Does Farmville have a theme song?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g06-b_dlcJY

Well imagine having to go through basically a sequence similar to this multiple times as a 9 year old, to complete the game.

It left an impression.

Crazy sexy fairy lady cackle set to otherwise calm harp music. Pretty damned weird.

Im hearing the fairy grotto music from OoT followed by the crazy giant scantily clad fairy lady screaming/cackling.

Time for a fan fic where Olivia Wilde gets stuck in Motoko Kusanagi’s head (ghost hacked) when Motoko has some strange assignment gathering intel in LA prior to the Mexican - US war from GiTS SAC timeline.

I tried to imagine what the bytes of information inside the computer must look like. Were the circuits like highways, the data packets like motorcycles?

Its ok, I’ll wear mittens and a cap for my winter themed self portrait, hahhaa.

To be fair, lots of human artists cant either, or fucking hate doing scenes with complex finger work, or drawing precise hands in scenes where the hands arent really the focus.

There are reasons why exasperated anime characters hands just turn into balls when they flail about.

Even a lot of video games for a very long time just used something like mitten hands in a lot of cases.

I would just like to point out that being terminally online has almost nothing at all to do with being technically savvy.

Huge numbers of people who are terminally online are really only adept at using tech at a surface level, and often confuse this /skill/ for things like knowing how back end programming works, understanding what software development entails, etc.

Actually technically competent people go to great, astounding lengths to make decent software very easy to use for the average person. UI/UX, front end devs, back end devs, database management, and I would say testing paradigms for possible bugs, but the industry seems to have largely abandoned giving a shit about that.

Even here on lemmy I often find myself in discussions which turn into arguments which turn into me finally realizing that the person I am talking to has absolutely ludicrous ideas about tech, the tech industry or a specific software.

Such people say and truly believe in obviously nonsensical things, or approach topics from a standpoint that makes it obvious they are really just power users of a particular kind of software, and have developed into basically superficially convincing fanboys or fangirls for it.

They reveal that they only have knowledge from a bit of experimentation and mostly just following a whole bunch of uninformed discussion about some new tech buzz word, and lack understanding of the important basic concepts, or actually relevant dynamics at play, which they likely would /not/ believe if they had ever actually worked in the tech industry, or developed their own software, or contributed usefully to some open source project.

A whole key thing about the tech industry is that it is dominated by reverence for impressive sounding tech buzzwords that promise some new and revolutionary feature, when in reality such things are nearly always minor, iterative improvements on something that came before.

A high number of people are easily bamboozled by such things.

Basically… you are not immune to propaganda?

Then tech world has: You are not immune to marketing.

A great example is the current craze over ‘AI’ generated content.

OpenAI, Stable Diffusion, these kinds of things?

None of them are capable of the vast majority of the kinds of processes that describe intelligence, but people will argue vehemently that they do, because they are not tech savvy, do not know anything about how the underlying tech actually works or what its capable of, or even what the word intelligence means.

It can do cool and neat things, and its branded or marketed as AI, so it is!

But, its not.

Specifically for antiwork:

Because they are either generally not very well informed or politically well versed and just know that work sucks,

Or they do not have very much free time to follow meta news about reddit and are unaware of what is going on,

Or they just have not heard of lemmy yet,

Or they have had some kind of technical trouble trying to sign up for or use lemmy in the way they would want to,

Or they are not very not very tech savvy and do not understand the FOSS benefits to a discussion board or why or how thats relevant to capitalism,

Or they are basically hypocrites who prefer an echo chamber that is comfortable to a somewhat less echo chambery option and are really just into the whole scene superficially and do not really actually care for having non contradictory and inconsistent views + personal actions/behaviors.

Lots of them probably fall into different categories and many probably fall into more than one.

See, unlike the communist tankies who would at this moment chant ‘one of us, one of us’…

I will encourage you to aim to to good in an imperfect world where circumstances are often either morally gray, or involve complex factors that are non obvious, but very relevant and important, to learn moral and ethical theories and challenge yourself to actually answer ‘What is good?’.

I will encourage you to /never/ believe you have all the answers to everything, that there is always more than can be learned, and that there are very rarely one size fits all answers to unique and specific situations, and to know that admitting a mistake or error, and reflecting on why or how you came to be in error, is not the sign of a fool, but is the sign of a genuine person striving to be consistent froma starting point of incomplete knowledge and experience.

I will encourage you to challenge your own assumptions, but to be confident when confronted with rhetoric and theories that you yourself can prove are misleading, logically invalid, or outright justify atrocities.

As can probably be reasonably expected, there is an extremely wide range of Anarchist stances on basically the minutia of theory, as well as on what are and are not defensible or moral stances on specific current events or situations, and there are many Anarchist theoreticians who come from many different cultures and backgrounds, and many who focus much more on how Anarchist theory can or should apply to more specific features of our largely capitalist world.

I have tried here to outline the most broadly agreed upon ideas that… well again probably only really Communist Tankies would find fault with, they kind of have a whole history of incorporating anarchists into initial Social Revolutions, and then murdering them all after they have control of their newly acquired state.

They really do not like that Anarchists existed and still exist, they are very convinced, ironically, that they own the ideology that evolved out of Marx, when in truth prominent Anarchists such as Kropotkin and others actually both agreed and disagreed with each other on various issues, and helped form some of both of their views both by antagonism and agreement.

Anyway, entirely unironically:

Live Long and Prosper, and, the Needs of the Many Outweigh the Needs of the Few.

Thanks for the compliment! =)

No problem.

Because no one knows anything whatsoever about actual anarchist political theory.

Largely due to it being heavily suppressed and propagandized against by States, capitalist or ‘Communist’, and their adherents.

Anarchy as thought of by the wide and vast majority of people is simply a state of chaos and violence with no clear rulers.

What Anarchy actually is is fairly simple.

Root words derive from Greek.

An- Prefix: Without

Archon: Tyrant/Cruel and Ruthless Ruler/Undefiable Authority

Non insane Anarchists are always critics of the state, corporate structures of organizing the work place, most forms of organized religion, oppressive social norms and anything that creates and maintains any kind of hierarchy in society that results in oppression, impoverishment or cruelty to any particular group of people for illegitimate reasons.

Anarchy is essentially very similar in many ways to communism as Marx envisioned it, in that it is an idealized, as yet not perfectly defined goal of a just, egalitarian and democratic society that heavily emphasizes people being adequately represented economically in their daily lives as workers, as opposed to the standard liberal capitalist model where your boss essentially has authoritarian power over you in the workplace.

Both Marxism and Anarchism are highly critical of the profit motive and the ability of a very small number of people to own all or much of the capital (means of production such as factories) of a society, for very lengthy and detailed reasons.

A very common misunderstanding is what is truly meant by ‘private property’: most people unfamiliar with Marxism or Anarchism believe that Marxists and Anarchists believe that no one should be allowed to singly, individually own /anything/.

This is false. While many different adherents have different precise definitions, generally speaking private possessions are just fine until they get to the point of owning something directly and singly that has a massive impact on the lives of others should you choose to unilateraly use your ‘property rights’ in a way that is beneficial to you personally, but harmful to a large number of other people.

Further, Marxists and Anarchists both generally agree that ‘property rights’ as we currently conceive of them really only functionally exist for the rich and powerful, and are enforced via the power of the state.

Anarchism significantly differs from many later Marxist derived theories such as Leninism, Stalinism and Maoism that generally emphasize that in order to actually achieve an ideal, non capitalist society, one must create a massive state structure (or subvert an existing one) and place all power to reorganize a capitalist economy into a class of totalitarian economic organizers and planners, and that during this process the state is entirely justified in basically any means of crushing dissent it deems necessary.

This is of course heinous to Anarchists, who view a totalitarian state as essentially criminal.

What modern Anarchists, who are, again, not insane, usually support are working both within and outside of existing norms and government structures to meaningfully improve peoples lives amd expand their rights:

Mutual Aid: Direct Involvement in you local community to feed the hungry, house the unhoused, provide aid to the sick and displaced.

Advocacy: Doing what you can to promote ideas and views that will be beneficial to the masses, or to protect at risk minorities, both within existing formal societal structures like governments and businesses, and also within society generally.

Many modern Anarchists are also very concerned about the power if states and corporations to abuse the environment and curtail freedom of expression.

Anarchy also has another useful definition in the context of a world of nation-states:

Anarchy is that same common understanding of a world without rules and chaos, but the realization that this simply describes our current world given the history of actions of and between nation states, who often engage in many harmful acts against other nation-states and their populations, and rarely actually follow any rules or norms which are supposed, but i actuality rarely do, govern affairs between states. States will often do whatever they believe they can get away with that will benefit themselves, even if it means massively harming another state or group of people.

Finally, if you want to also be a modern technologically savvy anarchist, aka a cyberpunk, you can realize that the advent of computer and digital technology means there no longer exist any actually valid reasons, in very many cases, to actually pay for software, and that you should be an advocate of open source software.

So, in summary, Anarchy is not a state of chaos, without rules.

It is a very complex and nuanced political theory of advocacy for a more equitable and more just society.

No serious Anarchist believes that the world would be better if everyone was free to rum around and do literally whatever they want on an individual scale.

What exact kind of society do they propose?

Well unfortunately that differs wildly from Anarchist to Anarchist, but again, as with how Marxist socialism is but a /process/ of transforming from a capitalist society into an as of yet not perfectly defined communism, Anarchism is a /process/ and /method of analysis/ of how to transform into a better society for everyone.

Because lemmy users tend to be tech literate millennials or older, who were using the internet before it became a widely popular and used thing.

We remember a time before emojis. And to us, there is art, and more meaning in continuing the old ways of using textual symbols in clever ways to convey an emotion.

Emojis are a cop out, a cheap and easy way to do the same, invented for a mass audience that didnt want to do any thinking or be clever in any kind of way and wanted it all handed to them.

I realize this may sound silly but I will die on this hill: emojis are for children and the technically illiterate, they are an appropriation of a culture spawned by some gen x and mostly millennials when the curious of us forged our own way onto what was at one point in time a frontier of seemingly infinite possibility.

Goddamnit these are incredible.

Make this but also he (?) is holding a keyblade while standing in the bridge of the normandy from mass effect, and then you’re on your way to the full VRChat experience