways.
Furthermore, your point relating to the desirability of Amish society seems to be far too idealistic, if we put aside the massive concerns most people would have with such a change. Idealistic in that it assumes that by rejecting the cultural forms of capital accumulation we are somehow free of the economic or material domination as well. No, the Amish are free only from the modern cultural manifestations of market forces and have only managed to revive the outmoded face of societal structure, while still in the same boat of economic domination as the rest of us. Not to mention it remains to be seen how long that cultural facade can hold against the revolutionary force of capital.
It is what appears to you as cultural collapse that is in fact the system reordering itself completely in service to its economic ends; not collapse but refinement. It may be worthwhile to wonder just how malleable humans are, and whether this restructuring might not push us too far, but it would be a misunderstanding to see it as degradation at a system level analysis.


As a final note, whatever health benefits the Chinese may have inherited from the generational concentration of Chi will have to be measured against the material demands of global capital on their descendants.

Addendum: any appearance of communist thought in my writing Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>2484
This! I have nothing also to add.

>>2468
Rich get richer.
Poor get poorer.
While the establishment that enslaves us destroys the environment.
Meanwhile the establishement tells us its our fault the environment dies and not that one of big corpos.
Those in power can only uphold the current state with retardedly hardcore propaganda and some look through it and others dont.
So its people against people, both h8 society for the same reasons but come from a different argumentation.

>>2487
The system of unequal wealth distribution is, unfortunately, a fairly stable system, and when it is destroyed, it is either semi-permanently replaced by an alternative or it quickly returns, albeit often in a different form.
The problem with modern propaganda is that while it is a lot, it is not of high quality. It mostly consists of variations of the same few stories, combined with a few buzzwords that, if you recognized them and have some degree of pattern recognition, you all know.
The whole destruction of nature thing is indeed pretty bad, but can still be reversed by reforestation and reduction of production.