So what's the long term plan? If tests require a bunch of ram, scaling costs seem at odds with "Free Forever". Will you eventually have a pay walled tier? Or will you seek donations to pay for infrastructure or...
I like the idea of a community FOSS or source available offering, I have a lovely pile of ram from the before times (when it didn't cost an arm and a leg).
In my field, arXiv (free preprint server) is actually much more discoverable than journals. It tends to be on top of Google searchers, many people (myself include) check it out daily, and few people even check journals (why would you check dozens of different ones if everyone posts their work on arXiv?).
This isn’t being realistic. The major benefit of these is peer review. You aren’t going to have enough people to peer review the work of a massively open and public publication system.
On top of that the chance of finding something as you suggest becomes that much more difficult. Smaller findings get published now in a more controlled scenario and get lost in the stream.
Major journals are a net positive for surfacing important science.
Yet "peer review" would absolutely scale if it were actually the review of peers (and not just an editorial board). A large number of publications where submissions are reviewed by previous and prospective authors would be much like how open source peer review works, though not without its own set of issues.
Discovery is a search problem and its pretty clear that we have the technical capacity to solve that problem if there is enough of a signal from wide-spread peer review.
Major journals become those that re-publish and report on the big debates and discoveries of the actually peer-reviewed journals and this would be the work of "journalists".
Peer-review can also occur from non-gatekeepers, from non-experts. You realize you posted this on a massively open and public publication system, right?
Non-experts sometimes bring perspectives that gatekeepers are blind to.
Grapheneos is, to my understanding, a dedicated development effort that specifically targets pixels.
Lineageos on the otherhand, provides scaffolding that volunteers can use to support phones of their choosing. It's very best effort and ymmv between phones. A universal upgrade option is just asking for trouble as it's not guaranteed all phones will behave the same/well.
FWIW in my experience upgrading Android versions works, mostly, as long as you remember to uninstall the old Google Play services and then install the new ones.
However, without a tested migration path, it may break your phone and make you factory reset + reflash the ROM if it doesn't work out, and there's nobody you can turn to or blame when that goes wrong. There's no official support, but that doesn't mean it'll never work.
Testing migration paths is a massive pain, especially when you're upgrading a whole bunch of parts all at once, and volunteers have more fun and frankly more important things to work on.
It's not the end of the world, it's a minor convenience and better than busy waiting.
There are plenty of cases where you want to manipulate an object but it's not guaranteed that it exists before your code is run. You get similar functionality with:
while not parentObj:FindFirstChild("childObj name") do wait() end
AFAIK, wait() is >= 1/30 of a second, if you wanted to be extra timely you'd instead run every heartbeat.
Programming doesn't make it easy to not miss jokes like that. I'll never forget my mum's face after I told her that I was working on a "killAllChildren" function when I was at school
Like? It's hard to do anything when the executive, legislative, and judicial branches are all controlled by the same party. Until midterms, there's not much that can be done at the federal level. States can oppose some issues, and some States are, but what exactly do you think the opposition can/should be doing that they aren't already?
Connecting with people, building a mass movement, organizing institutions that can funnel people and effort into building the world and election results they want. Taking risks by taking a stand on issues and saying those issues are the reason to vote for them (not to avoid having the other side win). Doing local politics to demonstrate competence and show that they care and are building things, then show off those things to the rest of the country and say “look, we can do this everywhere” or at least “look at what we can do on a small scale but our vision is bigger and it’s limited by the fact our vision needs to happen on a national scale and can’t be achieved fully at this small scale”. Lots of things.
They should be putting out model legislation now on a monthly basis. No, none of it can pass, none of it can get to the floor. But they need bills that they can say they will pass if given a majority, and they need to be OK with the Republicans attacking them for the next 15 months. In fact the more time the Republicans spend attacking Democratic legislative proposals, the less time they are spending on selling their own.
The Democrats also need to put out radical proposals, not incrementalist ones or business-as-usualones along with fluffy messages about competency and management skills. The public does not want a party of competent middle managers whose primary skillset is watering down expectations and telling people to be patient while they redecorate. They need to put out policies that are going to make people spit out their coffee.
IMHO, it's already too late for the midterms. In fact, it's probably too late for the 2028 presidential election, too. Democrats need to connect, and that connection isn't from showing up, out of nowhere, three months before an election and taking policy. The connection starts years before the election, by associating oneself to the things the voters also associate with. I think one of the most brilliant things Trump ever did was to get involved with WWE. That started the connection with Rural America. It was long before he ran for president, and it wasn't boring policy talk. It was, "Look at me! I'm your guy! I'm into wrestling, just like you!" Now, this is nothing new - Clinton played the sax on Arsenio Hall. But I think the Democrats are just terrible at it. And here's a great example: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DMIuyMQRAq1
Probably because the tsa isn't able/allowed to hand out access willy nilly.
It's kinda like how the police need warrants to request cellphone data, but cellphone companies could sell realtime data to third parties who in turn sold it to the police.
Yes, they build off other open source projects and list them in the README. I actually do run moonlight + sunshine myself, and have for more than a year. It's not too difficult to setup, depends on what you want to achieve.
I hadn't heard of wolf [0], but it checks a lot of boxes that sunshine does not. Namely, it supports multiple clients at once, multiple streams, and virtual displays out of the box (Linux + container first is almost neat). Sunshine is more for allowing your gaming desktop to be used as for game streaming. There's also a fork of sunshine, Apollo [1], that's more similar to wolf.
Yeah, it doesn't really elaborate on why openworld might be more fun than standard tracks/cups. Sure, I can drive around in it and look at it, but what makes than fun? This article basically tells us large scale level design takes a lot of effort, but no more.
Zelda makes sense to a degree, but IMO they lost the plot on what made Zelda games interesting. Old Zelda games were kinda open, but had (mostly) fixed sequence. The games were basically lock and key puzzles with a lot of back tracking. As you went you unlocked more items (keys), but having to key wasn't enough. You had to figure out how/where to use it. The way everything layered was elegant. You were excited to get to a dungeon, they always need a new gimmick(s)/mechanic(s), you got a new toy, and two boss fights. Once you were done, you got to see how this new thing unlocked more of world.
New Zelda games have puddle deep dungeons and shrines to quickly get you back into the overworld, and you've already unlocked all the mechanics before the tutorial is over. So all that's left is exploring the overworld for the sake of exploration, which has a thousand seeds and a hundred shallow shrines to encourage you overturn every stone in it.
I get I might not be the target demographic, open world games aren't inherently bad, and the new Zeldas enjoyed great commercial success. However I do feel this shift to open world misses and loses what made Mario Kart and Zelda beloved series to begin with.
I feel like the dungeons in BOTW all resemble the rooms in Portal. I.e. they feel highly artificial and contrived. However, this lets the player focus on the puzzle itself, rather than worry about the story at that moment. The puzzles there really force you to "get good" at a particular maneuver the game requires of the character. Rather than getting an item or advancing a world event, the player's reward is simply to suck less by accomplishing the task.
Plus, let's be honest, Zelda's story is really pretty fungible. The linear progression was mainly due to hardware limitations rather than aesthetic choice.
> IMO they lost the plot on what made Zelda games interesting
That's definitely an "IMO"—I've been playing Zelda games since the first, and Breath of the Wild revitalized my love for a series I was getting bored with. I do want to see them do something different with the next big title, but Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom kept my interest for hundreds of hours.
Actually, fwiw, I didn’t really play BotW. My non-gaming SO did, I just did the boss fights. They seemed to have fun exploring and hunting for ingredients. Although it was the pandemic so maybe standards were low.
Nowadays, I find the stagnation of open world games a little boring. But, I also enjoy steeping in a world. So I play rogue-lites, haha.
It reads to me like he had he simple (relative to today) investment strategies which where profitable, and closed shop when those market inefficiencies started running dry.
He was also, at that point, very old. He started his first fund in 1968. It tells you something about the modern world that you can your fund successfully for three decades, accumulate one of the best all-time records, and you will still have people online call you useless if you bow out in your 70s when your returns go dry for a couple of years.
I like the idea of a community FOSS or source available offering, I have a lovely pile of ram from the before times (when it didn't cost an arm and a leg).