Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#31

Post by sebstefan »

9rx wrote: post #26
sebstefan wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To replace the farmer you would have to completely eliminate the entire concept of human ownership that we hold. Why? > Economies benefit from its automation. It's far less clear if societies benefit. Farm work is hard, but there is a sense of accomplishment when it is done, which is good for the psyche. The never ending "bullshit" jobs that most people seem to find themselves in nowadays has not lead to happiness.…

> Why? I already attempted to explained why. If there is a gap I overlooked or if something wasn't made clear, you're going to have to try and work with me with greater specificity. > "Farming is good for the psyche" doesn't hold to the suicide rates. Farmers are known to have high suicide rates, but being the owner doesn't imply doing the work. That is the role of the farmhand. I cannot find anything to suggest that…

Ok I get the confusion

The framing of the debate is not using your terminology so this isn't useful

Being a farmer isn't owning a farm, it's doing the farming. Farmhands are farmers. This is the definition that most people have, and if we use your definition, the entire debate doesn't make sense. Remember we're talking about a game, and the game is called "replacing the farmer", in which you don't play a humanoid android handing out cash to a previous owner to buy a farm and then sitting on his ass paying out farmhands. The game is about automating the farming. There is no reference to ownership.

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#32

Post by 9rx »

cies wrote: post #25
sebstefan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Farming isn't artistry, society benefits from its automation Is it still bad if the farmer gets replaced?

I like the word farmer to be replaced. It usually means EITHER land cultivator OR animal exploiter. My choice of word maybe gives away that I'm not so okay with the latter category. While I think the first category is doing God's work on earth feeding the ever growing human population.

> My choice of word maybe gives away that I'm not so okay with the latter category.

I initially figured that use of the cultivator was also intended to be in the same vein, as seen by the no-till advocates. I was quite surprised that you later call it God's work. Mouldboard mafia representing.

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#33

Post by hosteur »

jgtrosh wrote: post #5

The game looks fun and pretty, but am I the only one to get triggered by the “replaced” naming? All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently antisocial. (And in many instances hypocritical if coming from people who defensively claim “it's just a tool”…)

You are not alone. I don’t get why you are downvoted.

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#34

Post by bigstrat2003 »

candiddevmike wrote: post #4
skeltoac wrote: post #2

I played this! The quadcopter with the straw hat got me. Funny and great fun. At the end I was still full of ideas for optimizing my code and the dev was making breaking changes that would require a full rewrite (a good time guaranteed) but I was more compelled to go back to Factorio due to the Space Age expansion. The rest of this comment would be about Factorio but writing on HN does not help the factory to grow.

As someone with hours of time in Factorio pre-space age update, I've really struggled to get back into the game. I really want to build out a mega base with the new train logic, but every time I try to get into it it just feels like work. Space age seems like it had a pretty lukewarm reception, and some of the tech tree changes seem like artificial padding (cliff explosives).

I'll be honest, I don't think Space Age was all that good as an expansion. The developers really focused on giving the player new types of logistics challenges to solve, but that was never what I wanted. I wanted the same Factorio gameplay, but with more stuff to build. So out of the four new planets, the only one I actually enjoyed building on was Vulcanus (because it plays pretty much like vanilla Factorio but with new recipes). The lead dev is also well known for disliking logistics bots and wishes they had never been added to the game. And the expansion shows that, with (again) three of the four planets having mechanics to make use of bots more difficult if not outright impossible (Aquilo).

All in all, the developers have a very different vision of what makes the game fun than I do, and that meant the expansion wasn't much fun for me. If I play the game more in the future, I'll probably do so with the expansion disabled.

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#35

Post by 9rx »

sebstefan wrote: post #31
9rx wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why? I already attempted to explained why. If there is a gap I overlooked or if something wasn't made clear, you're going to have to try and work with me with greater specificity. > "Farming is good for the psyche" doesn't hold to the suicide rates. Farmers are known to have high suicide rates, but being the owner doesn't imply doing the work. That is the role of the farmhand. I cannot find anything to suggest that…

Ok I get the confusion The framing of the debate is not using your terminology so this isn't useful Being a farmer isn't owning a farm, it's doing the farming. Farmhands are farmers. This is the definition that most people have, and if we use your definition, the entire debate doesn't make sense. Remember we're talking about a game, and the game is called "replacing the farmer", in which you don't play a humanoid and…

> Being a farmer isn't owning a farm

Not according to the government. To legally become a farmer you need farm receipts of a certain amount or more. Selling your labour to a farmer is not that. And not according to the dictionary either. There are multiple words surrounding this topic for good reason.

> Farmhands are farmers.

It is possible that a farmer also works on his farm, or another farmer's farm for that matter, but they would be a farmhand while in that capacity. People can be more than one thing, unsurprisingly. But not all farmers are also farmhands and not all farmhands are also farmers. Many farmers never lift a finger, so to speak. I personally work with farmers who don't even know what is growing in their fields.

> Remember we're talking about a game, and the game is called "replacing the farmer"

Actually, we were talking about some pedantic take on the word "replace", which transitioned into a pedantic take on the word "farmer". There is no discussion about a game going on in this thread. This indicates that you didn't bother to read the thread before replying. Why?

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#36

Post by [deleted] »

sebstefan wrote: post #19
jgtrosh wrote: post #5

The game looks fun and pretty, but am I the only one to get triggered by the “replaced” naming? All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently antisocial. (And in many instances hypocritical if coming from people who defensively claim “it's just a tool”…)

Farming isn't artistry, society benefits from its automation Is it still bad if the farmer gets replaced?

[deleted]

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#37

Post by abtinf »

skeltoac wrote: post #2

I played this! The quadcopter with the straw hat got me. Funny and great fun. At the end I was still full of ideas for optimizing my code and the dev was making breaking changes that would require a full rewrite (a good time guaranteed) but I was more compelled to go back to Factorio due to the Space Age expansion. The rest of this comment would be about Factorio but writing on HN does not help the factory to grow.

To make a programming game true to life, it could have a prestige mechanic where you keep all your code/scripts, but the api introduces breaking changes and you have to rewrite.

“Good job! Halfway through the workday on Thursday, some big brain engineer in a distant department has decided to change the order of for loop clauses in the interpreter, so now it’s “for variable declarations; variable modifications; conditional checks {}”. They adamantly refuse to revert the change because “it makes more sense to group variable stuff together”. Prod is down now. Have fun!

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#38

Post by phantasmish »

abtinf wrote: post #37
skeltoac wrote: post #2

I played this! The quadcopter with the straw hat got me. Funny and great fun. At the end I was still full of ideas for optimizing my code and the dev was making breaking changes that would require a full rewrite (a good time guaranteed) but I was more compelled to go back to Factorio due to the Space Age expansion. The rest of this comment would be about Factorio but writing on HN does not help the factory to grow.

To make a programming game true to life, it could have a prestige mechanic where you keep all your code/scripts, but the api introduces breaking changes and you have to rewrite. “Good job! Halfway through the workday on Thursday, some big brain engineer in a distant department has decided to change the order of for loop clauses in the interpreter, so now it’s “for variable declarations; variable modifications; condit…

Documentation should often be wrong.

There should be five options for each piece of tooling, none of which quite work the same way, all of which have a fan-base singing their praises, and three of which have critical problems you probably won't find out about until you try them. Then the one you pick gets abandoned when you're part way done. (this feature only for the Javascript and Python DLC)

Example farms should use old versions of libraries that are no longer maintained.

Interfacing with other farms should require manually faking a downgrade of some protocol you're using, because the older one is no longer available for you and they can't/won't upgrade.

You should be forced to design certain parts of the system in ways that are harder to use and constantly break when changing other parts, just so the appearance of those parts is "on brand". This should require re-writing functionality that would otherwise be supplied "for free" by a library.

When you're finally getting things how you want them, your farm should get cancelled and the whole thing abruptly burned to the ground because your parent company just decided to buy a different, existing farm instead.

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#39

Post by pixl97 »

jgtrosh wrote: post #5

The game looks fun and pretty, but am I the only one to get triggered by the “replaced” naming? All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently antisocial. (And in many instances hypocritical if coming from people who defensively claim “it's just a tool”…)

>All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently antisocial

Then I suggest you dig ditches with a spoon.

The problem isn't replacing human labor in itself. It's a few hording all the resources and leaving the rest to starve, aka the luddites and why they revolted.

If you had a way to live, then boutique farming, or whatever would be leisure if you chose to do that.

Re: The Farmer Was Replaced [video]

#40

Post by tantalor »

sebstefan wrote: post #19
jgtrosh wrote: post #5

The game looks fun and pretty, but am I the only one to get triggered by the “replaced” naming? All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently antisocial. (And in many instances hypocritical if coming from people who defensively claim “it's just a tool”…)

Farming isn't artistry, society benefits from its automation Is it still bad if the farmer gets replaced?

What's so special about artists?

Farming is an ancient human practice. It would be a huge loss to society if we forgot how to do it with our hands, without automation.

Post reply on HN