820 karma · joined November 18, 2015
As others have said, their primary issue is with quality control around stick drift.
It’s fortunate that it is cheaper than paying people.
Yes, people have a skill ceiling. However, it’s not something you’re ever going to get to by just playing most games.
People naturally improve at games when they start playing. Some factors being more familiarity with the game, and making less mistakes. However, people will stall out at different ratings at that point.
However, if you do deliberate practice in the game you will absolutely continue to get better. If you’re practicing specific scenarios, have focused areas of improvement, coaching, analyze your own replays, record your practice, and watch it: You will improve.
Yes, abstractly a “skill ceiling” out there exists for you, but you’re extremely unlikely to ever reach it in a game of skill unless you’re trying to go pro in it.
If putting time in were all that were required to reach your skill ceiling, we would have way more League of Legends Grandmasters. Unless you assume the people that go pro are all just more talented, and that their practice doesn’t make a difference.
- Since people are constantly retiring, and selling the stocks they are holding at that point: Wouldn't that balance out the limitless demand problem? Boomers/Gen X/Millenials/Gen Z all have around the same segment of the population according to (https://www.statista.com/statistics/296974/us-population-sha...) wouldn't things earlier generations sell get distributed among the next generation, preferentially going to Gen X who will be at their peak earning potential at that point. (Which in turn will sell to Millennials and so on) - How would you actively force money into an economy?
Certainly I'm at least glad a tool like that exists.
It starts with very basic, and cute blobs. And builds simulations around how they evolve. But as they explain the simulations, they explain how mutations might arise. It is explain how mutations can become advantageous to the point of driving predecessors extinct, or nearly extinct. And they show you how to derive math formulas for the outcome of the simulations in a very intuitive way. Also, it's entertaining as hell. I've watched the whole series at least 4 times by now. It's short, it's punchy, it's brilliant. I'd very highly recommend it.
The AI's often end up giving that pathway a try a few more times before giving up on it.
I'm not trying to imply they are above jurisdiction, I am quite tired of hearing the "No one likes these guys" narrative though.
You can strip the audio out completely from those files, and have like 20 second recordings that map out to ~1-2MB vs +10MB for GIF. All in all, it's pretty great.
To some limited degree.
If you were later in your life in need of a job, and your friend could refer you to their new company, but they refuse to because of arbitrary reasons.
Would you not think they are being a poor friend? Even more so because you did a very similar favor for them in the past?
Some authors are hard to understand, but the message they are trying to convey could be worth extracting.
As a reader it is preferable for you to be able to extract value out of opaque text. The author owes you nothing. And, presumably you are reading because you think there might be something of value underneath.
If you fail to capture that value (If there is any) that's your loss, not the author's.
Certainly, it would be best if the message were communicated in such a fashion that people would not misunderstand it to begin with. But if, and when things are poorly communicated, if you misunderstand the underlying message the person taking a loss is not the author, but you.
To think otherwise would be to focus too deeply on some sort of exposure, or monetary loss on the part of the author, rather than the failure to capture a nugget of wisdom that might be of utility to your life.
If you are a creative director, you have people working under you.
How do you all get to be creative directors?
By having control over which required dependencies are downloaded. As Nix does. Why would you settle for not solving that problem?
Sorry to hear you don't think my comment adds to the discussion, but I'd disagree
I use it for most of my dependencies, and software in OS X/Windows WSL/Linux
It is a lovely environment to work with. Has completely changed how I feel about package management and the like.
I know you were asking figuratively but something does happen to slot in that space.
It does make me feel a bit of despair at the prospect of humanity ever reaching an agreement that would make everyone satisfied. I guess having most satisfied will have to do, but regardless, it's rough.
I'm going to switch from Operator Mono after 3 or so years for the first time, for a month or so to see if I want to switch completely.
Thanks for contributing this! Really cool font.
I did understand that the title means "A great number of companies drain value from the economy", rather than "Having too many companies drains value from the economy".
Did anyone understand the message the article wanted to communicate aside from the title? What was it? Is it a valid message based on the sources it linked?
I don't agree with grandparent for what it's worth, just thought this might work as a reply to your question.
Not that it'd be a deal breaker for me, but he now debugs in Chrome when necessary, and still uses Firefox as his daily driver.
I'm sure there's something we could've changed for Firefox to work too, but for what it's worth we didn't do anything in particular for it to work in Chrome.