It seems like a very good use of LLMs. You should write a blog post with detail of your process with examples for people who are not into all AI tools as much. I only use Web UI. Lots of what you are saying is beyond me, but it does sound like clever strategy.
It is always the same sad story. Someone learns a new name, gets trapped inside, and tries to escalate conflict. I will not call that 'open mind'.
The deeper reason is that there is no kindness — many really don't care about others who seem alien to them. They just hide that behind all kinds of names.
Will removing the incentive, which is the upvotes, help reduce this spam? You can disable public access to the points gained by a new account (or may be for every account).
Or if the ranking that's attractive to spammer, may be try experimenting with randomizing order of comments in a discussion.
What I hope not to see is the Reddit method of "Oh you made a new account? Cool. You can't post anywhere and you can't post until you've posted catch 22"
IF its an android, connect to it via ADB and disable all the BS apps, even launcher. I am using projectivity launcher on mine, even has child lock which we really need. No ads or popups etc at all. YouTube is all we watch on this TV anyway, and retro gaming and movies.
I also have Nvidia Shield connected to it, that one is setup the same way.
I will leave this comment here by an ex Windows desktop experience team developer which says that designers have lots of control but don't even use Windows, they use Macs.
> It's almost like some tiny extremist faction has gained control of Windows
This has been the case for a while. I worked on the Windows Desktop Experience Team from Win7-Win10. Starting around Win8, the designers had full control, and most crucially essentially none of the designers use Windows.
I spent far too many years of my career sitting in conference rooms explaining to the newest designer (because they seem to rotate every 6-18 months) with a shiny Macbook why various ideas had been tried and failed in usability studies because our users want X, Y, and Z.
Sometimes, the "well, if you really want this it will take N dev-years" approach got avoided things for a while, but just as often we were explicitly overruled. I fought passionately against things like the all-white title bars that made it impossible to tell active and inactive windows apart (was that Win10 or Win8? Either way user feedback was so strong that that got reverted in the very next update), the Edge title bar having no empty space on top so if your window hung off the right side and you opened too many tabs you could not move it, and so on. Others on my team fought battles against removing the Start button in Win8, trying to get section labels added to the Win8 Start Screen so it was obvious that you could scroll between them, and so on. In the end, the designers get what they want, the engineers who say "yes we can do that" get promoted, and those of us who argued most strongly for the users burnt out, retired, or left the team.
As a Mac user, ironically, it seems like the Mac design team only uses iPhones or worse, not Macs themselves.
I think we are at a stage where the “design rules the world” dominate rather than the full product experience. And there seems to be zero vision left in these products as well.
> As a Mac user, ironically, it seems like the Mac design team only uses iPhones or worse, not Macs themselves.
It seems certain that they use iPhones for everything. They can’t even subject themselves to using an iPad. They just copy things from iOS straight into iPadOS and macOS and let others (end users) deal with the fallout. Craig Federighi doesn’t seem to pay any attention to software anymore.
Same how sex sells for humans, design and looks sell the same way for objects, from phones, to PCs, cars, washing machines, etc.
Consumers don't understand tech specs, so if you show them something that triggers their lizard brains because it genuinely looks really good, appealing, futuristic, trustworthy, etc, then they'll buy it for that.
The issue is that most designers are snake oil salesmen, so from the perspective of management and C-suite who approves designs, you can't objectively verify the claims and buzzwords of the design team. See the pepsi logo redesign fuckup.
I'm sure they use macs but those are only about 8% of Apple sales vs 50+ for iPhone and 22% for services. So I guess they stuff that makes money gets prioritized.
The weird thing is the way it’s trash. It breaks weird things no dev should ever have to touch. At one point Excel left horizontal lines on screen, when scrolling. Bullets and numbering just straight up refuses to restart numbering. It _worked_ why did you break it? Who gained what out of you breaking it?
where I work, we're not allowed to merge them. we test every change, and we review everything to make sure there are no regressions in all the obvious features. scrolling through our webpage will never break in production, because we use people with a full set of eyes to check before merge.
I believe you but I've literally not worked at a single place that puts that much scrutiny on PRs and I've been working as a professional programmer for 20 years.
I have been following you on twitter since I saw it. It looks amazing. Recently tried the demo. It is like under 50MB (the demo at least) which is insane these days. Placing building required construction of the building room by room which was tedious. I am sure some people will enjoy that. Will that be the core part of final game?
Thanks! Designing your own buildings is optional. The game has a feature to place zones where buildings automatically grow, but will be limited to residential and office zones at early access launch.
So CAV (constant angular velocity) is an encoding format for laser disks. When something is written with CAV, it is basically analogue data and therefore repeating patterns can be recognized on the disk.
No, CAV has nothing to do with encoding, and both analog and digital formats have used both CAV and CLV and hybrids of the two.
The legible text seen in the microscope images happens because of the combination of LaserDisc recording a raw and uncompressed encoding of the analog video signal, the way that LaserDisc used CAV to store an integer number of frames per track so that the image data for corresponding on-screen locations of subsequent frames would be aligned at the same radial position on the disc, and the credits scrolling vertically at constant speed.
If LaserDisc had used a digital encoding (especially a compressed encoding), the data on disc may still have had discernible patterns but the text would not necessarily have been legible. If it had used CAV but not stored a whole number of frames per track, then temporal and spatial locality on screen would not have corresponded so well to spatial locality on disc. And the vertically-scrolling credits are pretty much the only kind of content that can produce the recognizable and legible images on the disc surface.
I think the fact that the aspect ratio of the text came out approximately right probably is a consequence of the scrolling speed of the credits being chosen to suit the vertical resolution of the video. If the text had appeared squished in the microscope, it would probably have been moving too fast on screen to be clearly legible.
For the images seen through the microscope, the horizontal axis is the same as the horizontal axis of the video. The vertical axis of what the microscope sees is the time axis of the video: it's essentially a slit camera view of a particular individual scan line position within the frame.
No; it's strictly a reference to constant RPM or variable RPM.
CAV discs contained one frame per rotation. While this meant you could only fit half an hour on one side of a disc, it did give you perfect slow-motion and freeze-frames.
I worked in a video store and loved LaserDiscs. The Duran Duran video album was CAV, and the Pioneer LD-700 had such a fast transport mechanism and remote control that I could to DJ-style "scratching" with it.
The data being written to the disk is the same in CAV or CLV disks, but the player just needs to know how to spin the disk at the right speed so that the laser can read the pits/lands correctly. It is purely a detail about the speed that the disk is spun at so they can cram more data on it with CLV disks.
What CAV LaserDiscs allow for, though, is to make it extremely obvious where scanlines and blanking intervals are in the video signal.
