bryans

Again, you're exaggerating everything. There are literally dozens of hot tubbers among many tens of millions of creators. You're purely discussing extreme niches which, even when combined, don't represent a significant portion of the overall market. So, I'll reiterate that making a declaration of "the vast majority of super fans being dysfunctional and exploited" is outrageously false and disparaging, not to mention being based on no actual data or working knowledge.

> You're ignoring superchats and tips which is where most of the money comes from.

Tips represent less than 40% of revenue for nearly every type of content creator, so let's not exaggerate things. Super Chats are also limited to $500, so you're exaggerating the amounts you've seen.

More importantly, you're conflating the original comment's generalization about how "the vast majority" of all highly-supportive fans have "unhealthy obsessions and are trying to have a girlfriend experience." Whereas what you're discussing is a corporate content farm[1] of exactly 61 brands, most of which are specifically designed to create a "girlfriend experience" in order to intentionally develop obsessions. That is an extremely specific situation which is not representative for >99% of content creators.

[1] https://virtualyoutuber.fandom.com/wiki/Hololive

I've consulted with several hundred live streamers, and none of what you're saying is reflective of their experiences. It is outrageously false and disparaging to claim that the vast majority (or even a significant portion) of large contributors are somehow dysfunctional and that content creators are exploiting them.

Some people build cars for fun and spend their disposable income on that experience. Other people enjoy online content and spend their disposable income ensuring that content keeps getting made, or can be made even better. To declare an entire populations' preferred hobby as "dysfunctional" is plainly inflammatory and entirely inappropriate.

> The companies pushing this have all the data and know exactly what's going on, but market to this demographic anyway.

"The companies" aren't marketing high-cost options in any way. Twitch's highest subscription tier is $25/mo. Patreon suggests a higher tier of $30. Those are not "ruin mom's credit" or "dump your life savings" prices, so it's disingenuous (at best) to suggest that something nefarious and exploitative is happening in regards to platforms' marketing efforts.

> But actually this is a terrible career advice and relatively few people actually end up making anywhere close to $100k on Twitch or Patreon. [...] I think Patreon is a great tool to give you a decent supplement to your income

There are relatively few content creators making $100k/yr from a single platform, but there are tons of people making that and more by utilizing all of the platforms. The first piece of advice I always give to musicians is to treat every social media and streaming platform as its own "venue" with their own unique set of users -- because they are. Always performing at the same venue in your hometown isn't going to be lucrative or sustainable, so you branch out to other venues and other cities, because that's the only way to find new markets.

The same is true for all content creation. Focusing on in-person performances ignores the entire online market, which is >99% of potential revenue. Focusing on Twitch ignores the opportunities of TikTok and YouTube. But if you take the time to understand the quirks of each platform and its users, and then chop up your content into sizes and styles appropriate for each platform, it's actually extremely easy to go from zero online presence to $10k/mo within two years.

Not everybody understands Patreon or wants to use it (and frankly, it's not a very usable site), so if your subscriptions are solely based around that platform, then you're ignoring 95% of the potential subscriber market and making everything more difficult than it needs to be. Content is content. It can go anywhere, and investing a few days into learning basic video editing makes content distribution a breeze.

> with that delightful UX where it's /invisible/ until you wave the magic cursor around in the right place.

There is a button at the top of the editor, to the right of the filter input. The buttons that show up on hover are for inserting the new style at a specific position in the cascade, if needed -- but that's a rarer occurrence, which is why it's not visible by default.

> And it broke because Chrome is "being helpful" by forcing structure in the UI, so it instantly turned into a lot of crossed out lines with yellow warning triangles, and there's there's no visible delete option, no context menu delete, it doesn't respond to the delete key

I agree that one should be able to paste any CSS block or declaration and expect the style editor to parse it. But it's also worth keeping in mind that the only difference in this particular situation is pasting the declaration instead of the surrounding block, and you'd get the results you're after. Chromium's dev tools are definitely not perfect, but I think Firefox's method is much more cumbersome from a developer's perspective.

> Ok, apparently you didn't get that point either;

I completely got the point, which is why my original comment was extremely relevant to the conversation of a one-man operation -- a conversation that you acknowledge starting. You then, however, claimed that it doesn't make sense for me to post a video about a one-man drummer-bassist in a conversation about a one-man drummer-bassist, in a bizarre attempt to make it seem like I somehow antagonized you. What you're doing is called gaslighting, in its purest and most disturbing form.

> I don't see any connection between your video and the ones I posted.

The methods used by both drummers in both videos are literally identical in every conceivable way. They are using the same technology. It's a MIDI controller going into a computer which triggers samples, which is also the exact same method you are using and describing in your original comment and blog post. They are identical. And even knowing that, you are still shamefully attempting to publicly disparage another musician and claim they are lesser than you -- even going so far as to claim they are a "DJ" despite performing in the exact same way that you are. It's beyond outrageous.

Let's recap. You made a comment about one person (yourself) playing multiple instruments at once. Somebody replied asking to see that, because it "sounded cool." I provided another example of one person performing multiple instruments at once. Instead of watching the video (or ignoring the conversation), you instead decided to publicly declare that wasn't "real" musicianship, and provided a link to a video where the drummer is literally doing the exact same thing that you just declared wasn't "real" musicianship. You then decided to not watch the video again and instead doubled down on your false claims.

So, if you're asking why we're discussing one-man-bands in a "thread about visual coordination between musicians," that question falls to you, since you were the one who started the sidetracked conversation, which turned out to be a self-aggrandizing advertisement. Yet, now you're gaslighting and trying to make it sound like I did something wrong when, in fact, you were the one who both sidetracked the thread and then confrontationally declared a musician wasn't a real musician, thereby turning it into a "values debate" -- despite obviously meeting all of your requirements for "real" musicianship, since you're both quite literally using identical methods and technologies.

The video visibly shows him playing all of the instruments and not using a sequencer, which betrays that you still haven't actually watched the video.

I just explained to you that, if you had watched the video, it would be obvious that he's not just pressing a button to start a sequence. Your response was to again falsely claim that he is pushing a button to start a sequence, when in reality, he is manually playing all of the drums and notes in the exact same way that you play your instruments, and in the exact same way your video portrays. So he's actually doing the same thing and more than what you claim is "real" musicianship. I have never heard a musician speak so disparagingly about another musician in the way you are right now. It's disturbing and completely inappropriate.

I get that you were trying to be amusing with the Chrome comment, but in case you weren't actually aware, you only need to push the plus icon to insert a new style. It's the exact same number of clicks to accomplish that task in both browsers.

You clearly didn't bother watching the video before commenting, because he's not just triggering sequences, and you're acting childishly dismissive of a traditional drummer with a mountain of talent who is, in fact, performing live. I can't even imagine what would compel you to publicly declare that another musician isn't a real musician, especially given that both his and your performance methods are extremely similar. Your disrespectful elitism isn't welcome anywhere, and certainly isn't reflective of the greater music community.

There is a professional finger drummer going by NularMusic who wrote a Max For Live plugin[1] which lets him pre-sequence note progressions, and he becomes a one-man-band using just a Launchpad Pro. It's quite impressive and he performs improvised sets[2] using it.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-23VKnjcQw

[2] https://www.reddit.com/rpan/r/RedditSessions/t2wyq0

Riot has its quirks, but it should really get more love than it does. I found it to be a breeze to work with, and they were doing things correctly even back when the pre-rewrite versions of Angular and React were still getting it very wrong.

Luckily there are a lot of cheap STUN/TURN services out there, and if you really need something under your control, there are containerized projects on GH that make it easy to run your own. Though even when I used it as a Zoom replacement for meetings, I never ran into a situation where TURN was necessary, and that includes people behind corporate firewalls. It seems as though corporate netops learned some lessons during the pandemic and loosened restrictions.

It may not meet the qualifications of "production," but about a year ago I made an OBS.Ninja clone with some specifics for live streamers, and I was extremely satisfied with the reliability of WebRTC -- multiple hour streams with zero dropouts, and without any fancy code to handle reconnects or adjusting for lower bandwidth. It just kinda magically works. The browser implementations are an absolute disaster, but if you can make those limitations work for the project (or if you don't need to use a browser at all), then I'd feel pretty confident using it in production and at scale.

NewTek actually uses WebRTC for NDI's remote networking, and while the NDI software itself is prone to crashing and probably not usable for production, the connection to the remote system is never an issue.

Based on what previous school shooters have said over the years, the reasoning is somewhat simple and obvious. They experience trauma at a particular time in their life, and once they've mentally broke, the most personally "relevant" target for their anger is a group of people similar to those who either caused the original trauma or were present at the time but "did nothing to help." It doesn't matter that they're not the exact same people, because it's very rarely about revenge against specific individuals, but instead a way to exert control over a situation or space that they associate with their earlier trauma.

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/mass-shootings-in-amer...

This is really cool, and I enjoyed hearing explanations of your process and decision making in the video. It sounds like you have a lot of ideas on how to develop "personalities" for units, and that's something rarely seen in game AI, so I'm eager to see where you go with all of this!

You have the legal right and ability to remove any mark if you've paid it off. Both of the agencies have online options for removal requests.

https://www.experian.com/disputes/main.html

https://www.transunion.com/credit-disputes/dispute-your-cred...

That's actually not true. If you pay the collection agency, the derogatory mark gets removed within weeks. You also typically only need to pay half the amount. If they try to get you to pay the whole thing, just tell them you're using your tax refund to pay off debts, but you only have $X left, where X is half the amount owed.

There are actually very few regulations regarding the credit score "system" -- if it can even be called that -- and it shows. The system is grossly abused by everyone involved, and typically the only people experiencing the effects of that abuse are already in the most vulnerable positions. It's quite reprehensible what humans are willing to do to each other over an unpaid bill, almost universally representing a completely non-relevant amount of revenue for the companies. How many lives have been disrupted or ruined over sending $15 to collections?

That isn't helping your exaggerated claim. 1.6 is not a multiple of one, making it quite literally not multiple years. You have two apples. You cut one and give half away. How many do you have? One apple, and one half of an apple. You no longer have multiple apples.

Also, the page you're linking to has a gigantic "coming soon" banner at the top, which would indicate it's not actually available. Its call to action is not to purchase a bare metal server, but instead a link to register for their Green Light program, which lists the bare metal beta as "upcoming."

So, no, the beta hasn't been available for years, you're still ignoring that whole "on-site labor in the middle of a pandemic" thing, and I can't imagine why you felt like an attempt at publicly shaming them twice was necessary.

I wanted to like Vultr, but had reliability issues from day one, even while running nothing but a basic Nginx instance. And instead of the support staff acknowledging the issues or offering any solutions (or even reading my emails, frankly), they rather aggressively told me they don't see an issue, and even if there is an issue that I would need to fix it myself -- completely disregarding the visible evidence that it was at the networking layer.

It was one of the most infuriating exchanges I've had with support staff from any company. If there was any redeeming factor, it's that the COO sent a long email apologizing for the CSR's behavior. But when all was said and done, the VPS was still inaccessible a dozen or more times per day, and an apology from an executive doesn't change that.

> It's been in Beta for literally years now.

"Years" is quite a stretch. On December 30, 2019, they announced[1] bare metal servers as being part of their roadmap for 2020, and then on June 16, 2021 they announced the beta was "upcoming." Given the necessity of on-site labor to launch a bare metal service, I think it's perfectly reasonable for it take more than a year in the midst of a pandemic.

[1] https://www.linode.com/blog/linode/2019-a-year-in-review/

[2] https://www.linode.com/blog/linode/celebrating-18-years/

The parent comment's link goes directly to a portion of the video where he types "fdro" and then taps on the "F-Droid" search result.

That method is adding server, client and network load by delivering multiple versions of the same image, whereas a cached version on the front end can be freely re-used and manipulated as needed based on the specifics of the device and browser. It's not a matter of being a problem for the front end team. It's a problem for devops and the end user.

Expenses are the "loss" portion of "profit and loss." That is 50% of the concept of accounting, making it as direct as it gets. Please stop this prolonged line of trolling.

> Reducing expenses is not direct financial benefit.

You've created a seven word sentence which contradicts itself in every conceivable way. Expenses are financial. Reducing them is beneficial.

They make movements which are easily anthropomorphized, probably because of their jumping nature. Imagine a dog seeing its human after a long vacation, where its quickly moving back and forth, and doing little jumps, etc. It may just be the spider preparing to jump or exhibiting some other behavior, but they'll even exit the enclosure when you're close, looking up at you with those oversized eyes, seemingly hopeful that you'll let them hang out and watch whatever you're doing.

You're moving the goal posts, on top of changing the definition of "direct" to fit your false narrative. First you claim there was no incentive at all, then there was no "direct" incentive, and now direct apparently means "immediate" instead of linear.

If a company invests in research specifically because the fruits of that research will reduce expenses, that is direct financial benefit.

I can't speak toward tarantulas, but some jumping spiders definitely recognize, acknowledge and seemingly even appreciate individuals. Honestly, they sometimes look excited to see you as a dog would -- though that's likely just a basic recognition that you act as their food delivery service. They even appear to understand the concept (if not reasoning) behind their enclosure.

Some folks who spend a lot of time with their jumping spiders will actually leave the enclosure door open, as the spider will happily stay there unless it lacks water or food for a long period of time, and typically only leaves when its human stops by. It will come to the door when you get close, jump on your hand and hang out very calmly (some people even go on walks with them), then gladly jump back into the enclosure when you're done and patiently wait for you to bring it food.

You literally said "no incentive [...] other than good feelings." Regardless, even adding the words "direct financial" is still incorrect. For one of many examples, insurance companies investing in F@H infrastructure would be beneficiaries, albeit via savings and not revenue.