AFAICT MASD is an iteration on MDE which incorporates parts of MAD but not in a direct fashion.
Lots of acronyms there.
These types of systems do exist, they just aren’t mainstream because there hasn’t been a version of them that could be easily used for general development outside of the specific mid-level niches they are built in.
I think it’s the goal, but I’ve not seen anything come close yet.
Admittedly I’m not an authority so it may just be me missing the important things.
so, MASD(or MDE) then ?
A worldwide revolution in which everyone unites against the “ruling class” isn’t a viable alternative in and of itself, that’s like saying “world peace”.
An example of an alternative would be something which could fill in the blank in this sentence and make sense.
“Don’t boycott products/companies, that isn’t how you achieve your goal, what you should be doing is <BLANK>”
This is not a war between nations but a war between class
The issue i have with this isn’t that it’s a marxist cliche (i’ll take your word on that, I’ve no idea) it’s that it presents a false dichotomy in which a class war and a national war can’t both be occurring at the same time.
I suspect more people than you think realise this is a potential outcome.
Assuming it boils over before there is another election (also assuming that’s a thing that happens), military action is 100% a playable card.
It’s a toddler with a nuclear tantrum button.
It’s honestly not that much different in type then most nuclear powered nations.
The difference is “absolute last resort, and only maybe then” vs “they won’t let me annex Greenland and are being mean to me”
Hyperbolic ofc, but illustrative.
What are the reasonable good alternatives though?
Americano is not even American
I mean that’s a pretty specific phrasing.
I said it’s not American, as in it doesn’t come from the US.
Those are not the same things, but i know what you mean now, so thanks.
a sequel is in the works : https://www.remedygames.com/games/control-2
fair enough
At this point, surely its just easier to say he deported 700k people than to actually do it, his supporters can’t possibly care about fact checking his statements so why bother making them factual.
Also, i know it sounds stupid, but check it anyway…have you removed the plastic cover (if there is one ) on the cpu cooler side.
Hah, 3 whole comments, all of them nuts.
Another bot for the blocklist.
ah, my bad, that was two different responses, only the first line was directed at you.
i’ve edited the response to be clearer.
edit: for clarity
That’s a lot of assumptions about the poster but I can see how you got there.
Below is a response to the idea of supremacy in general, not a response to @chuckleslord@lemmy.world
That seems like a particularly stupid and relatively indefensible hill to die on, but I suppose if you are going to plant a supremacist flag, you haven’t really used well reasoned arguments to get there in the first place.
Why not just go with “I disagree with them to such a degree that I wish them and any like them, dead” ?
No need to base it on utterly and stupidly false claims.
how did you get to supremacist from that? genuine question
That’s one of the reasons why you get delayed or cancelled, over-budget projects that go nowhere. ( another big one is corruption and general financial shenanigans ).
if you throw a lot of money at a problem/project that doesn’t have reasonable management and competent understanding of where that money could work efficiently then you’re asking for trouble.
Destinating more resources to that quickens and makes better that process, though, incentivating people to work on it and test it.
That is charmingly naive, in my experience.
I’m not saying more money wouldn’t help, I’m saying throwing money at it isn’t generally a stand-alone solution, which is what i think the person you were replying to was trying to say.
It’s similar in that you presented a position that was not backed up by a reasonable interpretation of the data you also provided.
What you did was different, in that is was a brief misunderstanding of the wording rather than a fundamental misunderstanding of causation and correlation.
it didn’t seem defensive as much as dismissive.
Honestly i could have just been reading tone in your response that wasn’t there, i get that wrong more often than i would like, if so i apologise.
The gist you actually provided was “you are doing a bad thing and I’m disappointed in you, smh” and then proceeded to do something very similar followed by a non-apology.
I actually agree with your point but it’s still a shitty way to do it.
That’s exactly my point, you are taking the stance that people didn’t buy alan wake because it wasn’t on steam, to a degree that’s true, i’m saying that i think a larger proportion didn’t buy it specifically because it was on EGS.
If it were released as a game you could buy and play sans-platform, then i’d agree with you. It’d certainly see less sales than a steam release, because steam is where everyone is.
My stance is basically if you remove steam entirely, Standalone Sales > EGS. Add steam back in and you get Steam > Standalone > EGS
Think in terms of food, you’re basically saying the it’s the fault of the 3.5 star monopolistic countrywide chain fast food place that nobody want’s to eat at the recently health-inspection-failing 1 star food-poisoning cafe.
Is there a monopoly, sure, is the competition so bad people avoid it regardless of the monopoly, also yes.
If you were using something like GOG as an example, i’d fully agree with you, but EGS has seemingly infinite funds and they still managed to release something so bad nobody wants to use it, even for “free” games.
It’s not even just the platform, epic as a company have a reputation, so they have to also overcome that, which they have not.
That’s a terrifying amount of power that people aren’t bothered by
Historically there’s been no need to be worried, generally, i agree that’s not ideal, but again name a viable comparable alternative.
even though we’re talking about company that’s smug about selling gambling to children.
You mean as opposed to the company that actually lost a class action regarding loot boxes in their game targeted at children?
You aren’t even wrong about this but “People don’t buy games from this company who famously lost a lawsuit regarding gambling targeted at kids because this other company who also do sketchy kids gambling things are …better at PR?” isn’t a convincing argument.
Everyone should be better at this, but they aren’t.
I will preface this with : I have many games that are not in steam that I play regularly, I understand this isn’t the norm, I have zero paid games in EGS and outside of checking the platform I never use it.
Alan wake on EGS is a terrible example to support your claim.
It’s like being upset that a fancy new car hasn’t recouped costs when it’s only available in 4 custom made dealers that are only open half the time and the manufacturer refuses to allow it to be sold in all the places people normally buy cars.
Sure, that is certainly a choice but it’s a choice that would have been part of the risk assessment before the money was sunk.
Steam does have a monopoly, because it works and there isn’t anything better.
There is a bit of resistance to switching, most game libraries are in steam because it’s been the best option for a very long time.
If EGS worked well and epic (outside of unreal engine) wasn’t such a shitshow the platform would be fine.
It’s doesn’t and they aren’t so it’s not.
It can’t compete on features, support or stability so it tried exclusivity, that hasn’t worked out for them.
Steam has its own shit, sure, that percentage is some apple level monopolist bullshit.
Name a comparable, viable alternative?
My experiences are similar to yours, though less k8’s focused and more general DevSecOps.
This is mentioned in the link as “Barely General Enough” I’m not sure i fully subscribe to that specific interpretation but the trade off between generalisation and specialisation is certainly a point of contention in all but the smallest dev houses (assuming they are not just cranking hard coded one-off solutions).
I dislike the yaml syntax, in the same way i dislike python, but it is pervasive in the industry at the moment so you work with that you have.
I don’t think yaml is the issue as much as the uncontrolled nature of the usage.
You’d have the same issue with any format as flexible to interpretation that was being created/edited by hand.
As in, if the yaml were generated and used automatically as part of a chain i don’t think it’d be an issue, but it is not nearly prescriptive enough to produce the high level kind of model definitions further up the requirements stack.
Which then brings use back to the generalisation vs specialisation argument, do you create a hyper-specific dsl that allows you only to define things that will work within the boundaries of what you want, does that mean it can only work in those boundaries or do you introduce more general definitions and the complexity that comes with that.
Whether or not the solution is another layer of abstraction into a different format or something else entirely i’m not sure, but i am sure that raw yaml isn’t it.