You can construct counterexamples too! For example, "on your turn, say a number. First player to say a number that is double a number the other player said, wins." Is a perfect (I think you mean perfect information) game.
If you want a middleweight solution, between "ask about this on developer forums" and "try to get a law passed," you could create a consumer organization that publishes a list of games that are doing all the right things. Publish a newsletter, create free distribution for companies that don't use DRM and have sunset support plans.
Reasonable, but the level of copyright protection for games is actually really small! It only actually covers the art and text, not the game mechanics. I don't think I'd support that trade overall but it seems better than the unilateral requirement on game companies.
This is how a lot of regulation happens! It can actually work better than having central funding for inspections - if there's a sudden glut of people who need, like, meat processing facilities inspected, but it'll take a year to get the government to triple the meat processing inspection budget, then you get a huge backlog of plants that can't run. If the inspector is funded by fees, they can hire right away.
What level of justification do you think should be required to skip consumer preference and go with a law?
In the case of seatbelts I think the case is quite strong. Even beyond consumer preference, there's a burden on public healthcare, and a cost in safety to others (if you get knocked out of your seat you could lose control of the vehicle, belt keeps you by the wheel). Parents can injure their kids by not using seatbelts.
I don't see any of that in games. As a consumer and as a bystander I don't really know whether I want the marginal dollar of game development spent on long term support or on performance improvements or something else. It certainly varies game to game. For big AAA games that depend on mtx, but could be played entirely offline, the studios have a legitimate interest in making playing them offline hard!
I'd also note that having any laws at all about how games work is going to make it more expensive to develop games, purely because you'll make people check if they're following the laws. Imagine a teenager shipping their first game, or a small studio deciding whether to release a hackathon project, or a small team at a big company spinning out a mini game into a standalone. I dread "no, don't launch that, I don't know if breaking the mid battle save system counts as reasonably playable"
What if, in stead of a requirement, we created an opt-in obligation for companies? If you promise "EOL support guaranteed" you register a plan with whatever agency and pay some fee and they check in every couple years and make sure you remember. And if you don't, then you don't get the badge, and we find out if consumers actually care.
As the amount of data tends to 0 (idk why the quote is using 1), if course your belief tends to whatever your belief was before you saw any data. What else could it possibly tend to? Of course it's very sad that we don't have any data, but that's no fault of Bayesian.
Cover letters that just say how much you love the company are pretty useless. Cover letters that provide additional information about why you're a good use of the company's interviewer's time are useful. I've submitted letters about, say, how I think one project on my resume is specifically applicable to a problem the company has. This both shows I researched the company, which is proof of investment from me, and provides some evidence that I should work at this particular company (or I could have done bad research and misunderstood the company and what it wants, in which case it will help them reject me and help me find my way to a company I'm more interested in)
My friend has been at Facebook forever - apparently new hires often show up and say "I just bought a vacuum cleaner, why do you think I need a new one?" and the strategy of not showing you that ad gets tried over and over, and never actually improves clicks. Friend also doesn't have an explanation, apparently there are just people out there, who look just like you and me, but buy their vacuum cleaners two at a time a week apart. Mystery.
I'm a very casual Ubuntu user, but I use external monitors with my laptop closed. I fixed the "5 second input lag when main display is off" bug a bunch of times, it seemed to break again every third time I restarted. Eventually I saw a snarky "or you losers could just switch to Wayland" comment, I tried it, and I haven't had a problem since.
I'm learning a lot about the politics of the situation in here! For me, Wayland worked.
Related experience: I spent two years on Google Assistant's media team. We were ~35 people. Projects included integration with YouTube (5 person team), the visual UI for touch screens in cars (8), performance improvements (3-4), making "play" and "pause" commands work through the lock screen (3 people), backend migration to a new struct for representing a user query built by the linguists (5 people)
I think the goal of this post is to kick people out of a rut and make them reexamine their habits. If it's a habit and you like it and you're keeping it because you like it, great. But if there's something you're keeping because you think it's needed, check if maybe it isn't.
Half agree. Probably they no longer have the legal right to store (and serve) the data. Which means that they cannot serve the portion that is between your timestamps, which they called a "recording" for reasons.
My guess would be that "a recording" in this case is actually an internal URI pointing to the show plus a start and stop timestamp. If YouTube wanted to not destroy those "recordings" they'd have to find somewhere else to store all the data.
Agree - I moved from 40m2 alone to 60m2 with my wife, and the experience is much better. We still have one sink, one toilet, one bathtub, one washing machine. Her space takes up maybe 10m2. The free walking-around space probably went from 5m2 to 25m2.
My first serious number theory course was called "number theory and cryptography." The professor told us on the first day that modern crypto is basically a trivial application of the major proof from the second half of the course, and that the title was basically click bait. Awesome class, a couple students got NSA interviewers later.
Svelte is a frontend framework that isn't React, Angular, or Vue. This work is towards an installer that isn't Node. If you do frontend work and don't like React, Angular, Vue, and Node, this is all the things you like.
(It's me, I dislike frontend frameworks and node and like svelte)
Very different operating modes are required depending on how many people you're trying to coordinate. The allegory to software development is pretty clear - sometimes you're working on a personal project and zero documentation is tolerable, but sometimes your work is going to be translated into 200 languages and distributed to a hundred million users the day after it ships, and it needs ten times as many lines of tests as lines of code.
It seems to me that our model of "collect the data and analyze it yourself" is a sort of "ten engineer startup" scale process. Now that many fields of science have four or five digits of PhDs collaborating between countries, there's an increasing need for specialization, specifically in creating reusable data. It'll make us less efficient on a small scale, but creating any artifact at all that can be reliably used by ten thousand people is much higher leverage than a fully packaged data+conclusion that's even odds to be nothing but noise.
This would eliminate, like, caniuse.com, wouldn't it? Information about what browser version is used by 99% of visitors to a website is an aggregate of personal information of users of a website.
It would be nice if, say, ten million dollars into the process of preparing blueprints, the agency could look over the prints and the plans for the remaining prints and say "yes it looks like you're on the right track, make sure the reactor wall you decide on isn't too heavy for those struts." In a much more precise way that probably costs a million bucks, of course.
Regulatory intervention could happen at any point in the process. You could imagine an even worse world where the first inspection is after the plant is built, and changes are typically requested to the high level design.
A partnership where you send each other customers that are a better fit for the other's product, is the standard level-1 truce here. If a customer calls you ticked off that you don't have some feature, and you know the competitor has it and you're not going to build it, fire the customer at your competition!
After which the second player has a guaranteed route to win, but it's much harder to find! Last I checked the game tree was computed up to a 6x7 board, players usually use 13x13
I don't think so. If you put some effort into your fallback plan, and choose your weird shit so that it's likely to work out, I think it can just be a good bet. And it's hard to imagine working up the energy to do it if you're really happy where you are, you know?