Linosaurus

Ok, so they don’t call it a ’buy’ program.

It’s a lending program, for free. With a deposit for full value so it becomes a purchase if you don’t return it in time. Same structure but the phrasing matters.

Cool idea.

> , is "man, capitalism is a mistake"

Man, we need a better term for this criticism.

The US right now is more harsh to live in than the US pre-Reagan, which was more harsh than many countries with a strong welfare state, but all of them are capitalistic.

It’s rather neat, and recently hit 1.0.

That game, Timberborn, shares some design elements with roller coaster tycoon.

A block based 3d world they can be modified by the player.

Units walking around on player defined paths, with their mood influenced by pretty bushes.

But there are no obvious performance considerations like in the article.

> Vertically they produce 77% compared to 90% of the tilted panels? In what graph is the lower number better?

77% of the ’normal orientation’ per year, but the graph and 131% value is for a day in winter (January 15 this year). At least that’s my read.

Iirc I thought they were a bit disingenuous.

In theory the change in electric field will induce a small current in the other wire, and their magical science lamp turns on at any non-zero electricity. Whether the wires are connected or not at the far end doesn’t matter.

They never clarified how strong the other current would be.

> actually explain the "double" part in detail?

$100 appears in your account. That’s one part. The other part depends on why.

* you moved money from another account, the double is -100 in that account.

* you sold stuff, +100 in income.

* you borrowed some money, +100 in ‘debt’.

In a physical book each of these categories would have a left and right column, and each transaction has numbers in one left and one right column. Or in many columns but the sums of left vs right columns must be the same.

When describing a game that looks like it had a smallish team and graphics budget, ‘indie’ is a useful shorthand. It sets certain expectations.

Certainly marketing and media (as evidenced by the article) find this useful, but I think many consumers also are more interested in the game than in the creators. So it makes sense that this language shift happens.

But yes it certainly misses the theoretical point of a category like that.

And would be nice if it was replaced with a technically correct word. ‘Indie-like’?

That’s because it’s not a self-improving computer system. It’s just programming as it exists today for thousands of years.

No. If you listen to only a single artist for a month, your payment is still split the same way everyone else’s payment is, by total streamed numbers.

It sounds better if they artist got your entire monthly payment (after payment processors and Spotify’s fee), but probably a nightmare for accountants.

Unfortunately, games involving human reflexes or difficulty-to-see visual clues aren’t very fun against strangers who can run what they want on their devices. Because cheating.

I don’t think a good solution exists except to keep those games to locked down consoles only.

But maybe a more transparent appeals process could help, even if it gets expensive.

Sounds like the initial table has just one row and one column, containing the entire 16mb csv string.

> To the developers: You signed a contract, and now you expect to not have to live up to it?

From what I can tell, it’s more like they have a short term contract they are happy with, but their business model requires them to be able to extend it. They can avoid the new fees ‘simply’ by not letting any user download their Unity games after Jan 1.

But yeah, using free software would avoid this.

Yes, both meanings exists in dictionaries.

Fortunately usage has consolidated. In my experience a factoid is generally intended to be true in (American?) English, but untrue in Swedish.

> The key question is /why/ air moves faster on one side, and once you get away from the misconception of same time, I've never heard an intuitive argument.

Since the air follows a curved surface instead of straight ahead, you could perhaps apply your intuition for centrifugal force. Momentum sort of pulls the air away from the surface.

I’m not even sure this explanation is wrong.