Coriza

I loved the FF8 card game. It was so sad that you had to choose to used up some cards if you wanted some equipments if I recall correctly. It would be nice to not have to choose to keep all cards or have all equipments os spells

I don’t see input being discussed as much as it should, but when modern games became very realistic, let’s say Battlefield 4 era, it became clear for me that the current challenge for gaming is input. You can make an character animation do anything but you can’t instruct it to the character, maybe that is why this quick time action bullshit is so popular, because you can make a very complex cinematic scene but you can’t make the player give the input for it.

That is all to say this problem is 10x worst for VR games. Like the biggesr benefit of a 3D view is to move around but if you can’t do that in a natural way it kinda sucks, that is why 3D movies sucks, you are not moving around the scene. I guess that is also why VR works well with flight sims because in a real plane you are confined to your sit and can only look around. Now a shooter or other FPSs you WALK around and that has not being solved.

The efficiency is not on the API it is on the microarchitecture. The value of copying the API is just to run unmodified software made for CUDA.

I’m kind of noob in general terms and I’m afraid I’ll be leaving dual boot just in case.

ArchLinux is the other alternative.

Never change internet. Never change.

OP, don’t go with the hype, don’t go arch Linux as your first distro, you can change to it later when you get more comfortable and feels like having a more hands on approach.

PS: I don’t think that matters but just in case, I am an arch user for at least 12 years already as my only OS (except work computer) and I find it wild that so many people recommends arch Linux (or any of its derivatives) for beginners. I can only guess how many people get burnt and give up on Linux because of it.

I cannot get over the fact that that is not how whatsapp looks when someone sends multiple messages. This is the chat list screen that shows your recent chats. This image is like multiple contacts with the same name and image (but different phone number) sending the same message.

And it would be so simple if it was the correct chat screen with multiple messages from the person with each its own time stamp and stuff

In theory yes. In practice you cannot expect that every user maintains a server and one with internet facing ssh, specially a message app and the average non technical user.

It is supposed to to keep your SSN secret and not carry the card with you everywhere but you have to memorize it and everyone and their dog is gonna ask for it. It is kinda scary how many times you have to give it out to random people over the phone or email.

I mean, if you notice that you had and lost 700 millions you have to have a really strong mind to not go crazy. If it was me I think I would go crazy.

You see, your mistake was thinking that they want to make things better and are just misguided. The point is to gut the government and make it bad.

I disagree, in my opinion it is the opposite, IP and copyright laws of today do more harm than good, they stiffness innovation and creativity. The reason I think is at least two fold, one it incentivizes companies to stop innovating once they get a leadership in the market, since no one can use the innovation they can "camp out"on it and just pluck competition when they are at infancy, using their size and dominant position they can just buy any starting company that tries to innovate further. There is many examples of that, like kodak killing its own development in digital camera so to not jeopardize their camera film business. Same with electric cars, there was companies in the 70s that started doing it, they were just bought and the development interrupted, and because they have the IP on said innovations they can just not do it since no one else can either.

The second is that I argue that if a innovation is so easily replicated only by seen the end result or cursory explanation it really is like impeding people to do basic stuff, you see that a lot in software patents and video game mechanics. And last not forget that scientific advancements don´t happen in a vacuum, they build on top of previous innovations, and when just the author can build on top of its innovation it really slows it down. You can see it in how research and scientific achievements are done since the enlightenment, one research does something and share with the community and all over the worlds other researchers tries to build on top of it, otherwise everyone would be starting from scratch and would take so much more time. On the topic of researchers, must of the innovations and scientific advancements are done buy researchers that do not see any benefit of IP laws, be it in universities or companies, their IP are owned by the companies and universities, and universities are the more important ones because a lot of basic research are not immediately profitable, it is a slow climb of steps, each new paper, each new small improvements until it gets to a point that it can be applied.

And lastly I just wanna point out that Linux (and other FLOSS OSs) have being the leader in innovation on the operation system topic, and in fact Linux is the one pushing Microsoft to do more than just stagnating.

People like to make stuff for themselves, to do things, to share, and feel useful. I believe it is the default state of people, you see that in families and close friends. You see people simply doing stuff for themselves and sharing the results. You can build a pool and invite over your friends and such. It is nice when you do something for yourself but that other people also enjoy.

So I think the primary reason is that people like to do things to benefit themselves, things that they want the result or that they enjoy doing the process, and then why not share, even better if other people enjoy the result. It is like cooking for your family or friends

But that is not the point the other comment was making. It said that there is no incentive to create something and innovate if anyone can just copy it, and the whole FLOSS movement is a prove that is not the case. Same thing with the argument against UBI that would remove the insentive for people to work.

You can have other justification for IP, but that was the one the commenter gave and it is empirically false.

Did I said that? I am just pointing out about the companies origin because I don’t understand how this misinformation keep spreading still and with so many resources about it. I guess it is true that “A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes”.

But in any case I will answer your loaded question. No I don’t think his companies would be where they are today, because Elon has one thing that he was good at, and it is hyping, marketing, creating a narrative, a lore, and creating a fan base. An example is this lore that he created about his companies origins, it was always known but he kept it from the public discourse for many years and created his persona of nerdy genius that everything he touches turns to gold. And in a way that is true, because it was his performance and hype that keep his companies invested whilst many other would have investments puled off, even with constant mised deadlines, with his wild claims that “X will be a reality in N months” that never come to reality, this would tank the trust, public perception and capital of maybe any other company but for him, the personality cult he so careful cultivated kept people invested, kept the mantra “trust Elon”. And that was what kept his companies, especially Tesla in the green.

And I think part of this success is his image of kinda awkward nerd genius, which makes it easy for people to trust him and keep listening to him even after his promises failing to materialize, I guess because Elon is “Not like others CEO”, “he is smart, he know what he is doing”, “he is an engineer guy, not a business CEO, so he is not lying through his teeth, there is a reason” and so forth.

And he lost his magic, his ability to keep this image was lost some point before he bought Twitter but I guess that does not matter anymore, because this amount of money just perpetuates itself at some point and now he also has a new source of fan base in the political right that is not based on the old image of the nerdy genius and instead on the old and tried conservative grift of inflammatory and tribalistic discourse.

He didn’t start any of his companies, he just bought all of them (maybe the exception is the boring company)

Waterworld is Mad Max on a boat

The pitch was probably something like “What if Mad Max but instead of sand we have water?” And the producer guy would be something like “Will the people still be dirty even with all that water?” And the screen writer guy: “Wouldn’t be an post apocalyptic world if the people is not dirty”

If the government is paying for the company to have profit why don’t the government just do it themselves?

I feel like if the intent is that a private company provide the insurance, they could like force that if they want to do business they need to cover some portion of high risk area, a proportion that does balance things out.

Which is the Anarchists instance?

And of course there is a loop hole for that. If I recall correctly it works like this if you have enough money to have to pay inheritance tax (or it would be a sizeble value) you put it in a trust or company and done, no more tax when your heirs receive the company.

Yes It is.

They also said friends, and friends have other friends and so on.