I always figured the bartender was just another philosophy or sociology or political science major who couldn't find a better job. Which I'd say is also a relevant modern issue. I know plenty of college students and grads working shit jobs.
66 karma · joined June 14, 2020
Is it finicky? The stealth system is very basic and based on line-of-sight and sound (for human enemies). As long as you aren't running, it's actually incredibly trivial to stealth through levels without being seen. Even the bots aren't really a problem, since they have static patrol paths and limited line of sight.
Are you suggesting people stop using smartphones altogether?
A slightly different example. Internet Explorer essentially dominated the browser space for nearly forever until Chrome. There are any number of reasons, but the most obvious is that Microsoft could leverage their position as the platform owner to promote IE over all alternatives. EU tried to regulate it by forcing them to add a "browser choice" dialog, which didn't work. The only reason why Chrome became so popular was because Google did exactly the same thing as Microsoft. They could leverage their search engine, which by that time already owned 90% of the search engine market, to aggressively promote Chrome at every single opportunity.
There are all these examples of tech companies leveraging an existing platform to edge out competitors in clearly anti-competitive ways, and modern laws simply aren't up to the task of ensuring a fair, competitive market where massive companies like Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon can't abuse their power.
Unfortunately, this seems like a problem where nobody has come up with a good solution. Google allows other app stores on their phones and they allow sideloading, which might seem like the ideal situation. The biggest issue then is that Google still has the monopoly on apps on Android because the size of the Play Store far eclipses every other store. So if Google bans an account or app unfairly, the only realistic option is to appeal and cave in whatever they want you to do. Because being relegated to an app store that nobody uses is essentially a death sentence for that app and its revenue.
How do you fix something like that? The power or the problem doesn't go away because there is choice. I feel like Google has neatly sidestepped the problem from their perspective and thus aren't being scrutinized, despite being in nearly the exact same situation as Apple.
2) Taking his argument in good faith, he also means "free" apps with microtransactions, because in both cases the same situation exists: The iOS App Store is too big a market to ignore. Which leads to the same problem, regardless of whether your app is paid or "free", that if Apple suddenly decides it doesn't like you, you're screwed.
As an example, statistics has the idea of ordinal values vs interval values, where they have different properties that make them not comparable to each other and shouldn't be mistakenly be confused when working on them.
From the study:
> The basic operations of the Assembly Calculus as presented here—projection, association, reciprocal projection, and merge—correspond to neural population events which 1) are plausible, in the sense that they can be reproduced in simulations and predicted by mathematical analysis, and 2) provide parsimonious explanations of experimental results (for the merge and reciprocal project operations, see the discussion of language below)
This was an initial study, and I'm sure they're going to continue putting out papers exploring the model and how it compares with experimental data. It's not like everybody's going to see this one study and say "He's right! We should all use this model!" It's more that as more evidence is provided, the model becomes more relevant and it might be considered by others to be useful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_theory_of_mind
> Despite being vigorously disputed in analytic philosophy in the 1990s due to work by Putnam himself, John Searle, and others, the view is common in modern cognitive psychology and is presumed by many theorists of evolutionary psychology.
The theory is quite foundational for cognitive science and popular in a number of other fields.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_science#Computationa...
So it's not like he's doing anything fundamentally new. He's maybe come up with a new computational model that might give new insights.
Interesting, thanks. I sold my Switch after a year, so I've only been following up on it intermittently and missed this.
> My angle on it is pretty similar to when the iPhone came out. There was no copy and paste, multi-tasking and was arguably slow for a lot of things, but the pros outweighed the cons, and we knew Apple wouldn't be doing any big leaps any day soon.
I was okay with the Switch's OS in the beginning because I figured, sure, they rushed this to market, but this is a relatively solid basis to keep building and improving on. None of which happened. Queue my frustration with Nintendo.
I do feel by comparison iOS has made leaps and bounds (though admittedly, depending on what features you wanted, it might have taken longer than you might have wanted). I've since switched to Android (again), but I think there was a very long period where I'd stay up to watch the Apple conference revealing the new phones and iOS features, even when I didn't have any Apple device. As far as I can remember, every year brought significant changes, though of course I can't point out what they were for every year. The introduction of the concept of files and a file manager made iOS much more palatable to me, for example.
edit: https://www.theverge.com/2011/12/13/2612736/ios-history-ipho...
Wanted to take a look. iOS 4 added multitasking. iOS 5 added the notification center, iTunes wifi sync, OTA updates, iMessage. iOS 6 added, uh, .... the beloved Apple Maps? iOS 7 was the visual overhaul, added the control center (which I miss on Android), AirDrop, Camera and Photos were improved, multitasking was greatly improved, TouchID was added, apps automatically updating added.
Seems like there was a fairly steady stream of improvements almost every year. SwitchOS hasn't seen anything remotely close. Of course, Apple is a much larger company and has a much larger budget, but still, I think regardless of how large or small a company, it should be capable of yearly improvements from whatever place they're at any given time.
That is fascinating. Thanks for that.
> However, one could argue, from an evolutionary standpoint, that spe-ciÿc search mechanisms could have been learned and “wired” in order to improve theexploration eciency (e.g., if a salient point is located within a direct vision distance,maximize the probability of straightforwardly moving to that site)
So there's no way for anybody to verify that the code is actually being removed, or that the exploit won't crop up again in the future. I don't trust them or the FBI at all in this.
No idea what you're talking about.
> For QOL the last big update allowing to remap buttons was a big deal. I haven't tried moving data between to the SD card but it would also be a big deal for people with more than 10 ~ 20 games, as space becomes scarce pretty fast.
My point is that the amount of real QOL changes is extremely low for the amount of time the console has been out. There's been nearly nothing, while they just keep "increasing stability".
Frankly, the Switch's OS is still incredibly barebones and missing a lot of QOL features and I'm tired of people defending Nintendo for being so half-assed about the Switch. It's been three years. There's been barely any progress, whether it's the OS, online infrastructure, or fixing the drift issues. Do they have Yakuza debts they need to pay off or what? Where's all the money going to?
I've never seen an ePub with images where it looked anywhere as good as the PDF version. It's generally a mess.
You must be joking. The meme about "stability intensifies" with Switch updates isn't just a joke. Most of their updates are minor bugfixes and "increasing stability" (fixing exploits). They're far more interested in fixing exploits than they ever were in improving the OS in any meaningful way for the user. It's been 3 years and the only major QOL change I see on that list is making the all software page not useless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Switch_system_softwar...
https://www.chromium.org/flash-roadmap#TOC-Flash-Support-Rem...
That said, am I the only one finding it really hard to parse pages of illustrations? It feels like I'm stuck having to analyse every single illustration to figure out what the author is talking about and that a bit of supporting expository text is missing.