All of the exploits against Intel processors didn’t help either. Not only is it a bad look, but the fixes reduced the speed of the those processors, making them quite a bit worse deal for the money after all.

I was playing Destiny 2 and the lag was only noticeable to me when I compared it to not using Stadia. While I was playing, I didn’t feel like there was anything to complain about.

I think I saw less lag when connected to my house over Parsec, and definitely had less lag when playing locally at my house. I actually considered continuing to use Stadia, but by that point they had pretty much proven that they were not going to bother improving things further, and it didn’t make sense to pay for a service that didn’t provide an advantage over what I could do for free.

I think it really depends on circumstances. I tried GFN and Stadia, and found them to be adequate, and used Stadia for a few months. After comparing input latency with streaming from myself (across town) and playing locally, I decided it wasn’t worth it and left Stadia. I’m still mad at their ridiculous promises that they broke, and killing the service without ever really trying to hit its potential.

IIRC, there’s still a free tier with a limit of 1 hour playtime at a time, and you can’t play during peak hours because there won’t be a slot for you.

The pay tier is still a 6 hour limit, but of course you can just come right back in.

I don’t think the article means dogfooding. I think they mean that you can’t design a system unless you’re intimately involved with coding it.

And of course that’s still wrong. It happens all the time. And things end up working out the majority of the time.

That’s the problem with edgy, experimental projects. You can’t really tell if they’ll succeed until a lot of work has been put into them.

Most of the people I hear being critical of AI Coding are very clear about what it’s good for, and what it isn’t.

If someone is wholly for or against something, their advice generally isn’t very good.+

It sounds like Microsoft is being notified by its Minecraft players that toxic interactions are happening on MinecraftOnline’s server, and they’re taking action to reduce toxicity associated with their IP.

It’s really hard for me to fault them for that. Especially since MinecraftOnline is using the the Minecraft trademark in a way that sounds official in the name. I’m surprised they didn’t put a stop to that as it is.

I don’t see anything that says they don’t understand Git or Github.

They know people will look for them on Github, and they do their official releases there. They host their code on the non-profit Codeberg site for reasons of their own. People can still fork from there. They just can’t click a button on Github to do it. They can, however, click a button on Codeberg to fork.

It sounds to me like they did understand all of this, and decided to let internet popularity work for them (host releases on Github for discoverability and fraud prevention) without giving up how they wanted to manage their code.

I don’t think anyone puts this much work into something to make it “deliberately bad”.

But when I first saw it, I couldn’t believe it was actually a thing. The mix of things you do in this don’t make sense to me. In what world would I think being a “toll booth operator” involve selling dodgy drinks to people?

The grooves?

The pattern on the left is actually just inside the case, under a clear part of the case. That part is black in the Euro version, but the case looks the same otherwise. (We have cases like that, too.)

Edit: Also, that Japanese one? I’m pretty sure it’s the same style, but turned upside down. That’s the base of the case. Searching Google, I found a copy on Ebay that shows the front, and that section of the front of the case is clear for that one, too.

That sounds like pretty much exactly what we did at my last job, and it worked pretty well IMO. The individual commits in a PR didn’t ever matter. I don’t even think we used them for code review, except if it came up for review a second time after rework. In that case, we were able to just look at the new commit to see if the right changes were made.

And we definitely avoided basing off each other’s branches. We had to do it a few times. The only times it went well was when the intent was to merge the child branch into the feature branch. If they were actually separate tickets (and the second relied on the first) it was generally chaotic. But sometimes, it was just necessary.

Looks like they’re going back to Ryza’s exploration/gathering tools, which is great. I loved that system, and the constantly making of newer and better tools.

Unfortunately, it looks like they kept the mobile Resleriana game’s synthesis. Weak. :(

Ah, yeah, I think I remember that. It was pretty obvious it would be brutal for a lot of gamedev companies there, and I wasn’t surprised at all that it didn’t end up going through.

I’m not sure what you mean. The in-game reward path still has a daily “check in” task for points. And the daily “do 4 tasks” thing is in there, though they’ve opened it up a lot, which I really appreciate. (You can now do quests, open chests, or anything that costs energy to complete them, as well as the standard 4 mini-quests.) And the web checkin is still daily, with only 3 days that you can reclaim by visiting certain pages.

Yup. Though I’ve been pausing more and more lately. The months where I already own the games because I loved them are ones that I can’t blame them for. But there’s been plenty that I just wasn’t interested in.

I’ve played Genshin almost since the start (took a break for a while) and it’s had daily tasks the whole time. You earn gems and other in-game rewards every day for it. There’s also an additional web-based daily checkin as well.

Parsec? It has virtual monitors.

I only see the first of the comparison images linked here. The line of identical symbols inside squares is pretty convincing.

The second image contains lines of text copied verbatim, and is undeniable.

https://bsky.app/profile/antire.al/post/3lpa4gamtzs2l

A lot of people see an upvote as a signal that they endorse the message, or at least want it to spread.

A downvote is the opposite of that.

You’ll never convince people not to “shoot the messenger” on link aggregators because it’s antithetical to their view of the system.