redka

Seems like the title here on HN is bait testing for people not reading the article - and most of you failed. I came here to see what people have to say about his vector DBs comparisons

Couple years back I joined a paid accelerator program to write a mobile game under the wings of some company. My eyes were opened after having a fun time creating my game when the time came to publishing and tweaking. My mentors from the company explained to me the _requirements_ for it to succeed. Basically every change from that point was about manipulation. In order for the game to be high on the charts it needs to meet very specific metrics so subsequently the game was dumbed down so as much people can "have fun" as possible, levels were tweaked to control exactly how much time people spend on their "sessions". Mechanisms were introduced to limit how fast the game can be played and for how long (without paying). Certain tresholds were introduced where difficulty would be unfairly raised in order to create frustration and at the calculated times fake "promotions" of in-game purchases were supposed to be introduced. Updating the game exactly after getting a positive google review with game rating option - click 5 stars to get a reward and be forwarded to game page to post a review ; or click less than 5 stars and just have the pop-up closed without forwarding. Even thogh my game wasn't a simple clicking and getting rewarded and I put a lot of work into making it fun, challenging, dynamic and generally _mine_ I was sucked into the same situation as everyone else on the mobile games market. My game lost all the appeal to me and I couldn't keep it up. Creating another exploitation machine takes all the fun out of gamedev.

I don't know how much you actually tried coffeescript but I find your opinion strange. Coffee wasn't ever like J or anything crazy terse. Its appeal came not merely from making things shorter (it did that, but not by a crazy margin), but from adding a lot of useful things to the language like ? operator, spread operator, destructuring, classes, ranges, better iteration, etc. Almost every coffeescript feature was ultimately added to Javascript (and with very similar syntax) which made coffee somewhat obsolete. Coffee's lack of brackets and semicolons everywhere and @foo instead of this.foo, as well as usage of other features certainly didn't take away any readability or explicitness, if anything - they made it better; the same way those same features make Javascript better and more readable (and, ekhm. "easier to reason about") as long as you _know_ them.

If it's for fun, it shouldn't feel like work

I would be very careful with this sentiment. Pretty much any creative endeavour consists of parts that are not strictly fun. Coding in particular is filled with difficulty, tediousness, deep and wide thinking, etc. It's also the best creative tool that I know of, deeply engaging, very intelectually stimulating and fulfilling and lets you create things of extreme sophistication with very little limits. It's easy to rationalize your lack of motivation or discipline with a statement like: "I don't feel like doing it so it must not be something that I like" but creating an environment and a mindset to pursue fun, creative projects is not easy.

I listen to music mostly when working on my own projects. I don't talk much about ongoing projects until I have already progressed very far, and when I do I'm deliberately keeping most of the plans and further ideas out of the conversation - I've realized that it's easy to reward myself too much by talking to someone so that afterwards a lot of motivation is not there anymore. I also try no to listen to suggestions too much since it does create some weird obligations in my mind. And, most of all, I try to not ever fall into the mindset of creating something with a specific goal in mind - I find that it's better to focus on the process itself and not on the final product. This means I often pivot ideas or completely abandon then in favor of something that became more interesting. Also, if you have that option, working in the same room with friends.

You'd have to run it yourself. There's a docker image available but it's a pretty big download (11.7GB)

For anyone interested I've transcribed this song [1] using the replicate link the author provided (Colab throws errors for me) using mode music-piano-v2. It spits out mp3s there instead of midis so you can hear how it did [2]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-eEZGun2PM [2] https://replicate.com/p/qr4lfzsqafc3rbprwmvg2cw5ve

I wasn't and thanks! It was an interesting read

I would say that depends on what you're trying to achieve. If you're trying to get an overview of the space then probably one of the best ways of going about it to locate key figures that are involved in different projects (e.g. Vitalik Buterin, Charles Hoskinson) and listen to some podcasts with them or read stuff that they wrote. If you're trying to get a fairly good understanding of some specific technology or aspect of it then you must do your own research and that should be enough to be able to identify and ignore "those people" + as a bonus you might gain insights about the shortcomings or trade-offs of that thing. But then if you're looking for investment opportunities then you should definitely have a very good understanding of what you're getting into, any why - especially if you're being purely speculative and not doing stuff like arbitrage or some form of DeFi farming, etc.

I usually discern rational approach by the merit of the argument not because "someone wrote it on HN". If there is no argument but instead just blanket statements and negative remarks then I can somewhat safely assume that some thought process must've failed that person at some point - or at least I can gain no direct insight from it. I'm not really a crypto evangelist nor anyone involved in it technically (at the moment) but I do know enough to at least somewhat understand the scope of the Idea - which is enough to never dismiss the whole thing based on some perceived flaw of some implementation. It's slightly possible though, that HN commenters aren't approaching the topic of crypto significantly differently than other ones - but instead I just notice irrational comments more in relation to this subject - perhaps even because I know enough to recognize them easily. But it's very unlikely, even if true, that this would explain the whole thing away.

I agree with you about the importance of the social and economic ramifications - after all, that's the main idea behind a lot of cryptocurrencies, conceptually. I guess you might be right though that this isn't obvious or some perhaps not think of it as an important objective. I'm not sure about the trap though - or maybe I think of it differently - because what you're describing I associate only with some form of business bastardization of the idea where people are led to believe false things without ever actually grasping the underlying concepts. In which case, sure, there's your postgres or your web panel or whatever. But if you know any better you'll realize that if you *can* build something without requiring blockchain or other such systems then you're simply doing something else entirely and it might be completely unrelated. The whole point is that you can't just host an application with Postgres backend or create anything that is more efficient or "technically superior" (not easily, anyway) without compromising the uncompromisable which is some crucial property of the system, eg. decentralization, permisionlessness. I can easily conjure up "better" solutions to an infinite pool of problems if I can simply reject the requirements.

I don't find it surprising that this space is being crowded with opportunists, marketers, scammers or people motivated by greed because that's the most obvious thing that would happen when you mix vast amounts of money with new technology that offers such possibilities. Their existence doesn't invalidate any actual premises.

As usual, here on HN, any time something is posted that relates to cryptocurrencies the discussion gets filled with negativity and even, seemingly unprovoked, outright hostility toward the idea. Overall HN (in my opinion) has a very good quality of discussion and I often read the comments before opening a link or even just for the sake of it. Nevertheless when it comes to cryptocurrencies that assumption goes out the window and I'm bound to see overly negative attitude to the point of irrationality. It's surprising to me how, out of all the places, HN would be the one where that's the case. I wonder if anyone has any theories on why that is? I dare to assume that it's not just my ignorance of some fundamental, unrecoverable flaw in the concept itself that motivates some to speak against it with such certainty. It might be partly a lack of understanding of the multitude of available options (and even those not yet conceived) and how different - "cryptos" can be from each other but I don't understand how that would translate to people writing unprovoked, unsubstantiated claims or even just unrelated but unhelpful, overly negative remarks. Is it some negative experience someone had that traumatized them? Why HN has this problem?

Looks very similar to dust3d[1]. I wish the simplicity of this approach would be more widespread in 3d software.

[1] https://dust3d.org/

well Ruby is a weird example since it has both using either '..' or '...'

PiS is actually pronounced piss

no it isn't. It's pronounced peace

he seems to never blink

It's certainly not super obvious to setup but there are ways to use PlayCanvas with local setup[1]. I have Redirector[2] rules in my browser and that basically handles it. So with some tinkering you can have hot module replacement and front-end libraries integrated for a very smooth and web-dev-y modern workflow.

[1] https://github.com/thisredone/coffeescript-playcanvas-templa... [2] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/redirector/ocgpenf...

not much but shaving off some bytes is good in itself

actually binary websockets won't do in this case since the underlying protocol is still TCP with automatic retransmission mechanism which kills performance for very fast-paced games. You have to use WebRTC in that case

Instead of cramming ecoded json into the data channels, like you'd with websockets, you can build binary buffers with all the data that has to be communicated between server and client. For example movement commands like up/down/left/right alongside some flags like isJumping can be packed into a singe uInt8

I dunno. I implemented my games'[1] netcode on top of WebRTC and it runs just as well as proper UDP stuff. If you configure it be unreliable and pack everything into small binary commands then it behaves exactly like you'd want for a fast-paced multiplayer game. Obviously most web games use websockets for networking but it is certainly possible (albeit much more difficult) to have very fast netcode in a browser game.

[1] https://redka.games/mages

What about the tongue? After reading something strange in a book about meditation, where it said I should keep my tongue at the roof of my mouth, I got curious. Actually I was baffled because I couldn't do it. I literally could not keep a significant part of my tongue stuck to the roof of my mouth without significant effort and actually strain. I did a survey between my friends and only one of them (my brother) actually kept the tongue in the described position naturally. Surprisingly (this is highly anecdotal, but still interesting) he's the only person that I know that doesn't have any teeth issues - only once he'd visited a dentist with a small cavity. This got me researching and there's actually a British orthodontist (Dr. Mike Mew) who actively pushes the idea that we should keep our tongue at the roof of our mouth and that it's actually our natural tongue position that _would_ develop if we kept our ancestral dietary habits, e.g. chewing hard foods like meat from since we were little.

Yep, exactly. Last ditch resort is to modify the values via devtools myself but usually I just skip that site.

It might be just me but I can't look at websites with black backgrounds and white or yellow letters. My eyes hurt and when I turn my head elsewhere I can see shadows of the website for a bit. I use dark(ish) themes everywhere but such high contrast somehow is too much.

Does this work with pnpm since node_modules/@prisma/client changes based on the project it's in?

I read this the other day[1]. See challenges listed in the middle. It does seem like it's not very easy at all.

[1] https://hackaday.com/2020/03/25/ventilators-101-what-they-do...

I'm working on bot implementation for my latest game[1]. I only ever made bots for my first game[2] but it was a breeze then. Now I needed to setup waypoints, pathfinding algorithms and some funky chasing logic but frankly I'm loving it. It's amazing how fruitful javascript community is! Libraries like rbush[3] (and really just a lot of different things by mourner) and ngraph.path[4] make things so much easier.

[1] https://redka.games/shootout [2] https://redka.games/mages [3] https://github.com/mourner/rbush [4] https://github.com/anvaka/ngraph.path

Could someone explain to me how could researchers come to these conclusions if there are different factors at play that surely impact the results? The article states that:

Participants consumed a weekly average of 1.5 servings of processed meat, 3 for unprocessed, 2 for poultry and 1.6 servings of fish. People with higher intake were generally more likely to be smokers, drink more alcohol, have a higher body mass index (BMI) and a lower overall diet quality.

If that's the case then how is it possible for a cohort study to properly control for all of these? Isn't 7% increase in risk basically telling nothing then? The other thing is the methodology. The article says that they used "standard food frequency questionnaire" which I think means Food Frequency Questionnaire. This alone seems like it would have great effects on the efficacy of the research making the results even more questionable.

Tangentially related but what is the experience of introducing Sorbet into an existing Ruby codebase? How does it compare to rewriting Javascript code to Typescript? Does it provide benefits quickly or only after the whole thing is typed? Are there many gems already typed?