Thus, you have validated my comment you found insulting.

I don’t think insults are going to benefit anyone.

But the logic to perform operations on those tables for a transaction and accounting system must still be written. One of the main aspects of blockchains are exactly such an API.

Transactions are one of the most basic things databases do. Audit trails are also extremely common. Have you done any development that uses a relational database? Nothing you’re describing is difficult or uncommon.

When you buy an NFT, the actual data for compromising the NFT itself is stored somewhere else. The blockchain just has the token proving ownership.

I don’t see how this is a plus or unique. A typical row in a standard table would be like pk, item_id, owner_id, etc. Foreign keys are extremely common.

You are debating so confidently and asserting things so boldly, yet you don’t have the knowledge of the topic that a 2 hour tutorial would give you. That is the real problem

I mean, maybe, but I’m really not getting the impression from you that you know how existing technology works. I’ve been a software developer for more than a decade so I’ve got that going for me.

unique items with serial numbers

record of ownership for items

transaction history of who bought/ sold the item

account balances

All of that is pretty trivial to do in a standard postgres database.

currency to pay for items

I’ve never worked on currency stuff, but my understanding is this is a well understood and developed problem space. No one is blocked on software development because they can’t figure out how to charge a credit card, or implement their own stupid “Microsoft Points” system

all that tied to some external reference to a blob of data that represents the thing being traded

I don’t really understand what you mean by this. Maybe this is a load bearing point of yours?

Sounds like an API layer on top of the DB, though, which is also pretty trivial. Like Gw2Efficiency uses the GW2 api to read the items you have on your account.

For reasons I don’t comprehend, a lot of folks have been fooled by central banking propaganda that “crypto bad; me no like crypto bros”. Alan Greenspan, or whoever is modern equivalent is, ain’t yer buddy. And neither is the PR firm his friend hired to program y’all’s brains via Reddit posts from hundreds of deep socket puppet accounts.

I think it is an error and deeply presumptuous to make that kind of claim about the other people in an argument. How would you feel if I said you were fooled by crypto propaganda? Not likely to change your mind or even have a amicable conversation. Especially if you add the insulting “me no like” phrasing.

There are many reasons to reject NFTs and cryptocurrency that do not stem from being “programmed”.

Involved video gamers (as opposed to people who merely play video games) from my experience, more than a typical person, tend to angrily seek scapegoats for I’m-not-sure-what. Therefore, a successful profitable and enduring enterprise like Ubisoft is one of their favorite targets of ire. So like any angry mob, whatever Ubisoft is doing then they hate it.

People of any sort are susceptible to believing what their group believes. I don’t think “gamers” are more suspectible to this, but they may be louder in spaces like lemmy.

But, to your point, I don’t think people would focus their ire on Ubisoft if they were like “You know what? We decided to let our workers unionize, and we’re getting rid of microtransactions.” I mean, maybe. I don’t know. There are certain groups that if they told me the sky was blue and there was free ice cream, I’d still be suspicious.

You don’t need NFTs or block chain for any of that.

Also, “moving items from ESO to GW2” is utter nonsense. Every piece of that idea is a fever dream. The games have different mechanical rules for how they work (eg: the stat numbers on items, how they behave, who can use them). The technical stack that puts them in the game and on your screen are different. Different engines may have different needs for texture and mesh stuff.

If they wanted to do some sort of cross game promo, some games already do that. TF2 has weird cross game promo stuff. But there’s not really a universe where you can just drag and drop an “item” from one game to another. And even if you could, you don’t need NFTs for that.

Other than soulslikes I pretty much always prefer mouse+KB. Playing bg3 with a controller briefly during a co-op run was just way worse, for example.

I really dislike calver for like libraries and apis. For something like Firefox it doesn’t matter as much. But for a library? I want to know if this version has breaking changes.

Gw2 is the only MMO I’ve played where other people are only a positive. They can’t steal your loot. They can’t mess up your quests. It’s a good game. No gear treadmill, too.

Healthy parenting would go a long way. See some of the other comments in this thread.

You can also have settings on your local network. If you’re afraid of your kid casually finding something inappropriate, you can set that up stuff locally without involving the government. A determined kid will still find a way to get stuff, so this is more a safeguard against accidental discovery.

Investing in quality education would also benefit everyone.

the only way to protect kinds (like little me) is to block the porn.

This is false.

Parents have a number of options available to them that do no need to involve the state.

I know pre 1.x.x is kind of a wild west for versioning but uh is there any logic to the version numbers here? I’d think a new feature would be a minor version bump, not patch

I think I played Ironsworn once. It was pretty okay. We played it GMless, if I’m thinking of the right game. I didn’t really like that group that much, but it was an okay time.

PbtA really rubs me the wrong way and I’m not entirely sure why. Maybe because the two times i’ve played it, I didn’t really like the person running it or how they ran it.

But strangely, I really like Fate. Maybe because it’s biased more towards success. When I played PbtA and BitD I always felt like my character was a fuckup.

I only had the first one. I found it at a yard sale, and luckily they also had the instruction manual and hint book. The game had a check where when you tried to go to the second floor, it would ask you like “what is the third word on the page with a picture of an axe in the corner in the instruction manual?”. Early DRM. If you got it wrong, I’m pretty sure you couldn’t proceed.

The hint book was also written in character from the point of view of someone who had gone before you. It was like an idiot noble and his long suffering servant. Great way of doing it.

My PC game library goes back literally 30+ years. (I think the oldest game I play occasionally is Eye of the Beholder, 1991. The original doom is still good and from 1993)

That has value.

I kind of like the idea of solarpunk and optimism, but I’m not sure about the system.

Using 2d10 instead of 1d20 is cool because, as they describe in the main book, that gets away from the “every outcome is equally likely” problem. So that’s cool.

But otherwise I think this is crunchier than I’m in the mood for. I’d just play Fate nowadays. That even has reasonably good rules for non-violent conflict.

But I appreciate the effort that went into this, and like that it’s not yet more grimdark fantasy or “absolute monarchy is totally cool” gristle.

Do I not know how to use the Internet? I’d expect links to stuff but I see none

I’ve done a lot of “then go get approval from the stakeholder to go ahead with this bug/problem”.

If product wants it out now now now they can sign off on it not working on mobile, so when their boss has a fit about it I can point to the conversation where Ryan said it was fine.

I’ve mostly worked at smaller companies though.

I was a full time test engineer / QA person for a while. My motto quickly became “nothing ever works”.

Pretty much any ticket behind a static copy change would have some problem or oversight. Sometimes even those would (did you account for very narrow view ports?)

Good developers would take this feedback gracefully. “Shit, you’re right, I need to account for mobile users.”

Bad developers would get defensive and upset. “We barely have any mobile users (me: did you check?). Alan already approved so I’m merging. I don’t want to waste time on this”

There was an article recently that showed a Windows XP machine turning into a malware zombie from just leaving it connected to the Internet.

https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/a-windows-xp-machines-life-expectancy-in-2024-seems-to-be-about-10-minutes-before-even-just-an-idle-net-connection-renders-it-a-trojan-riddled-zombie-pc/

That’s going to be windows 10 sometime after they stop updating it.

If you don’t connect it to the Internet it might be safer, but that’s very inconvenient.

Imho any game is either rules-heavy, and as such closer to reality with more defined rules for various situations, or it is rules-light, where GM-Interpretation is other needed to determine what to role. (Or somewhere in between)

I don’t think more rules necessarily mean more like reality. You can have a bunch of rules for grappling, and create a system that anyone who actually does hand-to-hand stuff would say is nonsense.

That said, I think a lot of people would enjoy lighter systems than d20. Maybe not the people who get a kick out of the “lonely fun” of reading about builds online, but the people who just show up to play and the people who are there for a story? They’d probably be happier in Fate.

It helps I’m playing Fate, so it doesn’t require a lot of prep. My 2nd favorite system, CofD, also doesn’t require a lot of prep. Dnd’s math is so wonky it needs more prep.

In both of those systems stats are pretty constrained. A dude has like 5 health levels on average and you don’t need to scale things to player level like that.

I usually have a couple factions in the game that are up to no good. They can always start some shit by kidnapping NPCs or advancing their plots. Maybe today’s the day they dig too deep and a balrog awakens in Central Park.

Here there’s main. You branch off. Do your work. Make a PR to main. Build passes and someone approves, merge to main. Production release is done by tagging main.

The branches are short lived because the units of work we select are small. You have like one pr for an endpoint. You don’t wait until the entire feature with 20 endpoints is ready to merge.

Seems to work fine. I think this is different than trunk based development but honestly I’m not sure I understand trunk.