I applied this rule to microfibre cloth for my glasses. I bulk buy 100 of these online and place one each in every jacket I have, plus a few more around drawers at my home
There are multiple definitions of lying. Some people would use the stricter form of 'making a knowingly false statement', and those people are likely to confidently denied they lied when they were accused lying, when they think they only not telling the whole truth.
John Mearsheimer's book "Why Leaders Lie" has a great definition on three forms of deception [1]:
* Lying - Making a knowingly false statement to deceive
* Spinning - Emphasis / de-emphasis certain parts of fact to tell a favorable story
* Concealment - Hiding certain facts to deceive
If I detect someone is "lying" (in your broader definition) I would now use the word 'dishonest' instead.
Could you delay the large screens, commentaries, and live broadcast by 3-5 seconds (or more) such that any information gained from leaked noise would have minimal impact to the players? This would make ANS headphones viable
5sec would be way too low for anything meaningful. One of the more pronounced cases, where the audience reacts, is 'smoke' which makes the players invisible until they are close to opponent player (or tower), used in a way to initiated a gank. The 'smoke' last 45seconds. Killing a big NPC (Roshan) is another example as it takes time (and usually more than a single player) to down it. Other cases: buying a rapier - very high damaging and expensive item but it does drop on death - so it's a warning sound, that may take minutes between a conflict and used.
Sound proofing however still doesn't solve the issue as it doesn't deal with the vibrations in the venue. Pro players have commented that if they start feeling vibrations while 'farming' alone, they become more cautious - asking a support player to cover the gank or move to a safer area.
I hadn't encountered 'gank' before these comments.
But I had to look up MOBA too :-)
And I used to write multiplayer battle games for a living! And my favourite recent game was a MOBA without me knowing that was a term! Which goes to show, times change, words change, and it's easy to live outside gamer subculture, even while playing.
That's really interesting to me. MOBAs are notoriously new player hostile, just with the sheer amount of knowledge the game demands, and the fact that a team really does rely on its members which is too much pressure for a new player (which can translate into verbal abuse from your team depending on the game's culture).
So what's the MOBA that got you interested even though you're not familiar with the genre?
It is only ubiquitous in MOBAs which are, frankly, a small niche of the small niche that is multiplayer competitive gaming, which is a small niche of the small niche that is online gaming, which is a small niche of the small niche which is computer gaming.
I've never heard it in my life and I play games (not Dota) and get around on the internet generally. My first association was clank from hermitcraft's decked out, but that didn't quite fit. Farming is what I figured from context, though
It's such a common term around mobas that I doubt you haven't heard it before. Considering the popularity of the genre it's statistically unlikely that it hasn't come up.
My memory of this long ago is fuzzy, but I believe the word itself is originally from LA gang subculture and was spread more broadly via gangsta rap in the late '80s/early '90s or so (cf. the trend of people spelling certain words with "ck" changed to "cc", which was a feature of Crips tagging). The earliest documented use I could find referred to someone selling fake drugs, but I seem to recall that as it spread it turned into a generic placeholder for just about any offense from petty theft to cold-blooded murder.
Yeah it's just slang for some kind of nefarious action. It's in a lot of rap songs, west coast origin seems possible for sure but been around a long time. East coast version is juug.
In the early 90s in NorCal, we used gank to mean "steal" or "snatch", and you can still find this definition online. I don't think it ever meant murder until it got used in PvP games.
Aren't these murders for stealing though, like don't you kill the people and they drop stuff. I don't remember the game but I know people used to sell in-game items of high value on eBay then stalk people for a bit and kill them to steal it back. One guy got mad about it and went and killed the people in real life.
Well you said "most people" without clarifying whether you meant that generally (the way the other commenter assumed and so replied) or whether you meant "of people who know it, most of them..."
In internet comments, if you're not really specific with your words it's likely at least somebody will misunderstand your intent, partly because they can't read your mind and partly because with so many potential readers the odds of misunderstandings goes up.
Riot tried this with League of Legends and the result was that you'd get players jumping up celebrating 30 seconds before the audience saw the nexus falling, which was incredibly anti-climactic.
Imagine if you were watching tennis and halfway through match point you suddenly see the player celebrating.
To be fair, most of the time it's GG well before the nexus actually falls, but it's sometimes meaningful, and it still ruins the moment to have that sudden de-sync effect as you see live players reactions before you see why on screen.
As a result, as far as I know Riot abandonned having any meaningful and deliberate delay (There's still some technical delay natural to broadcasting).
This was an entirely weird thing at the last soccer world cup, or the one before that: TV via Satellite, Video streams and TV via DVB-T had different transmission delays, with up to 15 - 20 seconds of delay between them. As such, the people across the street started cheering first, then the goal would show on our screen and a bit after that the people across from the balcony out back started cheering.
I live in the hills above a major metropolis and I hear the sound of explosives before I see the reason on my internet stream of live sports. It’s definitely a unique kind of communal experience.
No, as another comment said this doesn't work in Dota 2, sometimes it can take 15-30 seconds of gathering before you trigger an action. And if you know X hero is in the fog of war you can easily gain an advantage. Or if you know X hero is jungling or stacking creeps or what not. There is just too much information you can gather from being able to see the enemy.
To some extent I think that was always an early aim of Creative Commons. I don't think Creative Commons ever saw their job as being a charity owner of IP, but they certainly tried their best to provide as many tools as possible to liberate IP and patents to either copyleft or the public domain (CC0) as they could.
I could certainly imagine an alternate future that if CC got enough donations to back a big enough budget they could help pay for lawyers to full time help creators claw back IPs from major corporations with the hopes to CC or CC0 license the rights that they win back. I also imagine that would cost a lot of money and that hypothetical arm of CC would need a huge budget to win the legal fights it would want to take on.
That was basically what happened to Blender, I think? I have been thinking it would be nice if someone was organizing crowdfunding and taking care of all the legal work to buy out old works properly. Thinking mostly of stuff with little value, that ought to be cheap. The rights to records released on small labels a long time ago that never sold very well to begin with. Obscure comicbooks. B horror movies. Low-budget video games. Old boardgames and tabletop-RPG books (illustrations included, ideally). Things that no one is making any money off anyway. Maybe something more high profile now and then.
But on the other hand if that was done on a large scale it might set an expectation that old things are bought out, or even that anyone ought to be paid to release anything free at all, and that sounds very bad.
Legally speaking this would involve actually purchasing those outright. Sidestepping any questions about copyright assignment and rights reversion, the main problem here would be cost. Most companies that own works anyone of us care about significantly overvalue their ownership in the work, like to the point where ownership is either not for sale or would only be offered for a ludicrous price.
You'd be better off lobbying to weaken copyright protections. There are several charities interested in doing so, but they all have different kinds of baggage: donating to the FSF means Stallman's Way or the Highway, donating to the EFF means supporting Protect The Stack[0]. RPG[1] is run by Louis Rossmann who is fairly chill[2], but they're also the weakest in terms of anticopyright. Nobody wants to purely abolish or reform copyright; they want to do so as a means to achieve some other ends.
Putting that aside, there's also the problem that proposals to reform copyright go absolutely nowhere. Copyright maximalism is pretty uniformly supported by almost the entire US political class[3] and even very mild reforms like right-to-repair face fairly extreme bipartisan opposition. Not even the fascist-lite (DeSantis/Trump) wing of the Republican Party is willing to kick Disney in the copyright balls.
Illegally speaking, the Internet Archive is perfectly willing to publicly archive works they don't own, and they are saints for doing so. But they are also having their balls sued off.
[0] To paraphrase a lot, it means "ISPs should not have abuse desks".
[1] Repair Preservation Group
[2] He does have a right-libertarian bent and an axe to grind against New York's government, though that can be explained by them trying to kill his business
[3] Corporate leadership inclusive. Most corporations should be considered to be a kind of shadow government, not just as private entities.
The only difference is that you usually trust the repo in Linux, but that’s a pretty significant “only thing,” in the sense that the repo is already the source of your whole system, so it better be trustworthy!
The "elegant" way of distributing 3rd party software for Linux is to ask the user to add your APT/RPM/[...] repo to their system. And most Linux distro maintainers anyway don't vouch for software in the main repos, beyond basic install-ability. The Debian project for example definitely doesn't do in-depth security analysis of every package in the repos: they just check the license, re-package it, and keep an eye on security updates in upstream.
