I work in another sector of the entertainment industry, music.
There are exceptions that prove the rule, but I do think there’s something about the quality of a person’s output that changes as they age. Maybe it’s brain elasticity. Maybe it’s that life changes as we age and things like kids or aging parents or health take precedence.
Regardless, I wish we had a better structure to more gracefully allow the greats to move into teaching or mentorship rather than expecting them to continually release the next great thing. Sports is a good model due to the physicality, if a little on the ruthless end of the spectrum. Most great athletes peak at 26-32 and the ones that continue can still do amazing things but they move into a different role; captains, coaches, commentators, whatever.
Spector was in his mid-forties when Deus Ex was released, System Shock a few years before that.
I wonder if he’s an exception that proves the rule like you mention, or if his experiences in his youth working on tabletop games contributed to his design sensibilities in the 90s.
I can’t confirm the quote online but I remember Julia Child saying in one of her shows that it’s easy to make a good omelette and almost impossible to make a great omelette.
Actually an even more cost effective way would be to buy a used 1-year old top of the line MacBook Pro on FBM with cash and then sell it a year later and rinse, wash, repeat.
Knitting has long been a highly political activity. Knitting in public by women during the French Revolution was an audacious act of gender equality.
And tennis? Goodness surely you’re aware of the modern political ramifications of tennis that happen almost constantly. There are so many modern examples but let’s pick Wimbledon’s recent banning of Russia. Or Serena Williams; who for her part would rather prefer that there isn’t a political earthquake every time she steps on the court.
Perhaps a better, more honest, and certainly more realistic course of action is to acknowledge that anything involving human beings is intrinsically political, including and maybe even especially tennis and knitting, and secondly to admit that you personally would prefer not to think about the intrinsic politics of knitting or tennis when you exercise those hobbies.
Yes, When politics is defined so widely as to describe interactions of humans and Society, anything can be construed as political. That doesn't mean it it is a useful or productive lens too obsess over.
I gave this a real shot, but I found it impossible to use the email client. There are basic things like collapsing replies (in a conversation with multiple lawyers no less, damn do they love their email signatures) are extremely important. Without them, it makes scannning and replying to email, even withe aid of AI, impossible.
Really love the whole idea and I hope it gets more usable.
We looked into the specific issue you mentioned. Collapsing replies does exist in the product, but we found it doesn't work for emails sent from Outlook (our guess on why you might have faced this). We are fixing this in the next release, shipping this week. Hope you give it a try.
Thanks for posting that link. I read part of it and their reasoning strikes me as contortionist. Good then that after decades, as you point out, that argument has not won out.
I would love to actually debate this issue with someone who does believe birthright citizenship is not a thing.
I just finished Michael Christie’s Greenwood, a generational epic on family and, well, trees. Part of the book takes place in a future where the only trees left in the world are on a remote island off the coast of British Columbia where the rich go to replenish.
It’s eco-dystopian science fiction (by a Canadian no less) but I wonder if the people in that future would’ve supported something like this now. I imagine probably.
HN has always been associated with tech entrepreneurship rather than 'hacker' in the way that it's commonly used.
I'm not sure there was ever a time when 99.9% of the userbase, or even a much smaller percentage, actually valued privacy and freedom rather than seeing them as obstacles to value extraction.
> We valued privacy and freedom over surveillance and “results.”
The relative value of one over the other depends on the absolute value of either. In a Mad Max scenario, very few would value the principles of privacy and freedom over the immediate need to reestablish basic order.
Take auto theft as an example. Depending on how old you are, the recent spike in auto theft is either "nothing compared to the 80s" or "entirely unacceptable in civilized society"; in select cities, the rate almost tripled in five years[0] (an incredible jump), though remaining well below the historical peak.
However, case clearance rates are at an all time low, which I'm sure furthers frustration for the victims. That is, you're statistically less likely to be a victim of auto theft today than during the historical peak, but if you are, you're statistically more likely to be SOL.
You're probably approaching this from a civil libertarian point of view, but the Constitution is not a suicide pact[1]. Members of society who collectively uphold the law also have a vested interested in the maintenance of the conditions that would further perpetuate upholding the law, i.e. law and order.
There are exceptions that prove the rule, but I do think there’s something about the quality of a person’s output that changes as they age. Maybe it’s brain elasticity. Maybe it’s that life changes as we age and things like kids or aging parents or health take precedence.
Regardless, I wish we had a better structure to more gracefully allow the greats to move into teaching or mentorship rather than expecting them to continually release the next great thing. Sports is a good model due to the physicality, if a little on the ruthless end of the spectrum. Most great athletes peak at 26-32 and the ones that continue can still do amazing things but they move into a different role; captains, coaches, commentators, whatever.
Maybe that should apply to games, coding, etc.