danko

Just wanted to say: thank you for making and maintaining this. I’m sorry that so many of the initial comments on this HN post are from one person complaining that their submissions didn’t get accepted. That’s the thing with the personal web: it’s personal! It’s what that person wants, which happens to be the thing that makes it great. If you don’t like it, the rest of the internet is still there.

A slight spoiler, but there's a reason why some spaces are '?' - they hint that one specific type of creature may be nearby. (Think of the one that looks like a Beholder from D&D).

For the walls - think of them as an HP sink. The game largely revolves around using your health as efficiently as possible to explore the board. Walls are useful since you can attack them 1 HP at a time to get the XP out of them (thus allowing you to always fully use your allotment before refilling your health).

Prost and Senna were evenly matched – that's why the racing between them was so great, and why the rivalry was so pitched. Senna was faster than Prost in qualifying and over a single lap, and vastly better in rainy conditions. Prost had better race-craft and was more consistent lap-over-lap, race-over-race. They were both otherworldly.

Bingo. It was that kind of thinking that put Neville Chamberlin in the dunk tank of history.

Not to put words in OP's mouth, but I'd guess the weirdness is in a couple of things:

1) Jimmy can go deep on some extremely obscure corners of the industry (e.g. interactive fiction movements that maybe only a few dozen academic acolytes are even aware of).

2) The occasional deep tangent. For example, I don't think a month-long mini-biography of Edward Mannock was really necessary to appreciate the Amiga game _Wings_. But then again, I loved that tangent, so it's the kind of weirdness that I can personally embrace. I'm guessing the Analog Antiquarian is going to end up ultimately absorbing that energy anyway.

Try passing along a vinyl or CD or VHS or DVD collection when you die. See how fast it ends up at a flea market, or on the curb waiting for the trash truck. ALL digital goods are ephemeral one way or the other, unless you're an actual archivist. That's why archivists are important as their own discipline.

It's true there's a non-zero chance the property market implodes, but the shift to remote workers is exactly what WeWork is counting on. Many (even most) people chafe at working in their living space 100% of the time, and squatting in coffee shops and the like also has its limits. People generally need a work place that is separate from their living place, even if their work place is not the same work place as the rest of their company. Throw in the need for quiet places, conference rooms, whiteboards, etc, and before you know it...

The implication here is that a lot of value associated with 2019-era VC-funded startups is derived from the revenue they receive by selling to other VC-funded startups.

If we're keying off of personal anecdote, allow me to be a single point in favor of the touch bar. I actually like the thing, and find it useful. Yes, I do!

I put my money on the former. 4chan is... itself. But it is definitely a vibrant community. And Poole himself has some thoughtful, unique insight into what makes a community vibrant and what kills it.

It's interesting how this article conflicts the narrative (and indeed, Fitzgerald's own narrative) about his life. The narrative was that they lived fabulously until the simultaneous stresses of the the stock market crash and Zelda's mental breakdown in 1929. Turns out that at least from an income perspective, he was doing quite well up until the moment he died. But Zelda's healthcare costs ruined him anyway, and he cognitively backed himself in a corner in terms of making adjustments.

It reminds me of a quote from another famous author, one Charles Dickens:

"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

There are many, many objectives for which the F1 rules need to account. Competitive balance is one of them. Providing interesting and relevant technical challenges for automakers and teams is another (and was a major driver behind the recent switch to hybrid engines). In addition to those, you have safety, spectacle, cost-containment, logistical considerations, and about a thousand other goals that need to be incorporated. The FIA takes incredible flak for whatever they do because there are myriad tradeoffs between these objectives, and it's impossible to balance them all in a way that makes everyone happy.