scott_s

74 ms·

811.
Making games for a living means being in constant fear of losing your job(polygon.com)
13 points by scott_s 8y ago|1 comments
812.
by scott_s 8y ago
What this looked like in 2004: https://www.scott-a-s.com/the-linux-boot-process-of-2004/
813.
by scott_s 8y ago
> His analysis was quickly dismissed as being unscientific and incorrect by experts in the impact of research. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47478537 Racists and misogynist have been using bad scien
814.
by scott_s 8y ago
But it's important to keep in mind no one is saying that . It's dangerous to get wrapped up in what people might say because that relies on your imagination, not reality.
815.
by scott_s 8y ago
In most modern martial art discipline rankings I'm aware of, white belt is your rank when you step on the mat with no experience, so you don't really "earn" it. I think the metaphor would be whatever color the rank above
816.
by scott_s 8y ago
I don't disagree with your reasoning. But: I posit there are fewer "good scammers" than "scammers." Added friction probably reduces the total number of active scammers.
817.
by scott_s 8y ago
You are not necessarily in disagreement with the poster you responded to. They meant it was fair in the sense that the user is using a fair heuristic to determine how likely they are to be scammed. You're saying it's unfair to the
818.
by scott_s 8y ago
Because the generated C is expected to be integrated into the project as source code : "Along the way, we learned what it takes to deliver quality C code that can be taken seriously and integrated into an actual source tree." The
819.
by scott_s 8y ago
As commenters point out in sibling threads, there is a logic to the hierarchy: the top is GitHub operations and concepts, while the bottom are git concepts. (“Releases” are really just tags.)
820.
by scott_s 8y ago
I mention this in a sibling comment, as I've thought something similar: maybe the README should be on top. The problem, as I mention there, is that when you use GitHub as a tool, it's more common to navigate to the files than refe
821.
by scott_s 8y ago
My point is that you will not.
822.
by scott_s 8y ago
> If you are a programmer, you might be surprised but other people normally don’t like hierarchies. Nested structures are hard to grasp, remember, navigate, and grouping is very often non-intuitive. Nested tabs are one of the worst UI p
823.
by scott_s 8y ago
People don't refer to contracts often, and we intuit costs all the time. We have many services and utilities which are pay-for-what-you-use, such as gas, electric and internet. I don't know how much it's going to cost me to t
824.
by scott_s 8y ago
The ACM is similar, and I think (hope) they will eventually have to just open up all published papers by default. The main difference between the IEEE and the ACM to Elsevier is that the IEEE and ACM are professional organizations . They h
825.
by scott_s 8y ago
When the price charged for a thing is completely unrelated to the cost of that thing, it's going to be hard for people to intuit what they will pay for their usage of that thing - both adults and kids.
826.
by scott_s 8y ago
That amount of messages (86 a day) seems normal to me. It's just chat, but on a phone.
827.
by scott_s 8y ago
Part of the dementia is that you lose the metacognition to understand that your short-term memory is hosed. We don't just become forgetful. We lose cognitive capacity. We're not ourselves minus the ability to remember things. We s
828.
by scott_s 8y ago
No, but it's also not necessarily obvious. By "surprising," I mean that it does not contradict my model of how people behave. But by "obvious," I mean that, unprompted, I may not have considered it an important part
829.
by scott_s 8y ago
Because the flavors are extracted from fruit. (Does it make a difference, given that the chemicals are the same? No.)
830.
by scott_s 8y ago
Which is fine, but often the claim is "The thing in this picture is a ghost." That's easily testable.
831.
by scott_s 8y ago
"I like pizza" is an opinion. "I can read your thoughts" is a factual claim. We can test factual claims.
832.
by scott_s 8y ago
As I said above, you're right in that we can't prove a negative. But it's not a claim outside of science. They make claims which can be tested. When tested, their claims fail. When you repeat that enough times, you have amass
833.
by scott_s 8y ago
"Prove" is a funny word. No, I can't "prove" there are no pink elephants in interstellar space. But based on our understanding of the universe, we can dismiss it out right. Claims of psychic powers are basically the
834.
by scott_s 8y ago
In this instance, when the specific people are looking up people's Facebook accounts to mine information on them, we can say that they know what information they gathered through natural means.
835.
by scott_s 8y ago
I was disappointed to recently learn that star dates were basically arbitrary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stardate
836.
by scott_s 8y ago
Google has down exactly this: https://golang.org/
837.
by scott_s 8y ago
I think you are underestimating how novel those things were 20 years ago. The NYT has been ahead-of-the-curve when it comes to the sophistication of their webpage for about that long. Perhaps their language helped.
838.
by scott_s 8y ago
This is the sort of programming language that I would love to read a detailed retrospective of in an ACM journal. It's a programming language designed to solve a particular problem, grew over time for that problem, and it successfully
839.
by scott_s 8y ago
I think it works well. The context seems clear to me, since the top text is time-based.
840.
by scott_s 8y ago
On the name question, perhaps: previously. As in when tv shows continuing a story was novel, and they'd do a "Previously, on Buffy..."

More ›