CDPR seems to be switching to Unreal.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/03/the-witcher-will-retu...
777 karma · joined September 11, 2016
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/03/the-witcher-will-retu...
This isn’t true about websites and frameworks or sculptures and chisels. There’s no reason why it should be true of games and their engines. It is a poetic statement though.
My opinion is that, in all of these processes, people are the ones that bring the spirit and thus are its source in the final product.
Passion, on the other hand, I understand.
For example, see the “Four Pests Campaign”.
> This was greedy "tech people", nothing more nothing less.
It's hard to talk about WeWork without talking about Adam Neumann. And looking him up, it seems that he does have a degree in business -- albeit only in 2017 -- rather than a degree in something like computer science or engineering. And prior to WeWork, he apparently founded a children's clothing company: not exactly a "tech people" industry.
So I'm not getting tech people vibes from him.
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/05/weworks-adam-neumann-is-gr... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Neumann
Say the banks are creating new money through these loans. And then enough of the original depositors plus some of the people that have been lent money want their money out that the bank can’t give it to all of them. From a layperson’s perspective (like mine) this seems like the bank has loaned out their deposits — it seems like a distinction without a difference to me.
What am I missing?
Do you mean in China or generally?
I’m not a finance person but my understanding is that fractional reserve banking is fairly common.
Sure, and I’m much more statistically likely to be hurt by a dog than mauled by a lion. But I’m not going to give up my dogs and start wandering into lion cages at the zoo.
With travel, we often talk about deaths per x miles traveled. I think in this case a reasonable metric would be deaths or injuries per x minutes of interaction.
Or, perhaps more importantly, on use case.
It’s hard for me to imagine (though certainly possible, I suppose) someone finding prototyping e.g. sensor processing algorithms in Rust more enjoyable than Julia, or faster for that matter.
Why don’t I like it? “Source: International Monetary Fund” !! Fantastic. That’s like quoting a scientific breakthrough and saying Source: MIT. Which of the many artifacts they’ve recently released did it come from? I scrolled through the first three or four pages of IMF pubs, checked all of the titles that I thought may have contained the figure or similar data but no dice.
Is it too much to ask for a standard citation including the publication title and date, too?
I went looking because another comment suggested that maybe Brexit made the Eurozone numbers look particularly bad. But I don’t think that’s the case: the WSJ article particularly calls out UK citizens as similarly being worse off.
But after all that looking I couldn’t ultimately tell you whether or not the Brexit hypothesis is correct.
I’m not an economist so I’m speaking from a position of ignorance here. But I thought the US was on gold standard during this time period.
How was the Fed able to increase money supply by such a large % without e.g. the country mining a lot more gold?
I tried a cursory search but was unable to find any answers.
Acronyms are lossy compression. I’d bet there’s a JDF that even predates the one you reference in one of your descendant comments.
I’d be interested in knowing (though admittedly not enough to look) if there’s even a three letter acronym using the English alphabet that’s not already in use.
Eminent domain is the state taking from you. I already mentioned this in my comment. In fact, the state pays a penalty for doing so in the US as enshrined in the 5th amendment: “… nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.“
> Ownership does not have a single neat list of requirements
No, it does not have a comprehensive list for all use cases, but I would say that the one I mentioned in my first comment is a necessary one: fundamentally that it cannot be taken from you without penalty.
In your examples, you own the book and the gun because the publisher of the book and the manufacturer of the gun (or anyone else, excepting the state, I suppose) can’t unilaterally take them back from you or modify them without some sort of penalty. This can — and has [0] — happened with eBooks. The “unlimited rights to do what you want with [them]” are not guaranteed by ownership in my opinion.
[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18am...
You’re not alone. I also am enchanted by non-standard architectures: the PS3’s Cell, its predecessor the PS2’s Emotion Engine, the Transmeta Crusoe, etc.
There’s a sibling comment to mine that talks about needless complication and dead-ends. That’s fine, but marching along with essentially optimizations to a basic architecture seems boring to me from a creative point of view (not that the achievements made haven’t been, of course, profoundly technically impressive).
And that’s on top of the fact the designing computer architectures can probably be thought of as a huge multidimensional optimization problem (where optimal can change over time or between customer demographics). I think of the approach of iterating as helping us march up that manifold to a local maxima. I think of these “exotic” architectures as sampling far away from those points to see if maybe we can find a more global maxima.
And that’s not to say that the main platforms aren’t innovating: with big-little, NUMA, etc.
But there’s a soft spot in my heart for those wild, long shot bets.
This doesn’t sound right to me. Certainly radar can, at certain bands, see through foliage (so-called FOPEN). I don’t have familiarity with radar seeing through buildings at the sorts of ranges and coverage rates that you’d want to use for ground mapping.
The article references the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission, which should use C- and/or X-Band radars — both should see returns from foliage and buildings.
Without digging more into it, my thoughts about the reason behind absence of foliage and building shadows in the radar data are potentially: 1) resolution of the radar data is too low (tens of meters or more), 2) maybe post-processing of multiple radar passes with different geometries to get rid of them, 3) steep grazing angles from the radar not generating much shadow to begin with.
> My philosophy is that you should do what you want to do today, instead of doing something you don’t want to do because of a hypothetical future repercussion.
Even interpreting this absolutely literally, the hypothetical car would be a today problem — not a nebulous future one. “Survive the day” would, for most, seem like a present want.
Apologies for the miscommunication. I don’t particularly think it applies here (at least, maybe not yet?). That’s why I prefaced my ramblings with both “[t]his may be a bit of a tangent” and “I don’t think it’s the case with Terraria’s fans…”.
It’s just a minor thing I had been thinking about off and on that I didn’t think warranted it’s own “Ask HN”-style article but seemed close enough to an article and discussion on a long-supported game that it wouldn’t be too out-of-place.
I don’t think it’s the case with Terraria’s fans, but I have noticed an odd sense of entitlement in comments and reviews on other steam game pages or on Reddit.
There’s a sizable contingent (maybe just a vocal minority) of people with a lot of time in a game — dozens or hundreds of hours — complaining about developers “abandoning” games.
I definitely understand if you’ve paid for a game that is incomplete and/or bug ridden. But I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about people that have effectively paid pennies per hour of enjoyment they’ve gotten out of a game.
Luckily I’m not in the games industry so it’s probably not anything I’ll need to worry about personally, but I do feel for some of the developers: particularly the smaller studios and indies.
If I had to work on the same project for decades I think I would lose my marbles.
Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me?
Here are some examples. They’re games that I’m familiar with and really feel to me as if they’re done.
[0] https://steamcommunity.com/app/394510/discussions/0/13550912...
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/spelunky/comments/xlpmb8/lack_of_up...
I just tested this on my phone (albeit it is an iPhone 8, so a bit older model perhaps without as many features). A short tap is sufficient to turn it on and off. A longer tap brings up the intensity slider. I was unable to tap the icon quickly enough so as not to register the tap and toggle the flashlight.
Upon retesting a couple times, I did notice that on the first tap the icon is illuminated but it did take a split second more for the actual flashlight to turn on. But waiting the split second was sufficient instead of further tapping.
I’m using the menu that is pulled up while the phone is unlocked (by dragging from the bottom of the screen, on my model), for reference.
I’m being a little tongue-in-cheek here, but the best supported case for AMD is gaming via console: AMD provides CPU/GPU for the current generation of both the XBox and PlayStation consoles.
Which suggests to me that they shouldn’t have too much problem supporting their hardware on Windows or Linux. But that’s outside of my area of expertise. Maybe they need to spend too much engineer effort and time supporting the consoles at what’s probably a pretty thin profit margin?
If it’s not worth remembering, you won’t remember if you read it or not — so you could waste time rereading a forgettable book until you realize. ;)
I’m in that camp. I ran Slackware on a Compaq laptop in the early 2000’s and it was more work than I would have liked — though I did have more free time then as a student.
I swapped to macOS and have been using that since for work and personal productivity projects, though I do use windows to play games. When my MacBook went on the fritz, I was forced to become acquainted with WSL. And I find it to be pretty usable for my use cases.
My MacBook is a bit aged at this point and probably needs replacement before too long. But now instead of comparing OSes (Linux or windows with WSL vs macOS), I need to think about hardware: battery life, build quality, and performance; my needs in these categories may still favor Apple in the laptop and small form factors.
I don’t know if I’m parsing this correctly. Are you saying that the only reason people get dogs in your particular apartment building in Austin is because everyone else has one?
Or are you saying that, in general, the only reason that people get dogs is because everyone else has one? The latter just isn’t correct. And I can’t speak to your particular apartment building, but I’d expect it’s not true for everyone there either.
I’m making this statement generally as opposed to about Matt Taibbi: I don’t really follow him so I’m not evaluating him personally, just your statement in general.
I have a finite amount of time. I don’t have time to “play the ball” given how many balls are out there. Particularly if the player has proven to be a low signal-to-noise ratio source in the past.
I even do this with colleagues as well as media sources. I give people the benefit of the doubt in the beginning, but if you’ve got a track record of not having useful information for me, then I will disregard what you have to say. I’m not going to be mean about it. I might even try to give a heads up about why I think you’re not correct.
But I value my time and eventually it’s just not worth the expenditure.
So no, I’m not going to play the ball: I’ll play the player if their track record is poor. Am I going to miss out on occasion? Sure. But I just don’t have infinite time so I use heuristics and accept imperfection.
There’s another dimension of this discussion about sphere of awareness versus sphere of influence and the utility (or lack thereof) when the former is much larger than the latter. But I will sum my position up by saying that I mostly try to align them.
The Gates quote is more interesting, albeit a second-hand source (instead of directly from Cheney) and about something that had occurred more than 20 years prior.
I have certainly seen assertions by US policymakers that Russia (and the world) would be better off without Putin, but this wording makes it sound like there is a non-fringe group calling for the assassination of Putin. Do you have a source for this?
I would also be interested in a source where policymakers have called for the break-up of (post-Soviet) Russia.
This sounds promising, but holy heck how do you prevent these from getting stuffed full of dirt and dust in short order?
My take might be naive, but isn’t pleasure in general — fun in this specific case — the chief reason that people compromise their moral beliefs?
Though I don’t particularly understand the moral judgment about online multiplayer. But I am sympathetic to judgments about “always-online” single player functionality.
This is an interesting perspective to me. I bounced off Ocarina of Time hard. It felt like I was being shuffled along a story that was already fully written.
Contrast that to my first experience with the series — the Legend of Zelda on NES — where you’re essentially dumped into the world without instruction and need to make your way.
For me, a huge draw of Breath of the Wild was the same as the NES version: being dumped into a world and being able to go wherever I wanted. I felt like that was a return to the old gameplay loop and mechanics. There was even item breakage — the Like Likes eating your upgraded shield.
I had essentially resigned myself to Zelda games from Ocarina on not being what I wanted, so it was refreshing to get BotW. I’m guessing similarly with TotK, but others in my household have made it such that I haven’t had a chance to try it yet.
The only thing I can think of that Nintendo could do to make me happier than with BotW is make a playable 3D game that is essentially the art that was in the original NES Legend of Zelda’s instruction manual.