Lmfao you mean spending his personal fortune on land conservation and spending much of epic’s on breaking up monopolies that harm everyone?
Oh wait, I’m sorry, I forgot, he also made you install a second launcher, and since you were mildly inconvenienced by not being able to deep throat Gabe 30%, you thought Tim Sweeney was the devil?
Lol like thats the only possible axis or lens to view a game through.
Battle Royale shooters got more popular then traditional team deathmatch games for their inherent pacing.
Battle Royale games always involve these dynamic phases where sometimes you’re looting, sometimes you’re exploring, sometimes your battling, sometimes you’re sneaking up on people.
That naturally creates the kind of varied encounters that games like Halo or Cod only got through randomizing game modes, and rather then only having downtime between matches to talk with your friends online, there is natural downtime built into segments of each scenario when you’re exploring and looting.
Lmfao. Watch Tim Sweeney get brought up, and watch some PC gamer claim he’s the devil because he had the audacity to create a second launcher and pay for exclusives.
Epic spent a massive amount of their Fortnite money on lawsuits to break up the iOD and Google Play monopolies.
And while doing so, still offer their top tier engine for reasonable costs to third parties.
And Tim Sweeney personally spends most of his money on buying up land for conservation, but yeah, he’s totally the devil for making you install a second launcher to play some games.
Sure yeah, this stuff happens all the time, and often persists until people start noticing the application being sluggish and they go and investigate and fix the slow points.
Alternatively you have tightly integrated software that only one team can work on and it takes years to come out and every time a feature needs to change its another 6 month job of reworking everything, and debugging and fixing security issues is a nightmare.
In most systems, not just computers, there’s a tradeoff between a highly integrated and high performance design, vs a modularized loosely coupled one that’s more adaptable and resilient.
Just look at automotives, Teslas have a unibody design that makes them cheap to build and low weight, that also makes them enormously expensive to repair and impossible to find aftermarket parts for.
Choosing maximally integrated is rarely the best path, there is always a middle ground.
Everything could do this but sometimes you don’t want to.
i.e. you’re trading off the background indexing resource usage for instant search results. On a consumer PC where you’re constantly on it and searching for stuff that’s worth it, on a remote server that you’re logging into to bug fix but is normally just running a headless application it may not be.
Lol, “the C Programming language is an abstraction of assembly and I for one, won’t have it!”
Some of those frameworks and no code platform bloat are because of that. Most are there to make working on large multi team software projects feasible.
It’s far faster. Ripgrep has to search every file exhaustively at query time. Windows Search indexes every file at write time (or a background job) so the search results are near instantaneous … at least, that’s how it used to work. I don’t know what happened to it over the past 5-10 years.
Most people in the world never faced any serious threat of jail time for copyright infringement. The absurd punishments handed down to average users is purely an American thing.
The contrast against the weirdly punitive American justice system is not the problem with AI companies.
The reality of the situation is that copyright is and always has been a horseshit system for its purpose. The entire concept of “property” is one that applies to physical goods, that are in limited supply. It does not apply to things that are abundant and ubiquitous, i.e. no one owns the air because the air is wildly abundant and everywhere.
Information: music, art, storytelling, is not physical matter. Unlike physical matter, a story can be instantly copied by as many people as can hear it, because information does not obey the same scaling laws as physical matter. Vinyls and recording equipment started exposing how infinitely copiable information is, and computers and the internet really drove that point home.
Copyright though, has always been a dumb fucking system that hamfistedly tries to apply the ownership laws of physical properties to that of information. It does so by forcing artificial scarcity on that information and creating all of these walls and systems to maintain that scarcity.
Copyright has never been fit for purpose, and the better we get at processing information, the more evident that becomes.
AI companies are problematic because they are literally burning huge amounts of resources to replace humans while there are no mechanisms in most societies to ensure humans still get resources if the robots are better than them. That’s the actual problem with AI companies, and it’s fundamentally a problem with capitalism.
You need to actually use it and understand what it does before you clown on.
Try vibe coding a hello world project with the Opus models and Claude code. It’s not perfect by any stretch, but to argue it has no use case is absurd.
I mean, no software developer is going to go back to completely not using LLMs after Claude Code.
They’ve literally been caught using distillation training off the American models. They undoubtedly do. Even the more efficient American models do.
Big baby bitch can’t even think things through.
No they’re not.
The best Chinese models are good, but they’re resoundingly outclassed by the likes of Claude.
And that’s not to mention the Chinese models are trained off the American models, i.e. they can’t exist without the American ones being developed first.
Lmfao, look at this righteous edge lord.
Who needs to think things through, when you can just condemn someone who says anything “black” when you’re on team “white”.
Talking total debt is somewhat meaningless.
The important number is the ratio between their loss and their revenue.
i.e. the convenience store down the street could operate at a loss before turning profitable, and accumulate far less than half the debt of iHeartRadio, but that doesn’t mean the convenience store is the better long term investment. When it turns a profit, it’s potential profit is far smaller than iHeartRadio’s was.
I have no love for AI but I feel like the people clowning on this don’t understand the most basic aspects of how businesses work.
It is very common to take losses early on and return a profit later.
I don’t necessarily disagree.
Though it does raise concerns about government identity systems and fascist governments…
I grew up thinking that was a ridiculous anachronism, but looking at how far the US has fallen, I do understand the concern.
Imho the best option is just OS level enforcement. You buy a device, you set up accounts on them, some can be kid accounts, those ones have their web fetches always include their restrictions.
This is horseshit.
It is worth remembering that many of those who champion Digital Sovereignty today were silent back in 2006, when the open ISO/IEC ODF standard — the pillar of Digital Sovereignty — was announced: not only did they not listen to us during all these years, but in some cases they greeted us with a condescending smile.
If we can speak of Digital Sovereignty in Europe today, it is thanks to The Document Foundation and LibreOffice community members at large, who kept the flag of open-source office suites flying when everyone was predicting their demise, and who continued to develop the only truly open and standard format that guarantees Digital Sovereignty, as it provides full user control over content.
The answer to this, is “thank you for your service”. It is / was genuinely valuable. That being said, arguments about what people said or agreed with in the past is irrelevant to discussions about how to move forward.
The basic premise of this kind of arguing is a smell that you don’t actually have a real argument to lean on. It’s like credential dropping, it’s a heuristic that hints at what could be a likelier truth than another, based purely on debate metadata, but that’s it, and by their nature / definition, heuristics are constantly wrong.
Insisting on a white knight campaign to make a file format standard when you are not the standard file saving platform is Quixotic. It does not make you an ally of Microsoft to meet users where they’re at.
The EU government mandating a certain file format might actually move the needle, a niche documenting software’s defaults will not. This is why Microsoft’s famous playbook was “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish”, not “try and force a niche number of users into making this a thing somehow” (of course, Microsoft has also tried and failed the latter playbook numerous times).
Social media needs regulation for everyone, and I’m deeply concerned about the impact of ID verification on the open web, but at the same time, given the clear harms, it’s hard to argue with people attempting some form of regulation, even if limited and imperfect.
Cory Doctor’s recent book on Centaurs and Reverse Centaurs is worth reading.
The core idea of that is that centaurs are a human top and machine / alien body, they’re effectively augmented humans with all this technology to help them excel.
Reverse Centaurs are human bodies and machine / alien tops, where the humans are just checking the work of systems and are subservient to them. He points out that that’s one of the fundamental differences between Amazon and the Postal Service is that in the case of Amazon drivers, they basically function as a reverse Centaurs where they are just an appendage of the delivery car, tracked and managed by that car, to do the tasks the car can’t do on its own.