daywalker's recent activity

  1. Comment on Under development: WoW Remix: Mists of Pandaria (not classic) in ~games

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    That's why I prefer more lateral MMOs, like Guild Wars 2 or Elder Scrolls Online. They have different systems that allow a wider choice of picks for endgaming, especially GW2.

    That's why I prefer more lateral MMOs, like Guild Wars 2 or Elder Scrolls Online. They have different systems that allow a wider choice of picks for endgaming, especially GW2.

    5 votes
  2. Comment on Under development: WoW Remix: Mists of Pandaria (not classic) in ~games

    daywalker
    Link
    It's insane how this is presented only as a temporary thing, while you can play all the maps as endgame content in many MMOs. It's a step in the right direction, for sure, but I think it's still...

    It's insane how this is presented only as a temporary thing, while you can play all the maps as endgame content in many MMOs. It's a step in the right direction, for sure, but I think it's still missing the mark. At least for me. I always disliked how WoW's massive world and stories were made moot by the focus on the latest expansion. I feel like it has so much to offer: its world is massive, it has decades of content. If only the game took some pages from different approaches.

    3 votes
  3. Comment on Best "dad" jokes and puns! in ~talk

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    Lmao true :sob: But I won't correct it!

    Lmao true :sob: But I won't correct it!

    1 vote
  4. Comment on Best "dad" jokes and puns! in ~talk

    daywalker
    Link
    Why did the mermaid give up wearing sea cups? She grew to B cups!
    Why did the mermaid give up wearing sea cups?

    She grew to B cups!

    2 votes
  5. Comment on Tildes is changing the way I use and think about online engagement. How about you? in ~tildes

    daywalker
    Link
    It made me reconsider my approach to online forums and social media. Places like Reddit have a very aggressive and debate-centric approach. Just like cfabbro, I was anxious of receiving...

    It made me reconsider my approach to online forums and social media. Places like Reddit have a very aggressive and debate-centric approach. Just like cfabbro, I was anxious of receiving notifications in these sites. Especially if I had made a controversial comment. While this is not completely gone, I think I realized how much I miss conversations, rather than takedowns.

    For example, I made a controversial comment the other day. It attracted some heat, but after I explained myself, I was surprised to see it was very well-received. This is not something I'm used to seeing, because people generally dismiss it and double down, even going as far as hurling insults.

    One of the strongest sides of Tildes is, for me, people being willing to listen. It feels really nice! And people do read the follow-up comments, too, which is part of this conversation-centric approach.

    As a result of this, I'm trying to change my habits regarding online forums. There are two reasons. First is that I would much rather have this than what I've seen elsewhere so far. The second is that I don't want to disturb the habitat too much, so to speak. There's been an influx of new members, and I'm one of them, but this part of the site is what attracted me in the first place, and I want to preserve it. This requires unlearning things and learning, developing some new habits.

    With this being said, I have some doubts about the extent of healthy communication on what I call open social media sites, where the mode of interaction is different from conversations among friends. I'm still in the process of considering various angles, and whether this is something I want for me. But for now, I can say that I do appreciate this place.

    21 votes
  6. Comment on Chechnya 'bans music that is too fast or too slow' in ~music

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    No, it's not misplaced. Once you grow up with things like this, you start seeing the humor in the absurdity of it all. At least certain people do. It feels better than being gloomy and sad about...

    No, it's not misplaced. Once you grow up with things like this, you start seeing the humor in the absurdity of it all. At least certain people do. It feels better than being gloomy and sad about it all the time. So, yes, while it's a tragedy, it's also incredibly desperate on the side of conservatives and authories, and really funny.

    18 votes
  7. Comment on Chechnya 'bans music that is too fast or too slow' in ~music

    daywalker
    Link
    This is incredibly funny, and reminds me once again how universe is so random, including the human part of it.

    This is incredibly funny, and reminds me once again how universe is so random, including the human part of it.

    5 votes
  8. Comment on Why do negative topics dominate social media sites, even here? in ~tech

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    Oh, I do curate my feed. But I don't login on my phone, and when I browse Tildes there I'm reminded how different the regular main page is from my own, which prompted me to create this discussion.

    Oh, I do curate my feed. But I don't login on my phone, and when I browse Tildes there I'm reminded how different the regular main page is from my own, which prompted me to create this discussion.

    4 votes
  9. Comment on Why do negative topics dominate social media sites, even here? in ~tech

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    Thanks for the feedback! You are right that Tildes doesn't exist in a bubble, and while original content is also part of the site, majority of content is posted from external sources, therefore...

    Thanks for the feedback! You are right that Tildes doesn't exist in a bubble, and while original content is also part of the site, majority of content is posted from external sources, therefore affected by rest of the internet and media.

    4 votes
  10. Comment on Why do negative topics dominate social media sites, even here? in ~tech

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    I can definitely see this having an effect. The kind of sites I'm talking about emotionally rewards people for getting clicks, and negatively framed topics have a lower entry barrier. If I combine...

    I can definitely see this having an effect. The kind of sites I'm talking about emotionally rewards people for getting clicks, and negatively framed topics have a lower entry barrier. If I combine it with this comment's input, I think we can speculate that the mode of socialization is very different from day-to-day conversations, or online chatting spaces that are closer to more "natural" conversations. As a result, this kind of setting, unless specifically curated or moderated, tends to get dominated by such issues.

    I think this tracks with some of the things I read in literature about communication on social media. A lot of them emphasized that the communication quality is poorer because of multiple reasons that make it different from "natural" communication modes. From what I gather, it's basically because the impersonal and distant structure makes it hard for the brain to approach conversations as if they are made with real people, even though it's true, and this leads to a lot of poor behavior. I think it's likely that this affects what we talk about too, maybe even dehumanizing us in the process.

    Your comment, and other comments, made me think more on the structure of such sites and its effects on communication. Some things are clearer now. Thanks for the insight :)

  11. Comment on Why do negative topics dominate social media sites, even here? in ~tech

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    This makes a lot of intuitive sense to me. I think it's very likely that it has an effect. Thanks for the insightful take!

    This makes a lot of intuitive sense to me. I think it's very likely that it has an effect. Thanks for the insightful take!

    2 votes
  12. Comment on Why do negative topics dominate social media sites, even here? in ~tech

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    The conflict angle is very interesting, and thank you for bringing it up. However, I'm not inclined to agree that conflict necessarily brings domination of negative topics. Conflict has a very...

    The conflict angle is very interesting, and thank you for bringing it up. However, I'm not inclined to agree that conflict necessarily brings domination of negative topics. Conflict has a very broad and loose definition. For example, talking about the positives and negatives of an art piece, criticizing it, also brings conflict, but it's much different than the ones I'm talking about in the topic at hand. Still, I will think about the conflict angle more :)

    3 votes
  13. Comment on Why do negative topics dominate social media sites, even here? in ~tech

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    I'm sorry but while I see the merit of being the change on some level, this approach is overly reductive. The answer to what I'm talking about is not ignoring any critical topic or conversation....

    I'm sorry but while I see the merit of being the change on some level, this approach is overly reductive. The answer to what I'm talking about is not ignoring any critical topic or conversation. That's why I framed the topic in terms of domination, rather than the mere existence of such topics. This kind of solution also puts the entire responsibility on the shoulders of the critic, which is a very convenient way to dismiss such issues. It also reduces it to a simple issue of personal responsibility, which is never a solution to communal problems.

    I also think the framing of critical issues is also very important in terms of its emotional impact on people. Criticism is a tough issue, and I definitely agree that there can be overly destructive critical inclinations in some communities. But simply questioning things, asking people for feedback, trying to understand—these are not an overly grim framing. I'm trying my best to approach this issue with curiosity and conversation facilitation, which I find to be more healthy for me and other people I've interacted with.

    6 votes
  14. Comment on Why do negative topics dominate social media sites, even here? in ~tech

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    But why would it be a given that such sites have to be dominated by [political] news? There are plenty of fandom, art, music, hobby, literature topics, not to mention day-to-day life topics. These...

    But why would it be a given that such sites have to be dominated by [political] news? There are plenty of fandom, art, music, hobby, literature topics, not to mention day-to-day life topics. These are the things that dominate a lot of my conversations in real life.

    Also, I mentioned it in the thread. Facebook, at least the feeds of my friends and I many years ago, weren't dominated by negative topics. Chatting platforms, such as Discord, also have plenty of various sized spaces that aren't dominated by such topics. To add, not social media sites themselves, but the smaller fandom communities in them also often are very positive.

    5 votes
  15. Why do negative topics dominate social media sites, even here?

    This is a question I eventually ask about every social media site I use(d). I like Tildes, and the discussions here are much more constructive than any other place I've seen, however I've seen it...

    This is a question I eventually ask about every social media site I use(d). I like Tildes, and the discussions here are much more constructive than any other place I've seen, however I've seen it to be true even here. When one doesn't curate their feed, and use the default home page, the negative topics seems to dominate. I'm talking about the topics that talk about problems and what's wrong with something, often with titles implying the awfulness or emergency of such a problem. I think I don't need to elaborate on how this is much more prevalent and extreme on other sites. But nevertheless, it's a recurring pattern even here.

    I know the argument that goes that humans are problem-fixing machines, and that there are psychological incentives to focus on problems. However, this seems overly reductive and lacking in explanatory power to me. Outside of internet, this is not a phenomenon I've experienced with people, unless they were mentally going through something very rough. Otherwise, people generally seem to talk about neutral or positive issues. And even while talking about negative issues, the tone often isn't grim, and doesn't leave a depressive aftertaste.

    Even on the internet, in smaller spaces and more closed spaces, like chatting servers, this doesn't seem to hold true. Sure, there are politically-oriented, and therefore problem-oriented spaces even there, but most spaces don't seem to be that way. Back when I used Facebook too, while the posts were vain, most of my friends and acquaintances were just interested in sharing and commenting on social lives.

    So I think this is a problem that is more endemic to "open" social media sites, with easily accessible and open-to-public spaces, rather than applying to the whole humanity or even every internet space. Its one of my biggest head scratchers about social media sites. So far I couldn't find a satisfactory explanation in the literature either. Doesn't mean there isn't, but I haven't stumbled upon such.

    So, I'm interested in your opinions: Why do negative topics dominate on open social media sites, even here, unless curated against? Why is this such a strong recurring pattern for sites structured like this, while it's not in other online and physical spaces and interections I mentioned?

    54 votes
  16. Comment on Scattered thoughts on the absurdity of existing in ~talk

    daywalker
    (edited )
    Link
    Content warning for my reply Talk of suicide in hypotheticals. I am a materialist, and I don't believe there is anything metaphysical about existence. Due to some health conditions, I've had to...
    Content warning for my reply

    Talk of suicide in hypotheticals.

    I am a materialist, and I don't believe there is anything metaphysical about existence. Due to some health conditions, I've had to start facing the fear of death at a young age. As a philosophizing person, this led me to question many many many things about life.

    At the current moment, I "enchant" my view of the universe with cosmic horror. Lovecraft grasped a fundamental truth about the universe: it is vast, and its laws don't care about us. He then turned these laws into dark gods, and wrote stories based on this. Simply trying to grasp or being exposed to their truth was enough to drive people mad.

    I sometimes think of this short essay, "An Alien God". The author argues that if there is a god, it's evolution, and that it's a Lovecraftian god.

    In a way, Darwin discovered God—a God that failed to match the preconceptions of theology, and so passed unheralded. If Darwin had discovered that life was created by an intelligent agent—a bodiless mind that loves us, and will smite us with lightning if we dare say otherwise—people would have said "My gosh! That's God!"

    But instead Darwin discovered a strange alien God—not comfortably "ineffable", but really genuinely different from us. Evolution is not a God, but if it were, it wouldn't be Jehovah. It would be H. P. Lovecraft's Azathoth, the blind idiot God burbling chaotically at the center of everything, surrounded by the thin monotonous piping of flutes.

    Which you might have predicted, if you had really looked at Nature.

    As a life scientist, I subscribe to this notion, to some extent. The universe is too often and too profoundly hostile. There are trillions of animals that die each year, in a single planet, among hundreds of billions of galaxies, which probably contain at least billions of life-contaning planets each. If a person is horrified by humanity's destruction of life, then it should declare nature the most abusive thing to exist.

    Yet life is also beautiful. It enchants us. More specifically, there is room for growth, love, compassion, excitement, and similar things. These are not distributed equally to everyone, and for some it's sadly almost nothing but misery. But... that's the thing. I am alive. I am an individual. I was born into this world. I was thrust into existence. So, focusing on the bad parts, no matter how awful or cosmically evil they may be, does not help me. In fact, it makes it worse. Therefore, it's not logical for me to keep focusing on the meaninglessness of life.

    A related concept is mind-dependent value. There's this article that talks about it, which changed my perspective. Basically, while there is no mind-independent value in the universe, we can find mind-dependent values. In other words, we can find values that are based on the human mind.

    I think, based on these two postulates, we can deduce that the logical thing to do is to affirm one's own life., because doing otherwise is only hurtful to the person. After all, if I adapt a value system and outlook on life that run contrary to the emotional needs of my mind, it will hurt. It will deny life, my own life, and the end of that reasoning is suicide. And unless under extreme circumstances with incurable and very painful ailments, I don't think we should affirm suicide. Because there's a more mind-dependently meaningful way.

    For this reason, I'm trying to affirm life, but not in a Nietzschean eternal recurrence way that doesn't solve the problem at all. It's by trying to find happiness and meaning, and by building tolerance for the ails of life. This requires me to take care of my physical and mental health, and invest in developing emotional skills, which I'm currently working on.

    So this is my approach to this problem at the moment of writing this. Universe's powers are chaotic, whimsical, unfeeling gods, rather than the ultimate parent-projections of Abrahamic religions. This results in a fundamentally unjust existence. But focusing on that only enhances this injustice. So I adapt, and try to strengthen the fire within.

    "Cells consume. Life itself is wrong, and that means death is right. But you can't side with that. So you live, even when it means eating."

    5 votes
  17. Comment on What's a game that you feel is almost great? in ~games

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    Yeah, it's definitely a gem for me, and will always will be. Just one with some problems that keep it from being among the greatest. Edit: u/payitforward

    Yeah, it's definitely a gem for me, and will always will be. Just one with some problems that keep it from being among the greatest.

    Edit: u/payitforward

  18. Comment on What's a game that you feel is almost great? in ~games

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    Oh, nice. It's been occasionally on my mind but I haven't played it yet. But that sounds cool.

    Oh, nice. It's been occasionally on my mind but I haven't played it yet. But that sounds cool.

    1 vote
  19. Comment on Dragon’s Dogma 2’s combat is sloppy and unrefined — on purpose in ~games

    daywalker
    Link Parent
    I took no offense, but I'm not sure if my point came across. My only point is that one can write about these things without experiencing them first-hand, and that it's not always obvious to tell....

    I took no offense, but I'm not sure if my point came across. My only point is that one can write about these things without experiencing them first-hand, and that it's not always obvious to tell.

    Edit: I'm not trying to pass any judgement one way or another.

  20. Comment on What's a game that you feel is almost great? in ~games

    daywalker
    Link
    Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen I've been a fan for years. It has a great class system, an extremely detailed character creation screen, many very fun and unique (within its own bounds) enemy designs...

    Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen

    I've been a fan for years. It has a great class system, an extremely detailed character creation screen, many very fun and unique (within its own bounds) enemy designs that require you to strategize. It has a lot of details I appreciate too, like weight and height affecting your various stats, visually distinct and diverse body parts. However, its story is very uninspired, the pawns (your NPC party members) feel extremely soulless, its world feels tiny and static. So, while it has a special place in my heart and I play it every few years, I can't say that it's overall a great game. Great in a lot of aspects, for sure, but very wanting in some others.

    Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning

    It's been a long while since I played it, but I remember it being quite a charming game. Its world, combat, class mechanics, all had a particular taste. But also at some level they all fell short of their potential. I remember the game both fondly and with disappointment.

    Elder Scrolls Online

    It could have been an excellent solo-driven MMORPG, truly unmatched in this niche. It's unique in its design in the sense that it has thousands of voiced quests, very solo-friendly design, a semi-lateral progression system that's also kind of endless, many unique races to choose from, character creation options that are far better than vast majority of MMOs, extremely detailed worldbuilding, several NPC guilds to choose from and RP as (e.g. assassin, thief), great housing system... yet it's awful in a lot of other aspects. Monetization is god awful and predatory, the yearly expansion release system created many subpar quality content due to time-constraints, its releases are very formulaic, most content is laughingly easy after a while, and of course, the combat is really wanting.

    I feel like this game has a lot of highs and lows, which make it both attractive and frustrating. I suspect it could have had a much better reception if a few things were changed.

    Remnant: From the Ashes

    It's the only "Dark Souls with guns" game I truly like. It truly did a great job in that regard. Its visuals and atmosphere are also within range of good. However, lack of NG+, and a weak story and worldbuilding make it fall short of something more.

    8 votes