Eji1700

Don’t think they’re suggesting it’s not a big deal.

Any company losing 10 months of revenue overnight is a BIG fucking deal. Doubly so in a speculative asset that you’re holding for others “securely”. The financial hit has only just begun for them.

That said yes the trading volume has huge.

It’s what you’d need to be regulated yeah…

Thats been the fascinating part of crypto is watching society speedrun “best hits of financial crisis from history” by ignoring things we already solved.

Crypto is roughly agreeing that the current password rotation practices kinda suck and agreeing that the new way forward is just to have a single plain text file because you’re sure all that overhead was just nonsense

The vast majority of crypto being held now was purchased by people who had never even heard of Mt Gox.

It’s likely state sponsored and some nation(NK is a common one) just paid for the weapons budget of the next few years

It's such a shame how few things in media have even attempted to carry the torch TNG lit. There's been enough written about how Trek itself wasn't, but I always hope something else takes up the mantle.

Closest i've seen is The Orville which I found best described as McFarlen using his money to pay for his Larping (in a good way), but was pretty much just copy pasting.

It was such a fascinating show and handled issues with a tact and nuance you're lucky to get today.

Curious if this finally pops tether. I kinda doubt it, but to my very mild research on the subject I feel like binance was a big part of the equation. Of course so long as the market exists it'll need a stable, and it's got the inertia, so maybe it just won't matter.

I've always found the best approach to a commercial product for the masses it to belittle them first and only appeal to the enthusiasts...

> I think there is a rise of "this is legal because we used a computer to do it.

This has literally been defining the modern age since the 2000's or earlier. Basically every law that ever existed about targeting ads towards children has been WILDLY ignored (to everyone's profit) because of it.

While i generally agree, some of this tech could be a major force multiplier and lower the barriers to entry.

Even if you have a great game idea, it takes a ton of time and money to even get it off the ground, let alone get it coded correctly and maybe get the reach you want. A LOT of flash in the pan ideas probably fizzled out faster than they needed (most recently Among Us and Fall Guys come to mind) because they were built to ship, not to easily modify.

Tech like this could lower the barrier to smaller and more creative teams or even individuals and get some better competition in the area. Fighting games KNEW that rollback was the way looooooong before AAA bit the bullet and started making it standard, and they still fuck it up (and it probably would've taken longer if COVID didn't force the issue and punish those lagging).

That said 2 of the largest hurdles i've seen in everyone's "magically ideal" game are enemy AI and Plot.

Interesting and well designed enemy AI is still hard, and even games that did it well built the whole game around it (FEAR) and the system is vastly less impressive without that focus (Just Cause). I don't think we're anywhere near modern AI solving the issue of making a good AI system for a game due to design space problems, but it might.

Plot though...that's tricky. Everyone always says how cool it would be for everything to be like Mass Effect or more, with all choices mattering and everything interacting, but someone has to write that. AI is not turning out well though out plot points that don't feel like the equivalent of Bethesda mission creep.

Point of this whole ramble being that in arcadey/simple stuff I think we'll see a lot more great games (and would argue we already were with the growth of the indie scene over the last 15 years thanks to steam and other tools), but there's still going to be entire genres that are just miserable to develop.

To be a bit difficult, depends on the 100 you ask. Yes yes statistical sampling, but I think my point here is more about how generations are trained growing up.

A lot of people dislike change and sure as shit hate relearning a skill they didn't enjoy or have aptitude in the first place. I know exactly what kind of UX my dad prefers and he HATES all modern design patterns. I think several of them are great for information density and despise everything twitter popularized. Entire generations have grown up on twitter and they think it's basically the only way to display information.

Point being when we're discussing as large a surface area as "software" I'm not really sure you're going to get much out of asking 100 people except what decade they were born in and what software/patterns they grew up on. Clearly some things can outcompete others, but inertia and network effects drive adoption, and can turn people from "ugh I hate this" to "ugh why would you do anything other than this".

A biased opinion as I dev in F#, but it strikes me that AI is going to play best with functionally pure languages (strongly typed, no side effects, whatever we call that these days)?

F# is on the softest side of that, but letting the compiler tell the AI "nope, here's why" seems like a huge win in saving cycles and time.

The downside at first was simply, "how many examples of F# are there to learn from", and early on it showed, but I think that's been long overcome.

And F# is obviously NOT the best example since it's both "soft" on functional purity and niche. I imagine something like haskell is probably doing even better, although I've yet to check that at all (not that I can code haskell but I haven't looked at anecdotes or anything).

I realize this doesn't really help anyone who's grown to love python, and there's surely no perfect language, but just like how the web catapulted javascript, I see a future where the answer isn't "use AI to make python better" so much as "what already works super well with AI, and does it ease the user adoption"

> [Edit: note that the above video is "content" so if you're not used to the style it might be offputting but I'm into it]

I hate that it is because it makes me suspicious of every reaction. I happened to see the CD video on the clown wedding on the moon(sodium vapor maybe?) and so I at least have some grounding from this, but if I didn't I'd probably ignore most of this (as i ignored the thumbnail) because "literal industry defining tech" and "random temu mall ninja crap" has basically the same production pattern these days so why trust it?

I realize this is "old man yells at cloud" territory but it sucks that prostrating to the algorithm means all sincerity is lost because you have to ape Mr. Beast or whoever to get "engagement"

Edit-

And with that said, I'd say just jump to 23:40ish when the professional is talking if you're grumpy like me.

I realize this is 100% not the point, but is this an immediately practical breakthrough that will change computing?

My extremely limited understanding is “no” as I sorta assume that would be the headline. The main point being that while a MASSIVE improvement over any previous progress it’s still “small” from a practical standpoint.

This is not to downplay the very well conveyed problem this might be, but I just want to make sure I even got that right.

I do wonder if this will be a major issue for future development or if the math experts in diapers right now will grow up in this world and have tools and understanding to assist and we’re just in a rough transition, but unfortunately that’s about as much as I can contribute.

Eh not really? Sounds nice, but the most important part of government is authority. If i tell my neighbor I will lock him in a room unless they pay their taxes, i'm a fucking lunatic. It is 100% within the governments right however to do so.

You don't have to have the monopoly on violence to be the government, but it's often a defining feature, and where their authority stems from. A bunch of people together is just a community, and has no legal or other form or authority. If one of them decides to start stealing from the others, the appropriate retribution is mostly going to depend on who caught them.

At that point you're closer to libertarian/anarchy which, technically, is a form of government, but often defined by its lack of one. You arguably have small governments all over the world where that's how it works, but there's pretty clean lines when discussing these things.

Hell technically it's not a government unless it's running a state which is where a lot of this stems from.

> It wasn't great, didn't age well, but it gave people a decent place to live.

This is, arguably, the big problem. Things akin to Commie blocks have been tried in non communist countries, but in general government run housing has this major issue of almost always winding up poorly budgeted and supported, so it quickly becomes a nightmare as tax payers don't want to foot the bills on some other persons housing, and it's extra ripe for corruption and corner cutting, and so on.

Not that it shouldn't be investigated (any option should be considered), but it does seem to be one of the big weaknesses. In theory if a private landlord/building owner breaks the law, you have recourse though the legal system (yes in theory), while if the government isn't living up to what it said it would do....well you tend to lack any option for recourse.

To be clear this is a disgustingly simplified summary of a subject I have at best a casual hobbyists knowledge of, but there seems to be an advantage to leaving housing in the realm of private so that you have the option of kicking them in the teeth with the government if they completely fuck up. As messy as that might be, the alternative seems to be messier.