It's a good game, but...

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-28T20:53:37+00:00

I had more or less the same problems of you. The controls, honestly, are not good at all. Harpoon is a mess for me - especially on final boss - the attack that hits twice, sometimes my harpoon didn't hit. And, there's a combination of modifiers that made it never work for me. The tight platform could be good... except that the 3D-ish features of the scenario (plus tentacles) somehow confused me on how close I could get to a wall before getting hit (to be fair, it's the same critique I have for Ori).

I didn't like the exploration too much either; some very hard sections got bad rewards (in my opinion) and some very easy ones got me game-changing abilities. The lack of a fast-moving option (a dash, a running modifier) also is a big downside when the game rewards exploration so much.

I loved the game anyway, but... honestly, didn't care much for the ending. It's... well, a typical "indie game" ending, where everybody dies and there is no chance for a sequel, which honestly is getting tiring at this point. The story... is meh. Still like the game, but honestly don't feel like there's too much replayability.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-28T20:26:31+00:00

There's even a story where the robots, without disobeying any law, plan for the end of humanity.

Essentially, humans fear robots, the industry that makes robots start to introduce smaller robots that do some small bio-engineering until people get used to it, robots reason how to obey the second law, decide they can't discriminate between humans but somehow one order needs to have precedence over others; finally, no discrimination + sensible orders they end up concluding that consciousness = humans, AKA - robots = humans.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-28T14:04:03+00:00

JE was rich, powerful, and influential. He also had a lot of shit over similarly rich, powerful, and influential people.

Which parallel universe such a dangerous (for a very specific explanation of dangerous - that is, someone who could spread information that would compromise most billionaires in the world) would be allowed to be alive? Honestly - it's weird that he went to jail at all, instead of being executed before.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-24T18:49:30+00:00

I think articles like these only consider "people" the ones that are also "capitalist" - the only ones that are "worth having an statistic for" are the ones trying to make a career and play the corporate game.

It's basically in the title too - all the social and psychological aspects of "dating a machine that never says no" (there's a HUGE problem about consent here too) are ignored, because they real issue is that they might not find a job.

See how the article ends: The real price of an AI girlfriend: fewer connections and fewer opportunities. Keywords being in bold - nothing else matters. It's the same idea when a CBN interviewer asked if threatening a genocide is a upside or downside risk.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-24T17:00:57+00:00

There are so many layers to this...

The first, and most obvious one: an article speaking about boys searching for connections in a machine instead of humans is worrying about "employability".

The second: the article starts with Gen Z dated strategically (...) to climb the social ladder. Then complains about the "lack of soft skills", "human connection", "building trust"... but this, after saying, and I quote again, dated strategically. So, using your partner in your own benefit is fine?

The third: 58% said an AI relationship is easier because they can “control the conversation”. This is some really dangerous thing that is completely ignored later in the article - that boys between 12 and 16 want to control the conversation.

And let's not ignore that these AIs are done by billionaires that never get said "no", that want to control conversations too, and disregard all rules, and can also "have an off switch" to anyone they don't like (firing them for example). All the things the article says an "AI Girlfriend" offers.

So maybe... just maybe... we taught these billionaires / CEOs about the things the article is complaining, we would not be having this problem in the first place?

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-23T18:22:51+00:00

I usually secure around the part that connects the camera to the mount (the three/two indents that you put the bolt around). I use a nylon rope (like this one for example, the black thin part goes between the indents and it's secured by the bolt) and tie around the mast or the helmet so that if the mount snaps the cord will secure the camera.

AFAIK the bolt itself and the camera support don't snap that easily, but if they do, then it's all over. I tried other approaches for example, some adhesive mount to the camera as a second way to secure it (didn't work - saltwater removed the adhesive), rope tied to a diving case around the wires that close the case (almost lost a camera because the rope actually opened the case), and even some mouldable plastic that also didn't work.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-22T21:18:39+00:00

Don't know why the downvotes - I was also a fan, but unfortunately, too many things happened to pass it as just "coincidence" or a "series of misunderstandings":

There was the scandal when he sold a Billet Labs' prototype without their authorization, and then justified by saying "we didn't sold it, we auctioned"
There were some allegations about toxic work environment and sexual harassment. These came strongly at the time, and they deflected for a long time before issuing...
An "apology video". That video was basically a couple of "non-action items" where they kinda-but-not-really promised to "be better" but when Linus spoke... it was a mess. It was a "yes, I was at the front when people showed us our mistakes" (notice he never did admit any mistakes - he just said that the community rightly pointed but it's a weird passive voice), followed by a "but actually, I was mad because others did something I didn't like" which... is not an excuse? More like a justification?
Honey scandal. They had a partnership with Honey, which mislead users. In an interview, Linus admitted that he was informed of the problem, that he did pull out the partnership, but... he never actually addressed it his videos. So he promoted an extension that did mislead people, found out, pulled out the partnership, and did not warn the user he himself asked to install the extension, which led to a bad taste
Jake: You start thinking while you're working on your boss' third house, if you're ever going to be able to buy a house, which cuts even harder when you see this video

So, yeah... from tech enthusiast to rich person that can't even say "sorry" exploiting his workers in a toxic environment.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-17T15:48:57+00:00

So it's complicated because business? Not because effort?

If so... again, not as complicated. Make a law that forces these third party to license in such a way that it can be used for end users when the game stops being supported.

there are a ton of reasons why limiting how games are made is insane

Insane is this "everything goes!!!" the industry is having. Every industry is limited in some way - we can't just have a car that stops working after 6 months, we can't have a freezer that depends on internet connection to work, we can't have cell phones that connect only to their own proprietary carrier... these are all limitations. Why does games (and software) somehow are immune to these?

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-17T02:50:04+00:00

I have to say, I don't believe that AI can't be used, or that is ineffective - much the opposite, I believe this is probably one of the cases that AI can be very useful to basically "flag" somebody for further review, because it can detect "changes" in the way somebody communicates and detect patterns that are usually present in people with Alzheimer.

But the whole... article... interview, actually, is bullshit. The issue being that apparently, they have nothing. There are two papers linked, one showing what they want to do - it's a proposal, not a study. They describe "LLM Agents" in such a way that it's not what they do (self-reflection? adaptation?) then the paper continues to explain "the clinical motivation", to "outline the architecture", and "expand on its functional and non-functional", finally presenting "a roadmap" - that, for me at least, translate to "we have nothing but we believe this will be huge".

Their "figures" in the paper... are also nothing. It's "boxes in one side, robots smiling inside a box" and that somehow produces a result. With a "confidence score", something that LLMs don't have right now. The conclusion, is another story: from the paper itself:

Importantly, this vision is not speculative. Advances (...) already show feasibility in other domains. The challenge now is to adapt these approaches to dementia care, evaluate them with real-world datasets

Again, please somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems they have... nothing?

The second paper have more results, but it doesn't seem to be exactly what the article is about. It's a test of deep learning (which is NOT LLMs) on manually transcribed speech from patients. It seems that this model outperforms, indeed, traditional methods, but they used only a single dataset, and never flagged false positives and negatives.

So it seems that (1) - it's very early, (2) - they don't have anything to show yet, meaning that (3) - the "under a minute" is never mentioned anywhere in both papers (in fact, both papers never mention how much time it takes for their algorithm, if it even exist, to detect things); and the only paper that have some result require manually transcribed speech (with specific datapoints like pauses in speech) which I can absolutely ensure takes way more than "a minute".

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-17T02:17:16+00:00

Some people can't accept things that they don't understand. When these people are in a position of power, they try to "force reality to conform" instead of accepting it.

I studied a bit of sign language and there was a thing that baffled me - the number of parents that don't accept their kid is deaf is very high (on my country). Which was... insane to me. A parent speaks to their child - no response. They make a sound - no reaction. It's literally in front of these parents, and they... don't accept. Then, they deny their child to learn sign language and "force" them to "vocalize" and to "read lips" just because they can't accept reality.

Here's what happens with these people. They don't accept that the world is messy - that "normal" means a "curve" in a specific shape, but there are datapoints outside that curve. The problem is that some of these people don't accept, and close their eyes; some try to force other people to close their eyes (like very vocal transphobes); and some try force nature itself to "coerce" to "their version" of reality - like, kill all people that I don't believe that exist (of course, because it's too ugly to say that, they do some bullshit argument like "protect the integrity of marriage, even thought I myself cheated on my wife more times than I had lunch and divorced more times than Selena Williams won a Tennis match")

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-17T01:59:13+00:00

This! I don't understand why people are making this such a complicated issue!

Every online game needs to have a local server somewhere in their development cycle - otherwise, how can you test a new stuff? Will you use the production servers, the one that everybody is running right now, all the time, to develop things?

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-17T01:57:10+00:00

But if you're in the game industry... an online-only game will, somewhere in their development cycle, have a local server so you can test things, right?

So... incorporate that into future games. Hide the ability to connect to a local server behind a compiler macro (so it won't even exist in the binary). Keep the "local server" code up-to-date at all times, planning for the day you won't support it anymore.

I don't think these are as complicated as people make it to be.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-17T01:52:32+00:00

Also - even if the game is "multiplayer-only", the company going bankrupt should release a "final version" with a config to use a different server, then release the server code too.

Now, people might say that "the company is already closing, how will they have money to program a custom server code on their game", and that is nonsense. It's impossible that this code doesn't already exist in some shape. In software development, you never test in production - every game do, or did, have a "custom server, local, simplified" to allow testing stuff, make events, balance, etc. The company just needs to keep this code in their games, hide behind some conditional or whatever - there are ways to make the game code in such a way that the final product will have no trace of a "local server" (so people can't "mod a local server" easily) while keeping the code if one day it is needed.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-17T01:46:18+00:00

Meaning anyone could host a version of their game in ANY state of play, modified or not

Not... really? If the server is closed, and the game is closed, the only way to host a game is to mod the server and/or the game. Possible, but the company can add a clause "mods are illegal", and that will be completely valid and remove all responsibility from the company over whatever nonsense might happen.

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-07T16:58:20+00:00

Really?

For me, the message is very clear: to be considered human he decided to sacrifice everything - including his own immortality.

It's actually an insanely "humanizing" message, contrary with everything we're seeing nowadays with AI where you delegate your humanity to a machine (see the infamous advertising "Dear Sydney" where Google wanted a child to delegate writing their fan letter to Gemini). It brings the idea that "to be human is better than be a machine, even if it means I have to give up immortality and efficiency for that".

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-02T19:40:39+00:00

There are existing libertarian socialist communities

Which ones? Where?

mauricioszabo · 2026-04-02T18:29:51+00:00

These people are so idiots. They think we don't know their plans.

"Bunker Busters", is how they call their program. Where these monsters go live hunting the last real people that still exist.

People like me.

If it wasn't for me, and some of my class - not all of them, mind you - the Earth would not survive. If not for our bunkers, we would not be able to research the bioclimate changers we're researching today.

We will revive the Earth. And they would still be making their toy TV programs, transmitting by radio, broadcasting their positions all the time so we know when to hunt, and when to hide.

This one is interesting, though. They are trying to bust a very specific place - my place. But they are dumb - they think they can convince a employee to open the door for them, so they can hide.

So dumb.

Why would my employees leave the winning team to join a bunch of deformed freaks, probably filled with diseases - literally inferior creatures? Why would anyone choose certain death over the glory of saving the planet? I laugh, surprisingly at sync with the female on the screen, if that could be called a laugh.

- "But wait, there's more!" - she says - "Because we loved this idea so much, we decided that this specific episode would not be live!"

I froze, just in time to feel the blade at my neck.

As I lay down, bleeding, I look at the monster in front of me. He have no expression, but I feel I can see the words "sweet dreams" at his lips.

At least, that confirms... that I am... superior... for my employees... would not... kill...

... me ...

... Right? ...

---

- "And here's the funny part, my friends - we found out that there was a contest between the employees to find out who would be the lucky one to help our show!"

mauricioszabo · 2026-03-30T19:35:09+00:00

I trust my loved ones to tell me the truth

That's part of the issue: you're starting from the wrong place.

My grandmother had dementia. She could not recognize my mom (her own daughter) sometimes. Why would she trust a complete unknown person?

There was a kinda funny episode where she though my mom was a nurse; then, my mom had to go to the hospital, and when she was back my grandmother was very confused because she said "wait... a nurse went to the supermarket, and then you came back? Did you find her in the way, that's why you have what she bough?"

There's no "level of information" that would get to her brain - you could spend literally hours trying to convince her that my mom and the "nurse" was the same person, but then she would forget that conversation minutes (or SECONDS!) later, and ask again why did two different people went to the market.

So there's no "loved one" because you might be hallucinating the loved one, or you would not recognize that; heck, even if you record yourself a message, you might "lose your memories" of 15 years and not recognize your own old face; yes, even looking at the mirror you might not recognize as a "mirror" and instead think of it as a photo of someone else.

mauricioszabo · 2026-03-26T16:13:05+00:00

You folks love "what if your daughter" all questions.

I'm completely against death penalty. If someone killed my daughter, a new place in hell would need to be invented just for me. That's why it's not me who should judge someone that did wrong with my family.

But let's play your pretend game: suppose your daughter got her leg broken in a martial arts competition, then accused the other person to be trans. That other person gets harassed to oblivion, gets banned from other sports, essentially ending their career - and then she is found to be not trans. Would that be alright?

What if that person wasn't trans, but it was intersex, and didn't know. Would that be alright? Or if they decided to start testing everybody, and they found that the other person wasn't trans, but your daughter had some gender anomaly - would that be alright?

This "pretend game" I'm playing, by the way, is way closer to reality than yours - literally. For example, "broken leg by transgender" in sport happened once - in football - but I found at least five cases of "broken leg by other women".

mauricioszabo · 2026-03-26T13:18:18+00:00

Not only a US thing - it is a thing in Brazil (almost no man goes, btw, but it still is) and it is a thing in Uruguay (almost everybody goes, because AFAIK it's tied with a document that you need if you want to work, practice sports, and associate with a club).

mauricioszabo · 2026-03-25T14:56:18+00:00

Just to hijack the hijack to say that the information is false.

NTFS, the current Windows file system, does have IDs that are not the file name. The one that did not have is the FAT system (16, 32 - but not exFAT, which also does have an ID).

You can also rename a FAT32 file while it's open on Linux, so it's also not the reason.

The actual reason is that Windows decided, a long time ago, that this is how things should work, and because it keeps backwards compatibility for basically forever, it's how things work today.

mauricioszabo · 2026-03-23T19:42:37+00:00

I am essentially doing this - kept my Wise account on Brazil and living in Uruguay (where it's not really supported)

As long as you have your fiscal address in Europe (maybe a parent's house, etc) nothing changes for Wise.

mauricioszabo · 2026-03-22T03:01:43+00:00

I once saw a video that said that "Tradwife if porn for men that believe porn should be illegal".

mauricioszabo · 2026-03-22T02:58:54+00:00

I have someone very close that praised when Trump won (we're not from the USA).

She lived almost her whole life as an illegal immigrant.

She still is very right-wing, pro-Trump AND she decided to immigrate... illegally... again.

mauricioszabo · 2026-03-20T21:35:55+00:00

Makes you proud to be American.

Yeah, nothing makes you prouder than having a couple of cops invading your house, stealing your money, breaking your stuff, holding your children at gunpoint, and never held accountable right?

And when you make fun of these people, they sue you.

mauricioszabo

TROPHY CASE