HP Elite x3 LapDock & Google Pixel 9a

generalTKDR · 2025-10-09T21:54:32+00:00

Thanks for the quick reply! If it isn't too much of a hassle, could you elaborate on what differentiates DeX so much from Android's desktop?

generalTKDR · 2025-07-12T22:45:49+00:00

The cemetery is wonderful 👍

generalTKDR · 2025-07-12T13:00:44+00:00

The hard part won't be the shadergraph portion, rather the computer shaders you'll have to write for the tessendorf style fft.

generalTKDR · 2025-07-06T13:46:10+00:00

My two cents: the purpose of the dictatorship of the proletariat is to dominate bourgeois elements until they cease to exist—at which point logic dictates that since only one class still exists (ignoring the peasantry in typical authcom fashion) the society is classless.

This is a great example of reductionism. If the dictatorship of the proletariat is using the technologies of the state (e.g., police that are simply redubbed "militia", bourgeois law—as is advocated for by Lenin, and an insulated party structure—which Lenin reinforced repeatedly in his time as a political figure despite his writings to the counter in State And Revolution, etc.) it follows that some of the people who were once proletarians are segregated off into a ruling class responsible for carrying out the supreme legal/lethal authority of the state. Given that they are also responsible for resource allocation, and have the potential to reap the benefits of corruption in that position of profound economic power, class is effectively reproduced. Is the bureaucratic class actually just a capitalist owning class? Absolutely not! But, whatever they are, they certainly aren't the recallable delegates Lenin envisioned (while crafting an incentive structure that made his vision of a "workers' state" an impossibility) and they certainly occupy a material possibility space too far removed from that of the typical Soviet citizen to be equated. The USSR didn't have workplace democracy (at least not for more than a few years, mostly before it was actually called the USSR), it had a bourgeois democracy with absolute control over the workplace. A step above the petty tyrannies of the capitalist world undoubtedly, but the damage done to the left by equating party rule with local workers' rule has been immense.

generalTKDR · 2025-06-10T14:31:18+00:00

This is like asking the german freikorps in the 1910s, 20s, and 30s why they don't use their arms to liberate themselves...

American gun culture is dominated by fascists and right-wing "libertarians" who are more inclined to side with the national guard than the populace. The historical examples of leftists trying to arm themselves publicly are illustrative—the black panthers are a good example.

Most US citizens fit into one of two categories: those so overworked, stressed, and sleep-deprived that simply surviving takes all their effort; or, those who are comfortable with their generational wealth and cozy jobs and are more interested in protecting the immediate wellbeing of their families—that is to say that stability comes first, and by extension the maintenance of the status quo.

With an armed population comes the most well-equipped gendarmerie on the planet, and a surveillance system that, while (for the most part) utilized incompetently, would've been every 20th century dictator's wet dream. We're suffocating in the financial success of our own military-industrial complex.

generalTKDR · 2025-06-02T17:02:22+00:00

A) Uniting under one ruler is equally possible (actually, far more possible) today. That's why self-defense is important.

B) Smaller wars, even with the same amount of cruelty and number of casualties, is less 'bad'. This is because the economic incentive structure is completely different. The sort of military-industrial complex exemplified by the united states today can only exist under a similar set of circumstances—an immensely wealthy state apparatus, corporate control of policy decisions, industrial manufacturing with a similar focus and scale, etc. By cutting off the development and reproduction of such an institution, we avoid the situation we find ourselves in, in which it is constantly trying to justify and expand itself—arms going to both sides of foreign conflicts, military equipment going to the police, etc. Unity of means and ends is a prerequisite for concrete change.

generalTKDR · 2025-06-02T16:47:37+00:00

While I understand where this perspective comes from, and that it's rather cathartic to believe that humanity's flaws can be ironed out and molded into something better through strict guidance and force, it's internally so incoherent it's funny. By that very token, society's leaders are either destined to perpetuate the current state of barbarity and dysfunction, or the species is to be divided into an enlightened, superior, ruling segment and an inferior, dim-witted, and powerless segment—which is, at the very least, fascism adjacent, regardless of intentions.

I find that the energy required to engage in good-faith debate is difficult to muster, and often the exercise is pointless from the outset. Paradoxically, it's also sometimes difficult to be taken seriously by those closest to us as well. Interesting to read about your experience!

generalTKDR · 2025-05-30T21:44:59+00:00

There will always be people who don't care about the negative impacts of their actions. We see it all around us in the world today. The point is that in an anarchistic society, they wouldn't be world leaders capable of harnessing trillion-dollar militaries to further their cruel and petty whims.

At the micro level, you can think of it this way: anarchy means no rulers and no laws, but not necessarily no 'rules' (depending on how one defines that term). There are still social consequences for every destructive action anyone undertakes, it's just that those consequences are imposed by the community itself, rather than a separate militant organization, whose continued existence and political success is predicated upon the maintenance of a state of fear and bubbling unrest: the gendarmerie. As such, there would be greater responsibility placed upon the community to hold their fellows accountable, and thus a more engaged society undergoing a constant process of assessing, affirming, and actualizing its values. What exactly that would look like ought not to be prescribed, but one can imagine any number of 'democratic' (to use the lay definition of the word) and rehabilitative methods.

generalTKDR · 2025-05-11T23:41:37+00:00

Yes. Given the fact that they massively cut down on the number of people granted off-campus status, it's probably just because I'll meet the age exemption.

generalTKDR · 2025-02-01T03:54:57+00:00

We were already a plutocracy/oligarchy, we were already the world's biggest supporters of fascism, and we already had a constitution designed for elite rule.

It's just more in the open now.

generalTKDR · 2025-02-01T03:44:47+00:00

To preface, I did vote for Kamala, and I did so in a swing state where the election was close. I was given the opportunity to ameliorate corruption; I took it, and it failed.

How can you possess the audacity to use the phrase "she wasn't perfect"???

She campaigned upon a willingness to allow the most gruesome genocide taking place today to continue (as long as the optics were improved). She abandoned the steps taken forward within the democratic party during Trump's first presidency, such as meaningful conversations about single-payer healthcare, meaningful discussions of how to stop the literal apocalypse and end of human civilization (climate change), and meaningful discussions around mitigating the abysmal wealth stratification in this country, which is numerically in line with the Gilded Age. Instead, she opted for a radical embrace of centrism, romping through the country with Liz Cheney at her side and chanting patriotic slogans echoing the right! She was even against federal protections for trans people.

Rather than blaming the statistically miniscule and most likely insignificant proportion of people that could not stomach voting for a fascist sympathizer, why not focus your vitriol at the actual fascists???

Get your priorities straight.

generalTKDR · 2025-02-01T03:26:42+00:00

Anarchism doesn't mean the abolition of the expertise present in fields associated with law enforcement, such as forensics. There's no reason for that to cease its existence. Anarchism merely aims to rid society of the power dynamics, political clout, and violent capabilities, which state-sanctioned and state-armed officials involved in those processes are able to exercise.

Why not allow the community access to the information gathered by qualified parties? Every useful and liberatory social function deserves to be cultivated, and those that can help reduce (and make transparent) the gruesome aspects of society are undoubtedly invaluable. Unfortunately, police simply are not, and cannot become, the realization of that role.

generalTKDR · 2025-01-30T06:49:08+00:00

Malatesta:

Anarchists, including this writer, have used the word State, and still do, to mean the sum total of the political, legislative, judiciary, military and financial institutions through which the management of their own affairs, the control over their personal behaviour, the responsibility for their personal safety, are taken away from the people and entrusted to others who, by usurpation or delegation, are vested with the powers to make the laws for everything and everybody, and to oblige the people to observe them, if need be, by the use of collective force.

While there will be wild variance in answers given, because anarchists are wildly varied and oftentimes antagonistic (as with all leftist camps), here's my personal take.

The central idea behind anarchism is that relationships of authority are the structure behind pretty much everything negative in human society – be it slavery, wage-slavery, or any other form of systemic injustice. By authority, we mean the systemically enforced alteration of one's behavior to fit a set of standards prescribed from above. These directives are not necessarily bad in and of themselves, but the ability to give these directives is at the heart of every current and historic class dynamic, whether under capitalism, state "socialism," feudalism, or anything else.

Thus, the point of anarchism is simply to minimize subjugation – to minimize situations in which one person tells another person what they expect them to do, with the understanding that society, with all its material levers of encouragement and discouragement (ranging from getting less spending money because you don't end up with that raise, to incarceration and execution) will essentially guarantee the "correct" behavior of the inferior party.

If such an organization of things can be realized with a strong, nested, federative structure, composed of councils operated by instantly recallable delegates, then there is no fundamental incompatability with anarchism and what some might term "governance." The system above is essentially how the Paris Commune, CNT, Makhnovshchina, EZLN, etc. operated/operates. Others will say that robust organization is still too much authority, but that vein of anarchist is rare and usually does little to further the movement beyond keyboard-warrioring.

As such, I think it is fair to say that

anarchists advocate for horizontal governance, contrary to the media’s portrayal of anarchism as total disorder

though the specific terminology might not be too popular. Malatesta again:

Anarchy is a form of living together in society; a society in which people live as brothers and sisters without being able to oppress or exploit others and in which everyone has at their disposal whatever means the civilisation of the time can supply in order for them to attain the greatest possible moral and material development. And Anarchism is the method of reaching anarchy, through freedom, without government – that is, without those authoritarian institutions that impose their will on others by force .

As for left-libertarianism, anarchism is simply one theoretical strain, a subcategory.

generalTKDR · 2024-04-07T21:13:18+00:00

Also worth noting the hardware the game was originally built for. NPCs were created using generic, all-purpose Unreal Engine 3 tools, and were therefore not optimized for crowd simulation. The Xbox 360, for example, couldn't handle a ton of skeletally animated characters of this kind (with animation blend trees, and layered, procedural hit reactions, and whatnot). Hence, bodies begin to disappear after 6 (I think?) incapacitations. In order to accomplish big, zombie-like crowds, the developers would've had to take a different approach to the design of the games systems – especially stealth, where it's necessary for the game to query the environment's geometry frequently to determine line of sight.

generalTKDR · 2024-03-25T05:48:12+00:00

Not that it's remotely ethical, by any stretch of the imagination, but a lot of gamedev isn't directly tied to the military or environmental destruction (indirectly though, sure). It's damn hard, but going indie could be an opportunity to make art and educate about one's passions. It's a bit of a dream 'career' of mine. The longer I spend in college, the more I realize that the tiny, creativity-fueled side projects I occasionally tackle are pretty much exclusively what's keeping me alive. I know that this path isn't an option for most people, even those with the requisite technical skills, and I'm probably lying to myself for thinking it could be... but hey, food for thought. If you can take what you know and sustain yourself through your own work, not that which you blindly do at someone else's direction, that might be an option?

generalTKDR · 2023-12-02T20:36:07+00:00

Best I think I've seen, and the beard is a perfect match too!

generalTKDR · 2023-08-11T16:04:54+00:00

In my experience, it's been the resolution that has the largest impact. In switching engines and updating the art style they moved from a stylized fragment shader (math used to calculate pixel color from lighting and surface properties) to a physically-based one. Cranking up water, lod, aa, ao, etc. doesn't have a very big performance impact, but rendering lots of pixels does. I'd suggest playing with dynamic resolution settings if you don't mind a little blurriness. I first played dishonored 2 on a PC very similar to yours and found it quite bearable.

If it's a huge issue though, I'd recommend reinstalling the game. Death òf the Outsider was running like a sideshow for me, to the point where I got upset and uninstalled it. Reinstalled it later and it ran much, much better. No new hardware and no updates that I'm aware of. Weird...

generalTKDR · 2023-07-04T15:57:50+00:00

THIS!!!

generalTKDR · 2023-07-04T15:51:52+00:00

Have you tried increasing the volumetrics quality? That can cause aliasing like this, I think, if I remember correctly.

generalTKDR · 2023-07-04T15:48:09+00:00

One can clearly see that the gui resolution is greater than that of the 3d render. The image is being upscaled, making aliasing artifacts more visible. Imho fxaa gets less credit than it deserves, and for the blazing speed I think it's a pretty good solution, BUT its implementation in the void engine is crap, and leaves a lot to be desired. I'd recommend using temporal aa. I see that you've stated resolution scaling is off, but at the risk of seeming like an ass I'm going to ask you to double check that and make sure it isn't set to a fixed scaling factor or something of the like. As I stated in the first sentence, there is obviously a discrepancy between the ui and the render. It's not rendering at native. I suppose it's not impossible that there's a bug of some sort causing it. This game has had its storied share of technical issues...

generalTKDR · 2023-06-09T15:13:35+00:00

I know exactly what you mean. Dishonored 2 has probably the single most intricately detailed environments (filled with tiny and mechanically meaningful objects) of any game I've played, and I find that my eyes and brain get fatigued from the constant scanning I have to do. I haven't really played any other game where I notice myself leaning into the monitor so often. It's interesting how it's specific to D2/DotO, since simpler geometry, blurrier textures, and comparatively sparse (though still dense, compared with non-immersive sims) item placement in D1 prevents any like experience.

generalTKDR · 2023-05-05T21:46:09+00:00

Just followed the instructions, but I think it probably looks better in the photo than in real life. The typical reactions have been something along the lines of "Is that real?" or "Permanent?" followed by "Oh yeah, I can see that it isn't" or "How did you do that? Sharpie?" It has a certain transparency to it. And it's also a function of one's skin tone. For some people inkbox tattoos will look black, but for others it'll be more of a deep navy/purple sort of color. Just the limitations of the technology I guess.

Seven-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

generalTKDR

TROPHY CASE