• 1 Post
  • 14 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
Cake day: October 26th, 2025
  • i_need_your_bones ( i_need_your_bones@piefed.social ) to Memes of Production@quokk.au•Wither AwayEnglish
    2·
    12 days ago

    I’d say we risk chasing words and definitions in a circle without much benefit with that method. If we don’t differentiate between the two it makes redicalization easy. People can easily state “no, they’re an idiot, here’s all the factual historical evidence. See? Believe me, don’t believe them, they don’t know what they’re talking about”

    There’s value in differentiating. If someone comes along stating “I believe in communism” and it’s entirely different than what you state you’re going to argue against a specter and be disapointed when the person isn’t a leninist. Most communists aren’t, pretending they are isn’t going to help anything.

    What value does conflation hold? You get to “own the libs” sure with a trump card of “but the USSR!” to any communist sure but that only makes you feel good with no value outside of it. If they use a new term then we completely divorce their belief from its historical context.

    Nobodies stating we ignore precedent. The opposite in fact. Your conflation attempts to seperate the reality of communism and its beliefs from the historical reality of those trying to bring it about. We should be accurate in our representation. These people tried to bring communism to society. Here’s what they’ve tried, here’s how it failed, and here’s why it was wrong. That’s the conversation we should have. Communists should look back at that past and look for another way which isn’t horrific to further their cause. The insistence that we conflate Leninism with the whole idea of communism typecasts the communist into that hole without value to anyone. Do we want that to be the only thing we talk about? Ignore all else? Shut down conversation?

    No, I think not. Communism is an economic and societal system. Leninism is policy. The difference is important. They’ll do it to what you believe too by the way. Find whatever horror they can to justify dismissing you completely. Sure, you should think on that horrible action, address it, but its obviously not defining.

    Sorry for the screed sincerely I understand your point of view. I will always prefer preciseness in speech. Lastly, language is a tool, the fact that others misuse it is meaningless towards how it should be used. If we follow that logic, socialism is now defined as “whatever joe biden did” with how many people call him a socialist. People conflating communism the economic and social system with the policies of the USSR are doing the same.

  • i_need_your_bones ( i_need_your_bones@piefed.social ) to Memes of Production@quokk.au•Wither AwayEnglish
    6·
    12 days ago

    Leninism, I’d argue, not communism is what that argument is against. I agree with you elsewise I’m just a massive pedant.

    Comunism is the end point. A moneyless, stateless, classless society where people provide what they can and recieve what is needed.

    The vanguard party, the state, is intended as an intermediate. A fucking terrible intermediate but an intermediate indeed.

    Not a communist by the way but I do like to make sure the best argument can be given. Vanguard parties are a part of Leninism, intended to achieve communism over time

  • i_need_your_bones ( i_need_your_bones@piefed.social ) toGaming•Yeah let's blame AI and not developers who can't optimize their stuffEnglish
    22·
    16 days ago

    Those computers had to do differentials and other math calculations for small, sole purposes. Alot of the true technology was in the hardware. All the software did was read numbers from the hardware and send a signal to different hardware that then does most of the work. It was a complicated calculator

    A modern application needs to keep track of positiin in the same manner for all items shown, relevant to each camera object, lit by another object at a position, the vector between them all for distance, and then use that to paint a 2d representation of the 3d emulated view which would be seen at a given position from that data, a bunch of flat texture files, and math. Then it does so 60 times a second or more for VR games. That’s just to show you a frame alot more happens. Shaders, game logic, state management, job scheduling…

    The rocket didn’t need to figure out hundreds of curves it needed to take measurements on fuel usage, air drag, time, gyroscopes, etc. to figure out speed, direction, burn rate, and adjust these things in flight. It didn’t need to do this all that quickly either. These are highschool math problems. Definitely a feat to do this all but something one very smart person can write the code for.

    Modern applications do alot more than those rockets. Just for less useful purposes. So many devs touch it too. The language devs, the enfines devs, the library devs, and finally the game devs. Even a solo dev has hundreds of other developers code running with the most minimal engine and language.

    I hate this comparison. Efficiency is a big problem, yes. We should care about it more and accept that we need to start making software slower, and more correct instead of using memory management solutions that obscure it all in a way that allows for every possible solution.

    Its a complex problem but no its not comparable to the moon mission. You can’t just go back to assembly, BASIC, and C directly managing memory and expect a 60 hour game to release every 3-5 years. Even with moderate solutions 3-5 years is a short timeframe when you get into the weeds of memory optimization.