somnic

Resource constraints would be a concern, yeah, so if you were developing a game featuring LLMs (which would, at this point in their development and maturity, be a gimmick) you would keep that in mind and keep other demands on resources low.

VR isn't pragmatically accessible to the average gamer due to hardware requirements and the necessity of setting up the right physical environment but there are still VR games.

Discord allowed hotlinking their files until recently, so it wasn't necessarily driving as much engagement as all that.

I think that's generally true, but it can still be interesting to see early works from people who go on to hone their crafts. Sometimes just seeing how they progressed is worthwhile, sometimes the unpolished nature can emphasize brilliance, and sometimes the unintentional breaks from convention have engaging effects of their own.

There's an extension for firefox called Tree Style Tabs. I never really got into it but some people are quite enthusiastic, pretty similar to what you describe though.

I get your point, and maybe as someone who's not part of said industry I'm missing something, but it seems like it'd be helpful even to the target audience to actually show how this plugin can transform video.

Yes, LVT pushes prices down. A 100% LVT on a property with a present land value of $1M won't collect $1M in taxes every year, it'll depress the price until the amount in LVT is at a low enough level that someone's willing to pay that to have the property.

High property prices aren't axiomatically good, if that's what you're going for, and the fact that people spend millions on construction as well suggests that sometimes properties are worth more than their raw land value. People will be able to make a ROI for the actual productive investment in building and maintaining property, even if speculation and economic rent are cut off.

In cities, there's less need to drive with walkable areas, and a scale that better supports mass transit. Smaller land footprint, and smaller homes take less energy to heat or cool. Economies of scale in providing goods and services. Ships release less CO2 than trucking, and lots of cities have ports. If you don't like cities that's one thing, but the environmental impact is pretty unequivocally less than suburban or rural living.

A manager's anxieties over losing an employee are not equivalent to an employee's anxieties over losing their livelihood. So taking less issue with it is perfectly consistent with it being a moral position.

Partly, but also smaller living space is in fact part of the tradeoff that you make when building stuff close together. It's a worthwhile tradeoff in my opinion, but I'm also not saying that single-family car-centric suburbs should be illegal for people who prefer it, unlike how building denser housing is illegal in many expensive cities.

>Yes, you still want a car for such things, sure it's quaint and nice to have a "walkable" neighborhood, if you're a tourist, but if you live there and have to schlep around by foot with your groceries every day, in all weathers, it's just annoying.

Depends on your lifestyle but I'm quite comfortably car-free. Shelf-stable stuff like tins, rice, beans I get delivered once every few weeks. Meat, veg, eggs and milk I want fresh so I rarely buy more than a couple of days in advance. If it's less than ten minutes walk to the supermarket, or on the walk home from the train station.

>Also in urban environments, making a lot of "inviting" public spaces for people to hang around and loiter is not always a great idea.. this also attracts a lot of crime, drugs etc

Crime and drugs happen where there aren't lots of people to witness them. If you're walking at night and can choose between a busy street and a quiet one, which do you choose?

>Maximum employment and productivity are the highest economic policy goals

No they're not. Or at least they shouldn't be.

High employment is good because it means that everyone's getting some money to spend on things they want, productivity is good because it means we're making lots of things people want. At the end of the day, the entire economy is about making people's lives better, and things like "inefficiency" are referring to things that make us worse at making stuff people want.

If people want recreational drugs, and restricting access to them makes their lives worse, then restricting access to them is bad (ceteris paribus). Likewise for prostitution. Of course in both cases there are labour concerns, but in general not arresting people for doing non-violent work is a good start to worker enfranchisement.

I also strongly question at best reductive view, at worse highly sexist, view of personal relationships that your comment indicates.

Firstly, it wouldn't necessarily shift as much burden onto landlords, depending on the tax. The burden would be spread around all earners if it were an income tax hike, or all consumers for a sales tax or VAT. The extent to which it does affect landlords, rent subsidies would more than compensate.

Secondly, how much landlords pay in tax is less relevant than what incentives the policy sets up. On the part of landlords, eviction moratoria incentivise not renting to higher-risk tenants at all. Higher taxes + rent subsidy would have the opposite effect, with more reason to rent to high risk tenants, and renting out properties that might be marginal otherwise.

I don't know all the details of this, obviously, but this sort of policy analysis is much more about how it shifts incentives on the margin, rather than who pays more and who pays less.

Personally, I hate that whole thing of having a subreddit devoted to things you hate. Maybe I should start a subreddit about it.

Or maybe there are billions of people on the internet now and seeking out only the most infuriating 0.01% still leaves hundreds of thousands I could be mad at. And instead I can close the browser and read a book.

I agree that encouraging people to beg former coworkers is shitty, but I'm not sure this is really introducing anything new. If I have a friend who's looking for a job and they ask me to refer them to my employer, then if I think they'd be a bad fit I'm in a similarly uncomfortable position.

Also, MLMs are actual scams, where in this case you'll actually get your money back if they're a good hire.

This idea has real flaws in how it's been implemented, like how the hard limit at which point you get the job (no questions asked?) encourages that begging behaviour to get over the limit, but if it were just another source of information among many used in hiring, like it is with actual referrals, then it wouldn't be so bad.

So instead of an authoritarian policy that you can't have more than one child, forcing a lot of people to not have kids they do want, you want an authoritarian policy that you can't go on birth control, forcing a lot of people to have kids they don't want.

Come on.

I wonder if the lessening of children's perceived obligations to parents is a factor, too. If cost of living is high but you expect your kids to look after you in your old age then that changes the risks.

A few generations of wild economic growth and thus less of a need for kids to look after their parents, shifting norms, and lag time in norms shifting back, perhaps. Though I don't really know if this fits.

Renewables aren't ready to take over from fossil fuels yet as baseload power, aside from hydroelectric, which isn't able to be built everywhere and can come with its own significant environmental and social costs. The dangers of nuclear power are about on par with that of renewables, and orders of magnitude below that of fossil fuels. It's competitive cost-wise with other energy sources, with greater initial capital investment in the plants but low costs over the lifetime of a plant.

I'm not saying don't invest in renewables, renewables are great. But they're not going to be a panacea.

It's not that they don't count. They count just as much as air pollution, heat stroke or hypothermia, from fossil fuels and expensive or unreliable energy.

Nuclear has costs, yes. Weigh them up against the costs of every other alternative, rather than singling them out.

One thing I find missing in xmonad vs dwm is the notion of tags. Being able to summon and banish groups of windows at a time was something I found pretty handy.

Easy account switching is the sort of thing that browser extensions would have been developed to cover in the past, something like like RES for Reddit or XKit for Tumblr.

That's obviously less relevant when a majority of users are using desktop or mobile apps rather than browsers, but a plugin interface even for closed-source commercial desktop software used to be far more common than it is now, leaving users dependent on the development team to add features and usability.

I assume this decline is due to security concerns, wanting to be able to develop faster internally rather than needing to continue supporting old APIs for external developers, and marketplaces like Google Play and the App Store not wanting to enable competing marketplaces within the apps they distribute. It's a tradeoff to be sure, and I'm not sure moving past plugin functionality is a bad thing, but I find it a bit sad.

I mean, if Brendan Eich's known for anything it's for getting a lot done in 10 days.

This only makes sense if tenants are a liability, because you get property value increase + rental income. As long as renting doesn't decrease the property value by more than the net rental income there's gotta be something else going on.

And if you don't want to manage a property, property management companies exist for that exact reason.

This is equivalent to saying everyone must work to earn their basic livelihood. Unless you're doing something funky with your definition of "handouts" here such that doesn't include unemployment benefits or other publicly subsidized welfare.

I do find it rude that people would go to the devs for issues like that. It's one thing if it's not working on a system that's supposed to have support, but otherwise you should really be figuring it out yourself, or going to the community.

Maybe actually clarifying where the community lives, like WineHQ and ProtonDB do for running Windows games on Linux, would be a good start to help reduce devs having to deal with this sort of thing.

The assumption that accreditation and education must be done by the same organization is absurd, really. Public schools evidently have the exact same incentives. The answer is that third parties should be evaluating education, not administration making up numbers and giving themselves a pat on the back for doing so well.

Of course, teaching to the test isn't ideal. But it looks like the alternative isn't a well-rounded education, but not teaching at all.

I mean, isn't that just status quo bias? You can come up with a story for how anything will result in negative consequences. If we didn't have medical gatekeeping you could just as easily come up with a story about how requiring people to get approval from a doctor to treat themselves could result in someone fainting at the wheel and killing a family of four, and it'd be just as meaningless as this.

Another thing that happens these days is that a game of telephone has gone from "there are lots of valid ways to understand things, so don't punish kids who get the right answer with a different method than the one and only way you've been told to teach" to "teach every kid a half dozen different analogies and algorithms for every concept and punish them if they don't know which one you want them to use."

IIRC there's some research that suggests maths education before 8th grade doesn't really do a whole lot long-term. I doubt that'd be true in a perfect world with personalized maths education for everyone, but I'd buy that waiting until a kid's capable of conceptualizing stuff rather than trying to push them when they're not ready really cuts down on learned helplessness.

ETA: On the other hand, I'm not sure how I feel about that framing. I hated it as a kid when I asked about something and an adult wouldn't even try to explain it to me, or point me in the right direction to learn, and just say I wasn't ready to learn that yet.

Kurzweil used to treat exponential curves as if they were "hockey-stick" shaped and there was a meaningful turning point in the shape of the curve itself. So it's arguing against that silliness, not claiming that exponential growth doesn't involve meaningful change.