MDKAOD

joined 1 year ago
[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

I've tried to roll out Borg a few times over the years and always hit a roadblock for one reason or another. Perhaps it was the lack of any front end at all and Borg just chilling in the background, but the documentation was never really clear on what the next steps were.

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It compiled, and you could run around. That's 'playable' in my opinion. Playable is the baseline, i.e. you can play it, but why would you want to. Bad Rats or Big Rigs: Over The Road Racing are also playable, and those are complete experiences.

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This comment is a little silly imo. There already is a GTA6. It's been leaked in a playable form and we already know some of the storyline. The marketing machine has already started ramping up.

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Just a suggestion, but a short term UI/UX solution for this might be as simple as a badge or label suggesting that X instance is defederated from Y instance and that the users content will only be visible to their home instance.

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 68 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Have you tried Firefox? It's a great lemmy client

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That headline is funny as hell

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Yay. Break my extensions yet again papa Mozilla! :(

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

My thoughts are to consider greenpeace a media production company. Coordinate a b-roll shoot under a pseudonym to access the property, stage your shots and leave. There's no footage of the activists getting arrested on the story this post links to, and the fabric clearly isn't oil drenched, it's just "oil-black" (I. E. The name of the color, not the state of the fabric)

Greenpeace gets their marketing materials and the estate gets some cash.

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion. Certainly there's an element of risk, but I imagine that both parties operate under pseudonyms for exactly that reason.

A point of order here, while you're welcome to criticize my opinion, you also haven't addressed my reasons for doubt.

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Greenpeace is a marketing company. They product they're pushing is green technologies. Broadly speaking, and obviously without direct knowledge, its possible to buy access to a property for a photo or movie shoot to achieve whatever message they're pushing. Everything is for sale for the right number. It's not unfathomable that greenpeace bought a permit and/or permission for this stunt, even if using legal loopholes suggesting they were just shooting a film.

So greenpeace gets their marketing piece, and PM estate gets paid.

Just saying it's not an implausible scenario. 🤷🏼‍♂️

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

Look, that's presumably a high security home. They just walked on in set up ladders and climbing gear. Took a bunch of photos along the way, drooped what in-my-opinion is nondestructive black fabric over the house, took more photos and ~~left~~ waited around until they got arrested.

The article keeps emphasizing "oil black fabric" but oil is wet, and that fabric looks dry. Are there aftermath photos?

I'm suggesting this was coordinates by greenpeace and the person they "attacked"

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (11 children)

I applaud the message but this is such a photo OP stunt. Fully geared up with hard hats and greenpeace hivis gear, carrying extendable ladders thst collapse to briefcase size fully extended...

In my mind, photos like this are super sus and feels like this was coordinated and approved to keep up appearances.

view more: ‹ prev next ›