We don't have many examples of short form video feeds which are divorced from the the TikTok and Reels algorithm -- both of which are aggressively incented to "engage" a user in ways they may not have preferred in the retrospect.
Well that's why people are doing science to figure that out. Right now it looks like the format itself acutely affects short term memory. The video really is worth a watch.
He oversaw a lot of good things. Recently he's been in "admit defeat and dissolve the brand" mode. To me this has smelled like a "my hands are tied and someone above me is making bad decisions" path, but I don't have anything to justify that other than it doesn't make sense to absolutely fold when it's your name on the line and it's the brand you've spent your life building.
Sure, but they pretty conclusively lost, and it would likely require a major fumble by Sony to change that. So I'm not sure what they're supposed to do?
Loss is admitting defeat when you have a mature hardware team, decades of fans, and a brand that was born from, and reached its heights, from really connecting with what people want. That's fertile ground that got doused in salt. At some point you just have to admit that people don't want what they don't want. No reality distortion field will make people want crap games made without love bloated to the gills in microtransactions. Microsoft would rather shut the whole thing down than admit that though.
Was it really profitable when it was doing things fans did want? The original console was a massive loss and a mess because they didn't know what they were doing. The 360 gave them a few good years but in the end the ended the cycle in second place yet again. Afterwards it was years of being distant third. Will Microsoft ever recoup that investment? The only good years they had were because their competitor stumbled momentarily. How good was the brand when they never really made inroads into asia?
(I say all this as someone enamoured with the first console as it was a core moment of my upbringing)
Of course it was. The proof is in the pudding. You don't go from a skunkworks program to a major division without profit. Selling millions of consoles and games for hundreds of dollars with healthy margins is a printing press. The issue is while searching for making the printing press to have ever growing margins you squeeze the soul out of the product and make it so your customers leave. Optimizing for 3 months out kills you in 24 months. This is textbook enshittification. It is very obvious when it's happening and it should be very obvious when looked back on.
It was xbox yesterday, it's Windows today. Microsoft is on the way out.
I'm not so sure. Your comment is based on assumption that all they needed to do was launch the thing and then its free riding there. This is developing an entire platform we are talking about.
There are xbox engineers confirmed reading these forums so maybe some of them can shed some light but it seemed like the first console was a dud for multiple reasons and they killed it off early. Why would they do that if it was making money?
So thats a confirmed negative two billion dollars and we haven't even talked about the cost to develop 360.
Sony caught up to them after RROD and managed to turn PS3 around so 360 didn't even end the cycle as number one in sales. After that, they never had any real success again and continued to fall further behind until today.
The problem with openSCAD is that you cannot modify it easily. I had made a complex geometry several years ago in openSCAD and I have been waiting for a model that can actually convert it into a python script that generates freecad parametric sketches that recreate it in an editable way. All frontier models fail at this, some more spectacularly than others (gemini never spent 40 minutes / $4 trying and failing, but opus 4.6 did).
OpenSCAD is ideal for making models that can be modified! You have to program your models with the mindset of parametric CAD though, if I was making a battery case I would start by defining variables for battery length, diameter and count and work from there.
Your ball looks well parametrized to me, what kind of editing are you missing from it? Unless you want to change the shape of the locking mechanism altogether, which I think would be a chore in any format.
Yeah the lock is what needs iterating. It was always marginal and took several rounds of prototyping to even get to a printable state. I'd like to experiment with something like a keyed screw.
The issue with this scad file is that I built the geometry up with no functions. I tried and failed to get them working so I just pushed through, so now it is mind melting to try to refactor it. I'm hoping to one day melt a mechanical mind to get it done. Until then, it's a fun challenge prompt for these models.
there are a lot of "do what I mean" type papercuts in openscad. BOSL2 is a library that, for me at least, takes away enough of them to make a rewarding experience. still find myself brute forcing which axis to translate or rotate things the way i want.
concur otherwise that openscad is parameter friendly. the lightbulb moment for me was when i finally grasped its functional grammar and leaned into it, esp recursion instead of algebraic solutions. that should probably be the subject of a tutorial or several.
Homelab and hobby assistant. I have spent $300 for 12 months of tokens. If I'm burning up more than $25 a month then I'd have to pay more or curb use at the end of the year. $25 / month as a new expense is something I can accept for a toy that is letting me accelerate my fun stuff. I can't justify more than that. So I'm left constantly evaluating if my current task is worth more than future tasks and if it is expected to be harder than future tasks. Speculative execution is already one of the harder things I do at work.
Java garbage collection gets out of control when cramming 100+ poorly optimized mods together. The bedrock edition is great in theory but the proper mod API never appeared. Regardless, people have accomplished some really impressive stuff with commands, but it is an exercise in pain.
The other issue with bedrock is it is far from feature parity with java. If these two things were hit then java could be reasonably retired. However we are decades too late in it being acceptable to introduce a breaking change to mod loading. So it's java forever.
>Consider this, if the mod interface was C/C++, do you think those poorly optimized mods could be trusted to also not leak memory?
Of course. Because they would fail loudly and would have to be fixed in order to run. Garbage collection is a crutch which lets broken things appear not broken.
Memory leaks very often don't fail loudly. Especially if they are slower leaks which don't immediately break the application.
A lot of the memory problems that you can see without a GC are hard to find and diagnose. Use after free, for example, is very often safe. It only crashes or causes problems sometimes. Same for double free. And they are hard to diagnose because the problems they do create are often observed at a distance. Use after free will silently corrupt some bit of memory somewhere else, what trips up on it might be completely unrelated.
> A lot of the memory problems that you can see without a GC are hard to find and diagnose
The nastiest leak I've ever seen in a C++ production system happened inside the allocator. We had a really hostile allocation pattern that forced the book-keeping structures inside the allocator to grow over time.
To be fair, I've seen something similar with the JVM, though it recovers. G1GC when it was first introduced would create these massive bookkeeping structures in order to run collections. We are talking about off JVM heap memory allocations up to 20% of the JVM heap allocation.
It's since gotten a lot better with JVM updates, so much so that it's not a problem in Java 21 and 25.
> Consider this, if the mod interface was C/C++, do you think those poorly optimized mods could be trusted to also not leak memory?
Garbage collection does not solve memory leak problems. For example
- keeping a reference too long,
- much more subtle: having a reference to some object inside some closure
will also cause memory leaks in a garbage-collected language.
The proper solution is to consider what you name "poorly optimized mods" to be highly experimental (only those who are of very high quality can be treated differently).
> Garbage collection does not solve memory leak problems
It solves a class of memory leak problems which are much harder to address without the GC. Memory lifetimes.
It's true that you can still create an object that legitimately lives for the duration of the application, nothing solves that.
But what you can't do is allocate something on the heap and forget to free it. Or double free it. Or free it before the actual lifetime has finished.
Those are much trickier problems to solve which experienced C/C++ programmers trip over all the time. It's hard enough to have been the genesis of languages like Java and Rust.
There is no "must use GC" mode, as far as I'm aware, but the footguns you describe only exist if the programmers opt-out of the GC. It's somewhat similar to using JNI/FFM in Java: it's possible to escape the safety of the VM. Though it's much easier to do so in D.
I always had trouble running bedrock as a household server. Specifically it would stop accepting connections and required daily restarts. Java was much more reliable.
I can help. It's security. There were multiple exploits patched in 26.3. Part of what users are paying the apple premium for is maintenance of exploits.
While it works for macOS, that strategy doesn't work for iOS. Apple has broken their contract of 2 supported OS versions to force people onto iOS 26 unwillingly as a deliberate strategy by sneakily not releasing iOS 18 security updates for all devices. A manufactured Hobson's choice between usability and security updates.
This framing seems like justification of the assumption that "how the world is doing is the equal average of how everyone is individually doing". Quite simply the "direction of things" is either completely uncontrolled or controlled by a small group of people with incentives misaligned with the rest of the world. Everyone can be doing fine despite losing a war against them.
This one is very easy. Trump has a well established pattern of making a loud statement to make it appear he didn't lose, even when he did.
reply