ionforce

This is a false equivalence. Its popularity doesn't make it "valid" for some criterion.

> Kids have no spending power

This fact means nothing for as long as one can accumulate ad dollars based on views generated by children.

What is the definition of "mainstream"?

> tendentially

Is this a word? You don't mean tangentially? I'm having a crisis right now.

I find using <OLD TECHNOLOGY> in <MODERN_ERA> endlessly fascinating. I love stuff like this!

You don't understand it because the mental model as presented by the statement is too simple.

Money can make LOTS of people VERY happy, up to a certain point. Supposedly after 80k$, after you've been relieved of basic stresses like rent and finding food, more money will make you less happy per increment.

If you are an unhappy person with a minimum of 80k$, then the bottleneck to your happiness is not money.

Merely more money doesn't make ALL people happy ALL the time.

That model is too complicated for tiny minds. Just tell me when it will be done, man!

What is an example of a person for whom this is terrible advice?

I can only jokingly think of people who are naturally hostile or low on EQ. "They can't handle all this!" kind of people.

- More heroes.

- Drop invulnerable courier.

- No scripted builds.

Do you attribute your learning the most to the live coding? If so, what was it about it that helped you?

Is there a name for this field? I guess it is all rate limited by the amount of data that can be categorized and visualized in this way, which feels very specific. But I love it.

As with all questions like this, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what this is optimizing for. It's only "the worst" from one perspective. But it is optimal for another.

The tension is not realizing that difference.

Including the example images was GENIUS. Love it.

> streamlining for whiteboard interviews

Can you clarify what this means?

Is there a thing that's like "by using this service you put your work in the public domain" kinda thing?

> dynamically typed, pure functional programming language

Why dynamically typed!!!

People love to write write write code and don't give a shit about size or how it impacts reviewers.

Scala.

It really opened my mind up to what I was missing, as a recovering Perl programmer. Perl folk tend to think their shit doesn't stick. But it's the Blub Paradox in full effect.

Types matter. Functional programming matters.

Anyone advocating for dynamic typing in the year 2019 is captain of the USS Blub; and it's sinking.

> Looks to me like you guys are talking past one another.

Every Internet discussion ever. I'm glad you pointed it out! The world needs more reasonable posters.

I've always been under the impression that consciousness is actually a bunch of brain activity competing for attention and that one thing at a time is selected/blessed to be the highlight of one's attention.

The addition of drugs sort of pulls back the curtain on what other things may be just under the mark, lurking beneath your "default" consciousness.

Probably they did the math and found that that feature wasn't delivering enough value or cost too much to maintain.

In comparison, Release Radar is an easy win; all the ML is already there.

No one cares about accessibility when ad dollars are at stake.

What specifically was draining about it? What drained you? Why?

You have to synergize authentic work-streams.

Most organizations don't have the foresight or bandwidth to organize things this way. It's always just one person do everything. I hate it.

That's not fair. Humans are incredibly fallible. Humans tire, demand food, need to sleep, get bored. An AI just needs a graphics card and electricity.

I think it's to help illustrate the time dimension as going forward rather than something that goes up and down. And also to not measure the hills against some global X-axis. It is confusing.

There are three things this seems to do. And what's changed is the perceived value of these.

1) Increased mining rate. Although there's a prescribed "maximum", as I understand it adding more workers, up to some limit, does yield more minerals beyond the prescribed.

2) Buffer against harassment. If you are over-saturated and lose two probes, you rate of income isn't affected.

3) Bootstrapping an expansion. All of the excess probes can be moved over to the new expo.

This feels more impressive since in SC2 you can pilot many units while in Dota you only (generally) have one. And Deepmind is playing (albeit a slightly older) stock StarCraft II while OpenAI had to play using a very weird ruleset (invulnerable carriers).

Milestones that we have yet to see with Deepmind

- generalize on maps - generalize on races - zero-style training

This is actually a great question. Like what does it mean for a unit to be cloaked?

If humans can, under ideal circumstances, see cloaked units... Maybe the only mechanic that shows up (like for bots or an API) is the inability to be targeted using an attack command (i.e. you can still be hit with splash damage from ground targeting)