canthonytucci

I remember the “I’m feeling lucky” button

They’re talking about likelihood of a typo, not speed.

But they own this version instead of renting it. And it’s been released for free to the world.

That’s a way that the “worse” version is better to some people.

Also, assuming this person used $200/month subscription to some robot, and they used 5 days of of their quota, the money comes out about even after the first month or two, no?

I hope we can save “jobs aren’t supposed to be fun” for stuff like undertaker and grief counselor.

My feeling is making things should be mentally stimulating, and as many tedious parts that can be automated should be, so we can spend precious human thought on thinking instead of recitation.

I don’t know what you mean by the last part. Do you mean programmers depend on busy work to eat or the users depend on the human touch on the boring details?

All details are not created equal.

Some details are boring.

My AI dream (that I’m living happily) is getting to focus on the details that I find interesting and ignoring all the boilerplate details that modern software requires.

If you’re paying the $100/year to publish to the store you also get access to Xcode cloud, which you can point at a repo and it will build snd archive for you to distribute to testflight. I opened xcode to test locally in simulator the first time but haven’t had to since.

Using godot iOS export.

For regular old native ios dev replacing Xcode i don’t think i would do it.

.el = emacslisp file extension

Can I see the picture of Jupiter though? Seems like one of the 2 pictures this article would need

> Cars should be able to interface with any phone without having to subjugate themselves to Google and Apple. Because this is a perverted inversion of control.

Bluetooth?

> Because they sold them. They put it out in the world. If they just made it and then immediately destroyed it, wonderful! But they didn't.

They sold a pass to play the game while it was open. Just like a swimming pool or a buffet.

Just because we got an executable software instead of a wrist band doesn’t change what it is.

Is the naming convention the sticking point here?

Did we really think it meant “all you can eat until the heat death of the universe”?

> And, also, their creators are not a monolith. They were worked on by hundreds of hands. The production company shouldn't get to unilaterally make that decision.

Why not?

I have never had a say as a developer or designer of other software when the company turned off products, how much we charged customers, what the SLA was etc. etc. etc.

I signed a contract to do a job on a thing. Regardless of how much pride I took in my work I understood the license it would be distributed under and what my role was.

We can form guilds or join coops if we want a say. Labor has pull before and during the work. Get it in writing. After the fact we’re fucked. Welcome to earth. Sucks here but we make do.

> This is this and that is that.

But this is that. They sold us a concert ticket. We checked the checkbox next to the EULA. Nobody made us do it.

I get the ick from this kind of game it so I stopped buying them, except for when I do. Just like I stopped eating Doritos.

I don’t expect something that comes in a colorful crinkly bag at gas station to be healthy and I don’t expect a game sold by some big studio to not be ripping me off.

The idea of interacting with lawyers and politicians to solve the problem of “some of my luxury goods are a bad value” never crossed my mind.

Let’s take all these games as great artworks - why don’t their creators have the right to destroy them?

All my own art is derivative schlock, so maybe I’m biased, but I don’t see how the viewer/consumer whoever has any say in the matter. The show is over when it’s over.

Should be compel musicians to record every live performance and make those available to people who couldn’t make it to the show too?

What if someone was in the bathroom during their favorite song, should we compel an encore?

Maybe it’s ok for some things to be ephemeral.

I’m calling it garbage because the content is boring and the gameplay is tired for well over 99 out of 100 games I see.

The music, visual design, dialogue and “world building” of most games (indie and AAA) is trite recycled junk that without the budget would be indistinguishable from the output of a high school drama club (at best).

That’s before we talk about the cynical stuff like the always online, the loot boxes, the decontenting, the Day 1 dlc, the lack of physical disks you can share with friends or sell to GameStop, the bugs, the prices, etc. etc. etc.

I have failed at enough art and software myself to totally appreciate how much effort it takes to ship something even on the level of the crap that most games are. That doesn’t mean I think that makes them precious and people should be compelled to preserve them. Slop is slop regardless of if it was made by a human or a robot.

People put a lot of effort in to a lot of things that yield boring and or unethical results all the time, I don’t know why people treat games as some special case.

Why?

Is there a lower form of “art” than always online AAA garbage?

Im not going to lose any sleep over _COD 75: More of the Same Bullshit_ becoming lost media

How about a “stop buying games” movement where people just don’t buy this live service garbage?

It’s all shovelware. It’s all the same crap over and over. There are plenty of non live service games being released every day, buy those instead. If a game is actually important to people they’ll figure out a way to play it (as people did with WoW classic before classic).

The idea that we should spend time and energy to regulate the big studios (who will just find loopholes anyway) instead of just supporting the indies who are making good stuff is wild to me.

Can you describe the “AI-style CSS” look? It’s gone over my head. I thought this thing looks pretty nice, kind of jetbrainsy maybe.