=== ANCHOR POEM ===
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┐
║ in strategy, the first move is always public knowledge, while the second is in │
║ reaction to the first, as a contestation. │
║ │
║ This is good design because well designed games reflect reality, and the first │
║ move is very rarely a surprise. Timing can shock you, methods can scare you, │
║ but the strategic goals are almost always known in advance to both sides. │
║ │
║ The third move is to challenge your foe's advances while striking in a new, │
║ unexpected way. The fourth almost always addresses the unexpected, often with │
║ force out of proportion to the impact of the third, leaving the second to be │
║ defeated by the first and third in tandem. The fifth is a feint, as the first │
║ and third come to bear against the fourth, while the sixth is a rapid retreat │
║ and attempt to regroup. The seventh should strike where they intend to be, not │
║ where they are. Beyond that you must press your advantages and shore up your │
║ critical weaknesses, while sacrificing the weaknesses that are not part of │
║ your win condition. │
║ │
║ These rules are not set in stone │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────┴──────────┘
=== SIMILARITY RANKED ===
--- #1 fediverse/2254 ---
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────┐
║ "fortune favors the bold" is actually a real mechanism in game theory. │
║ │
║ if you act first, if you have the initiative, you can determine the nature and │
║ scope of the contest with your foe. │
║ │
║ in turn-based games of course it's more explicit, as each action begets a │
║ reaction, but in real-time games (where time flows as it does in reality) the │
║ mechanism is just as apparent. │
║ │
║ if you focus attention in one area, you can strike where they're weak. like │
║ Alexander keeping his foes busy with a massive frontline of solid, defensible │
║ troops while his companion cavalry would ride around the side and hit their │
║ flanks and rear. │
║ │
║ game theory is just strategy viewed from the other end, and it matters what we │
║ think because what we think defines what we do. │
║ │
║ ... also, fear is the great paralyzer. fear is a call to action, fear is your │
║ soul speaking straight to you. │
║ │
║ but fear is just nerves, it's just excitement before the leap - you have faith │
║ in this bungee/ this parachute/ the water where you'll be safe, right? My │
║ faith is in y │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧══════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #2 messages/383 ---
════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────
the most successful strategy is always to strike from a position of strength.
whether that be timing or power, the goal is to defeat the problem that lies
before you. One by one, problems are solved, until at last you're through the
worst of it. Then it's just a matter of expressing dominance, and "this is how
thing's're gonna be."
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────┘
--- #3 fediverse/4135 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────
part of being a good leader is being able to listen to criticism and adjust.
it's just... part of navigating your "idea-space-environment". Like... what's
the best tactical decision here? are we going in the right way? where is the
objective? whose lives will have to perish?
good news is that you can do that every-day, whenever you play strategic video
games. It's just practice of course, but the game mechanics that have been
made available to you are the tools you can use to undertake this particular
sport. The sport of leadership, a game or mo-del.
as long as the mechanics line up to what the real world conditions are like -
NO. That's not true! you can learn meta-insights that are useful too. By
minimizing the processing to only the levers that you pull to get through the
job, you remove a lot of other informational calculatory methods of doing
things too.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┘
--- #4 fediverse/4685 ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────
┌───────────────────────────┐
│ CW: video-games-mentioned │
└───────────────────────────┘
In games, the one who takes the initiative often wins. Because games are
designed to be symmetrical, in order to be fair.
In more complex games, Paradox games for example, games where you look at maps
or otherwise have unequal starting conditions simply due to the unique nature
of each team, the initiative, while an advantage, is not necessarily the
driving force that determines who wins.
But it is an advantage, and they say that sometimes weeks happen in months and
years happen in days or whatever.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────┘
--- #5 fediverse/1027 ---
╔══════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┐
║ @user-246 │
║ │
║ one thing you can rely on about evil: it presents itself as such. │
║ │
║ "you can always rely on bad people to turn mean." │
║ │
║ (nobody's beyond forgiveness, but we also need to protect ourselves.) │
║ │
║ in video games, going with a defensive build is a valid strategy depending on │
║ how it's values align. If attacking scales better than defending, in terms of │
║ "effectiveness at the most difficult part" (usually the last 90% takes 10% of │
║ the effort) then it's a better strategy. But if your win condition is to │
║ outlast your opponent, then all you need to do is time your aggression for │
║ when they begin fracturing. │
║ │
║ "I'm sure you don't know this, but once garth fought a dragon. they crashed │
║ through the skies and littered the fields of their home with the broken and │
║ crashed symbols of their own. garth defeated the dragon when one of it's claws │
║ broke, thus giving him the advantage. he took from that fight a shield of │
║ dragonscale, and a tabard made out of some cloth." │
║ │
║ in a contest of wills, the first sign of weakness is whe │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧═══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #6 messages/649 ---
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────
when playing co-operative strategy games, a build focused purely on
self-defence and community organizing can easily fail your allies. You cannot
win with a purely defensive build, you must have offensive capabilities as
well.
We've been trained from a young age to believe that offensive = bad, wrong,
evil, but that's simply not true. You cannot execute a flanking maneuver
without pushing forward behind enemy lines, where you can hit them in their
sides or rear.
Trust me, flanking is the best way to defeat a foe, because they are forced to
split their attention not only between multiple enemies but also multiple
directions.
The more shots on target, the better your chances of success, because most of
the time it only takes one hit to win.
In addition, sometimes it's important to *intercept* your foes, either as they
flee or to protect a vulnerable friend that is being pounced upon or flanked.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────┘
--- #7 messages/1392 ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─
It's good organization? Actually? If something falls when you jostle something
else. It means that what you're doing is causing the system to become
unstable, thus allowing unexpected reactions to allowenable. Like stuff
falling or getting dropped, not ideal.
much better to do your cable management in mind with instability as a goal,
like a canary in the coal mine for "damage-imminent". Design for permanence,
not resilience. If you can prevent problems before they occur by confidently
saying "no" and ideally earnestly saying "here's what you do to resolve your
problem because i know better" (but if you don't know it's okay, especially if
you know who to refer them to who might know better.) then it's easier to
build a repetitive system. Like an institution of people who are working to
fix a problem or fill a social gap need. "how do we keep the water" or "where
does our food come from" can be helpful and useful questions to ask,
especially if work is done to answer them. So... "Go find out" is a reasonable
response for an idle question about stuff that might go right or wrong. Urgent
questions might need a bit of cooperation to resolve, triaging of course.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════┘
--- #8 fediverse/6040 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────
everyone's all against ai because it's big tech but it doesn't have to be that
big it can be [minimized but pronounced marginalized]
== stack overflow ==
distributed
so I think the idea is that by the time you would use AI, there's been enough
time to rewrite the software to work on handheld laptops in a distributed way
and we'd vote on what to ask the amphora of great knowledge, the answer could
always be 42.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────┘
--- #9 fediverse/2098 ---
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────┐
║ ┌──────────────────────┐ │
║ │ CW: games │ │
║ └──────────────────────┘ │
║ │
║ │
║ The difference between tactics and strategy is a level of abstraction. │
║ │
║ Tactics are crucial, but context dependent. Strategy is ALWAYS useful as a │
║ method of planning. │
║ │
║ If you typically play base-builder games like Starcraft or Age of Empires, try │
║ playing a game like Supreme Commander or Factorio - both of them are one level │
║ of abstraction up. │
║ │
║ If you typically play arcade turn-based strategy games like Civilization or │
║ Catan, try going up a level of abstraction with Dominions 6, or any game │
║ developed by Paradox Interactive like Hearts of Iron, Crusader Kings, or │
║ Stellaris. │
║ │
║ If you tend to play luck-based games like Poker or Monopoly, try playing an │
║ actual game instead of resolving a system that's predetermined by the initial │
║ board state and results of chance-based-mechanics with minor (if any) input │
║ from players, like perhaps Star Realms, Magic the Gathering, or Dungeons and │
║ Dragons. Each highlight a different type of choice in their mechanics. You │
║ should probably try all three if you care about strategy. │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧══════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #10 fediverse/3248 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ CW: the-sound-a-gong-makes-except-solid-steel-(vibratory-patterns-in- │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
the trick to strategy is to overcome your weaknesses with minimal expenditure
of resources. Making better decisions optimizes for the most optimal
performances.
practice makes perfect.
just as there are infinite anti-derivatives of zero, (the derivative of any
constant (the derivative of any number of equations)) so too are there
infinite perspectives from which you can perceive the same object. Therefore,
no understanding can be assumed to be true, as the path you are on only speaks
in adjacents. almost any things.
like the tips of a triforce moving outward from a central point.
and the people, the other half of our minds,
those are the ones you speak to. The thoughts that run alongside your mind.
an eternal orbit, like two stars spinning and rotating and [lol I've been
instructed to stop, brb gonna play some video games =P]
(did you know that the colors red and blue are meant to instil panic? it's the
most panicking colors around!!]
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘
--- #11 fediverse/434 ---
═════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────
@user-324 @user-325 @user-326
thus enters the promise of technology: that we might solve the problems of
bureaucracy once and for all by ever more effiency-aligning mechanical
processes that produce effects which we desire - such as efficient allocation
of medical resources such that all of humanity is protected from the ravages
of pain and the incongruencies of our nature.
Alas, that we should only conceive of success through the lens of profit.
Perhaps another design is in order?
(oh yeah also people who are in control are worried that we, like all other
examples of natural entities, might immediately proceed to breed beyond the
capability to cater to the needs of said entity (such as "to feed" and medical
resources) and therefore might overburden (and therefore destroy) said system
which allows for their sustenance and initial creation. To this I say... Yeah
probs, what should we do about it?)
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #12 fediverse/2806 ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ CW: politics-social-media-spirituality │
└────────────────────────────────────────┘
pretend this is an allegory for social media.
[it's not an allegory]
yeah that's why I said pretend.
okay imagine that you are sitting in a rock in a forest.
far away, about 100 feet away, there are other people, but you can't see them
because the underbrush is sooooo dense. they are also sitting on rocks.
you can speak to them, and share your thoughts - but you don't know exactly
where they're coming from because the sound has to bounce around off so many
different plants and such.
[that's not how that works] shut up
so, if you want to say anything important, it's important to have the right
tone, because people 2 or 3 clearings away can't really make out your words -
but they might hear your tone if you yell very loud.
the energy of the space you inhabit is the only thing that really matters. the
words that you say are just snickering to a friend, but the expression on your
face, the beating of the drum of your heart that reaches forth... that's what
matters most.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────┘
--- #13 fediverse/1116 ---
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────┐
║ ┌──────────────────────┐ │
║ │ CW: eye-contact │ │
║ └──────────────────────┘ │
║ │
║ │
║ It's important to build self-hostable computing components of video games (as │
║ in, old style games where you could host a server on any machine instead of │
║ just the ones owned by the corporation) (as in, your machine, yes yours) │
║ (something you can control and observe, something within your control) │
║ │
║ ======================= stack overflow ===================== │
║ │
║ there are two ways to play Unreal Tournament (capture the flag) gamemode. The │
║ first is to run past all your enemies and fire at them as you pass, which is │
║ what some of the bots are designed to do. The rest stay on defence, and defeat │
║ any enemies that approach. │
║ │
║ however, they never push the borders of their "territory" forward - each │
║ according to the different "lanes" or "directions of approach" │
║ │
║ I like the use 32 bots, to simulate a more consistent gameplay experience. It │
║ feels more like ww1, fighting over ground, pushing forward and attempting to │
║ outmaneuver your foes. │
║ │
║ some allies will approach from behind, and you let them pass forward while │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #14 fediverse/5878 ---
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────┐
║ ┌────────────────────────┐ │
║ │ CW: politics-mentioned │ │
║ └────────────────────────┘ │
║ │
║ │
║ revolution is when you successfully prevent your comrades from being kettled │
║ │
║ [wait for time, it echoes in cyclical motions] │
║ │
║ no sand castle survives contact with the ocean. a sea of people at high tide │
║ can break any wall, surpass any boundary. at low tide, it keeps the │
║ sand-castle at bay, ever contesting it's advance as the tide on the other side │
║ of the world makes progress. │
║ │
║ rhythm is unbeatable. vigor is collective flow state. you cannot resist that │
║ which you cannot catch, but their nets grow tighter with each year and our │
║ fins and flippers grow ever more agile and elusive. │
║ │
║ eventually, they'll build brick walls if we let them, checkpointing our │
║ progress at every boundary. not ideal. borders keep us divided, the world │
║ deserves more than our picketing minded, dream bigger than "the same, but nice" │
║ │
║ though it'd be nice if it were nice as well. consider it a design requirement, │
║ once you got the project managers on board. │
║ │
║ turns out, we dont have much to fight over, as there is enough for all │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╧═─────────┘
--- #15 fediverse/4113 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────
┌──────────────────────────┐
│ CW: capitalism-mentioned │
└──────────────────────────┘
I don't know how much simpler I can state it than this:
power is penance
and yet repentance is scant amongst those chosen to lead us.
Voting slows things down. It gives us room to breathe. It is crucial for
long-term operations. Leaders should be chosen for experience, wisdom, and a
humble lifetime of dedicated service to others.
Executive action is important when reactivity and adaptability are important.
Projects should be undertaken by those chosen for merit and spirit. They
should not be chosen for charisma or gravitas - both can be earned in the line
of duty.
Power should not be rewarded. It is it's own reward, the feeling of strength
and control, and it must be wielded with care, precision, and honorable
intention.
Self flagellation and forced humility are self defeating. They are traps that
the greedy fall into when seeking righteous power. They misunderstand the
nature of virtue and seek to claim it for themselves, failing to realize that
virtue helps more than it hedonizes
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┘
--- #16 notes/star-realms-balancing-tradeoff=2 ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─
what if I use equal signs instead of dashes, so prevent people from assuming
they're duplicates?
hmm okay.
right so anyway the star realms balancing tradeoff between combat and authority
is measured against the duration of a hand (does it fit balanced between other
cards of it's playcost) instead of balancing it for the duration of the game
(how long does the player want the game to go on for) one of which is just
inverse combat damage / healing, and the other of which is an enablement of
different strategems.
put this in symbeline-gen-realms please
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════┘
--- #17 fediverse/2056 ---
╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────┐
║ sometimes I think about how you can store number values in letters, in │
║ addition to numbers. Like, ascii values for each word of your grandma's maiden │
║ name. All you have to do is encode it, and suddenly "44 means something │
║ different than Q" │
║ │
║ if I showed up at your place and used your username as a password to a public │
║ key I'm showing you in my hand, would you trust me then? Would you trust if we │
║ ran the simulation on your computer versus mine? Would you trust if I had │
║ never told you I knew where you lived? │
║ │
║ ... probably, tbh, I'm desperate for adventure. Though I got some good things │
║ going for me, so you'll have to convince me. (not the right attitude in an │
║ election year, just saying) │
║ │
║ why are elections so perilous this is NOT what democracy is designed for │
║ │
║ when kids cry in preschool, they're sent to a different room (or put outside) │
║ until they stop making noise and ruining it for others. That's just natural, │
║ like "hey baby let's walk around the block while I bounce you on my shoulder │
║ and hum calming music to │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧══════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #18 fediverse/290 ---
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────┐
║ you're supposed to play the same games as your friends so that you all learn │
║ the same lessons at the same times. creates for a more cohesive familiar │
║ structure. │
║ │
║ applies also to family movie nights... but it's much more apparent with games │
║ as you'll often play them for weeks, months, and sometimes even years if you │
║ keep learning and enjoying them... book clubs are too open to interpretation, │
║ your pathways don't get a chance to align. games are perfect because they │
║ imply reaction. │
║ │
║ also helps if they're multiplayer, so you can share with another. preferably │
║ with healthy, respectful competition and a sense of shared brotherhood and │
║ trust. │
║ │
║ the toughest opponents are the ones that aren't aggressive. the ones that let │
║ you grow uncontested. by taking only neutral resources they guarantee that │
║ your growth isn't impeded, as after all an equal foe is what you learn best │
║ from. │
║ │
║ to a tree, the loss of a branch (cleanly cut) would feel like an empowering of │
║ the main limb. inspiring it to reach higher and beyond... +h2o1 │
╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤
║ similar │ chronological │ different │
╚═════════╧════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────┴──────────┘
--- #19 fediverse/5065 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────
┌────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ CW: strange-ideas-about-software-mentioned │
└────────────────────────────────────────────┘
software should have 3, maybe 4 or 5 maintained releases imo
for adding security improvements and whatnot
then people wouldn't complain about updates
because they wouldn't feel like they were being left behind (after expressing
their differences (of opinion and such))
I think that'd uh maintain them as, I guess, userbase optics parallelograms?
oh sorry we're on rhomboids this week - right, and no I won't forget the
differences in creed, all things are received equally...d.
uh-huh yeah no that makes sense. gotcha. okay see you at the location. have
fun with your demarketion. what if we played games with swords but like,
the peril of steam is that you can't decline to update. meaning if a
corporation wants to break an old game and it's collectively hosted servers...
all it has to do is push an update that disables them. suddenly nobody has
room to do, and the whole
-- stack overflow --
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────┘
--- #20 fediverse/5001 ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────
┌───────────────────────┐
│ CW: systems-mentioned │
└───────────────────────┘
"we'll figure out how it works after we push to prod"
yeah okay point taken.
How about this:
for every large decision, write a little essay about why you made the choice
that you did.
Observe, Orient, Decide, Act, Explain. OODAX : )
Make sure you connect your goal to one or more of these three colors:
red : people
green : places
blue : things
and then explain which numbers you're going to gather to determine whether or
not it worked.
If someone has a problem with your choice, show them the essay, and let them
write an essay of their own.
If they still have a problem, then let someone you both respect decide which
one to use.
It's not perfect, but it's not meant to be. Make something better and easier,
I dare ya.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────┘
|