I design games and have been working on a Red Riichi variant where one of each number is red and this drives scoring instead of all the myriad of Yaku. All the Yaku are hard for beginners to onboard and a lot of hands have to good path to an interesting Yaku and just depend on luck to be able to call Riichi. I'm still testing it but I find it more interesting.
I also have a card game version that implements some of these ideas (although it doesn't have a Furiten concept).
I read the article and would argue that it is really just two things they did. However, both things are really the same coin and are about solving poverty and almost nothing to do with education. Both are small (but positive) band aids on general food insecurity and housing insecurity. Amazing how having a known safe place to sleep at night and food to eat everyday helps kids live better lives.
All schools should have free breakfast and free lunch. Countless studies have shown that kids learn better when properly fed nutritious meals. Struggling schools near more after school and weekend programs with tutoring AND meals. These problems are fairly easy to solve and the cost is less than the status quo.
Serious question: but aren't there thousands of other guys doing almost the same thing and getting almost no views? Even if there are lots of new channels, there aren't going to be lots of winners
But there are many Youtubers making a decent living doing it as a one person shop or a small team. In the past, you needed to a large team with a large budget and buy in from TV/DVDs/VHS to get an audience.
There are no such detailed numbers as far as I know. No platform (twitch, YouTube etc.) generally provides this information. Thinking bad one could assume it's because most people would realize it's one in a million who makes it.
Channels that make money consistently also have teams behind. Sure, probably they are smaller then TV studios, but TV studios do also other jobs compared to youtubers.
Anyway, these are the only numbers available. If there are numbers that show that masses of individuals can make a living in a market with so many competitors like YouTube I am happy to look at them. Until then, I will observe what is known for almost everything: a small % takes the vast majority of resources.
People keep blaming Alan Dye as if he was the only one responsible.
Federighi—who's in charge of implementing this and was busy praising it on stage—is completely blameless. As are all other managers big and small at Apple.
I mean, yeah, if you were picked to present "on stage" (when was the last time a stage was actually involved???) then of course you're going to be a team player and read the script enthusiastically. It's not like Federighi is going to present something "and now, here's the thing that I argued against doing, but was shouted down in all the meetings so here's this thing I don't like and you shouldn't feel obliged to like it either"
> I mean, yeah, if you were picked to present "on stage"
Ah yes. Federighi, the VP of Platform Development, literally responsible for the development of iOS and MacOs "was picked", and had no power to say no to the overwhelming power of the all-powerful head of design Alan Dye.
> but was shouted down in all the meetings
So, VP of Platforms was shouted down by whom exactly?
But sure, let's keep telling everyone that it was only Alan Dye who was responsible for Liquid Glass.
BTW I remind you it was the same Federighi who introduced the awful design changes in the MacOS a few years ago proudly presenting the new settings app and saying that everything will be meticulously designed in the final version (was it Sonoma? Can't remember).
You've taken the wrong interpretation from what I was being somewhat snide about. I don't know the Apple hierarchy and who is actually responsible for what. The point was that anyone presenting for Apple is going to come across as having drunk the kool-aid, otherwise, they would not have been picked.
At the end of the day, I don't care who was/wasn't responsible for any of the decisions. I have no say in the matter, and unless you're part of the management at Apple, neither do you. Lots of people wrote the code to make whatever debacle has happened. They all have skin in the game.
This one is a lot harder to tell because there are some AI bros who claim similar things but are completely serious. Even look at Show HN now: There used to be ~20-40 posts per day but now there are 20 per HOUR.
(Please oh please can we have a Show HN AI. I'm not interested in people's weekend vibe coded app to replace X popular tool. I want to check out cool projects wher people invested their passion and time.)
As the sibling said, papers used to make money via ads and classifieds. NYTimes pivoted to games. This gives people a reason to go to NYT every day and gives them upsell opportunities to full subscriptions. WaPo and others don't have the alternate revenue source.
Correct, and this is meant to attract the same investors and Bulls that already think Mars colonies is a solved problem, just need a few more years to run some tests. As with all, it is only about making himself richer.
It’s so great when the files on the navigator pane aren’t sorted, and then if you right-click sort, it rewrites half your pbxproj file and you get merge conflicts everywhere. So then nobody sorts the files because they don’t want to deal with it. Why can’t the sorting be a view thing that’s independent of the contents of the project file? Who knows.
When I used it in a team, I had to write a build step that would fail the build if the pbxproj file wasn’t sorted. (Plus a custom target that would sort it for you.) It was the only way to make sure it never got unsorted in the first place.
You can work around this by putting most of your project in spm packages and making the Xcode project a small shim that depends on the other packages. Tuist makes this even better, it generates the Xcode project so you don't commit the pbxproj files.
as of Xcode 16, the default uses actual directories for folders instead of file references in the pbxproj file, which eliminates those annoying merge conflicts. at my work it took a bit of effort to move the project over to using folders but it was 100% worth it.
Serious question: If you are so sure that this is a big payday, have you put all your net worth into SpaceX? Seems like a no brainer if you fully believe it.
The reason for this "data centers in space" is the same as the "sustained human colony on Mars". It is all pie in the sky ideas to drive valuation and increase Musk's wealth.
Just a small sampling of previous failed Musk promises:
- demonstration drive of full autonomy all the way from LA to New York by the end of 2017
- "autonomous ride hailing in probably half the population of the U.S. by the end of the year"
- “thousands” of Optimus humanoid robots working in Tesla factories by the end of 2025."
- Tesla semi trucks rollout (Pepsi paid for 100 semis in 2017, and deliveries started in 2022, and now 8 years later they have received half of them.)
The thing about Elon is that he's got more than enough credibility with betting on big crazy ideas that he's one of a few people that you have to take seriously.
SpaceX rewriting the entire economic formula for space launches, accounting for almost 90% of all launches globally last year, becoming a critical piece of the Department of Defense while also launching Starlink globally.
Neuralink let's people control computers with their brain, even playing video games. They're working on an implant to cure blindness right now.
I get that the man is politically unpopular in some circles, but it's really difficult to bet against him at this point. So far, the biggest criticism has been that it took a little longer than he initially said to deliver...but he did deliver.
I have put as much money as I believe in it (risk adjusted). And same goes for Google, Spacex, Blue Origin and other companies.
This trope
> It is all pie in the sky ideas to drive valuation and increase Musk's wealth.
Really needs to stop. This is based on a naive interpretation of how wealth gets created. Musk has an amazing reputation getting things done and making things that people like. Whether you like him as a person or not, he has done stuff in the past and that's reason enough to believe him now.
reply