I really enjoyed it when it was airing. I don't know if I'd enjoy a rewatch today, because the writing is rough in several places.
I feel its kind of similar to agents of shield where they outlived their original plan and had to adapt and come up with new plot arcs (and I think it shows, in both series). Though, I think their forced adaptions created some of the best new and interesting sci-fi concept explorations to come to TV for a while.
I'm also a sucker for "then it got worse" type shows, where the characters are struggling and doing their best to improve their situation, but every step forward is followed by being pushed a couple steps back through no fault of their own.
All that being said, I like S2 of The 100 best. S1 of the show is probably up there, starting after
. I think once that happens, its clear this is not a typical CW show.
I believe Rimu said that following users would be possible in the next update. Not positive when the update is coming, but probably next couple weeks or sooner.
Yes, but I'm not sure it will be to the same extent.
I think gamifying the setup leads to internal competition that will push them harder to make sure there is evidence of their results. That may have them make questionable decisions that they wouldn't otherwise, if they didn't need the evidence dog their efforts.
Additionally, I suspect the public points system cuts back on disgruntled-ness, as units can easily see how they compare to others. It also allows them to see who to talk to, to see how to improve their results.
So, pros and cons to the gamification, but I think the pros are going to win out. I doubt that's a good thing though...
I really don't like the idea of game-ifying war and I agree with your critiques and think you bring up a good point about non-pointed aspects of the military could potentially become ignored.
That being said, I think the system is here to stay and will be implemented worldwide. I think the system reduces/prevents/solves a couple major issues.
The first being: pics or it didn't happen, prevents false reporting up the chain of command. Allows for actually well performing soldiers being promoted (with a paper trail) rather than those who only claim to be. Also allows higher ups to make war plans based on real, not falsified Intel. My understanding is Russia has a massive issue with this, but all/most former Soviet-bloc countries struggle with this more than average.
Another aspect is quick feedback/iteration on weapons and systems by users is a major improvement in my eyes. Instead of a soldier having to blindly use whatever they are given, they can make the choice that's best for them. This allows real end users to talk amongst themselves to find the best options.
A third point kind of overlaps with the others, analytics. With all the accurate information going into the system and getting real feedback from soldiers, better analysis of situations and events can be achieved. This can allow for better future planning and strategizing, as they have more accurate data to work from and the data doesn't lose accuracy playing 'telephone' up the chain of command.
Something I just thought of is its potential effect on morale. I can imagine there are many situations where soldiers may feel they are being overlooked by higher ups. With a point system they have direct feedback on how they are doing and how it relates to other units (potentially reduce disgruntled-ness). Also, maybe it could expand to nonmilitary "luxury" items. For example, unit is defending a bunker for months, it sucks, but they almost have enough "points" to get their unit a console to play in their downtime (improving morale).
I feel like you are definitely right about losing non-measured aspects. I think there will definitely be many iterations on this system and they will eventually, at least partially, be able to get those aspects into the 'analysis'.
To your question about units not getting enough support, my understanding was the rewards system is on top a base level of support. Which I'm sure still allows for "winners" (more effective units) to keep winning and "losers" (less effective units) to still struggle much more, but I think the system is going to be better than the previous system.
It was an interesting read. The setup made it seem like it was going to be 'revolutionary' structural change, but the outlined rights come across as American liberal, which makes sense as you stated you used the bill of rights as a starter. Not necessarily a critique, just an observation.
A couple quick word choice notes:
You switch between gendered (he/him/his) and ungendered (they/their) a far bit. I'd suggest switching everything to ungendered.
I feel "Mother Earth" is probably targeted at the "spiritual" crowd. You may want to change that to "environment" or something similar for a wider audience.
I'm open to what you're presenting, but I'm not sure the data you are showing is comparable.
It looks like dairy is 1555T (trillion?) liters of water per ? (daily glass of milk?). That doesn't sound right. Seems like it could be the entire annual water use in the dairy industry is 1555T. I have no reference frame for that, so could be, I have no idea.
The annual water use per person who heavily uses an LLM is shown as ~20B liters.
If those are the are the metrics being compared, they shouldn't be, because they aren't comparable. One would be water for an entire industry, the other is per user.
If you can provide more context, I'd appreciate it.
Edit: missed the "B"s in the LLM numbers, thought they were "8"s. Holy shit that's a huge waste of water, for daily LLM use.
That is not to say anything about the animal farm use levels which are astounding, but having no reference frame for those numbers, so I can't really place them in my mind.
That was semi helpful, but I still don't quite get the gameplay.
A player picks a nation and then describe the nations actions for the turn (an in game month?, does it also last a month in real life?). The actions can be anything (?) and they just work 100%?
What happens when two player nations have competing actions?
That channel was posting to the threadiverse up until a month ago. There are newer videos on it's peertube channel, so not sure what happened, but it was working.
Never thought you were required to open source any of your work, only wondering if it was open source.
I appreciate you providing clarifications. Good luck with the app.