Ironically, they insisted at a very narrow definition of the question and answer format and consequently failed at creating a good wiki. There is no way to approach broader topics. It’s always „how do I do x“, and the accepted answer since 2013 is a jquery plugin which is missing a maintainer since 2015.
The rules there just don't encourage updating answers or re-asking things already asked. I've always said, StackOverflow is a great resource if your specific question is "How would I have done this programming thing back in 2010?"
Ironically, I predicted this already back in 2010 (or whenever the site started). I knew from the outset that disallowing duplicates forever was not future-proof, and that the voting mechanism will favor answers posted earlier, not answers that are more correct or up to date.
No, Europe will not go back to the Stone Age. US services will be substituted for somewhat shittier European services. That’s how it goes. On average, everyone will be worse of. The European customer loses, US tech loses, European tech wins.
I’m somewhat surprised about this kind of gleeful condescension in this particular forum, of all places.
I think this is essentially the exact same approach as the "bring back US electronics/heavy industry"-- you subsidise a sector (either directly, via regulation or tariffs). This can have positive outcomes (crisis tolerance, less reliance on international trade), but all those jobs that it brings, are basically paid for fully by additional costs for taxpayers/consumers (and there are also negative side effects on other sectors).
I think this is currently in vogue globally (both sides of the political spectrum), but its important to remember that we had good reaons to stop doing this in the past (or at least scale it down to absolutely vital sectors like agriculture).
Import substitution is one of these ideas that sounds great but seldom works out as intended. Bureaucracies instead of markets now pick winners, and their picks tend to be significantly worse. I really hope they are smart about it and treat this as a measured retaliation against easily substitutable products like twitter, Facebook and gmail, maybe cloud hosting and Amazon marketplace. There is zero chance of any initiative to produce a competitive office suite or operating system, but there will be undoubtedly real pressure to burn billions of taxpayer euros to try exactly that.
I sort of agree, except they are already picking by making Office their IT procurement choice. Choosing to only use documents in .odf format would definitely do something, and they could start funding bugs etc in whatever libraries/office software would bring value to their org.
Have you tried mixing up games with daily moves with rapid and blitz? Mixing “do it right” with “do it fast” training is more effective than doing only one of both.
One thing a friend of mine mentioned about studying, is that you can get in a weird cycle where you end up reinforcing answering incorrectly to a thing over and over.
I think that blitz reinforces my bad habits of approximate pattern matching and ultimately makes me play worse in my other games. If I want to "do it fast" I can just open my dailies and play them fast! But this is a me problem, I routinely play board games etc too quickly, and lose because of it. I do not need help with "do it fast".
Even his greatest successes were never the breathtaking, revolutionary advances he promised. Populous, Syndicate, Themen Park, Magic Carpet, Dungeon Keeper were nothing but a fairly simple game play idea, executed well.
But for some reason, games journalism always repeated his wild and completely impossible ideas for the next product like a gospel. That is the core of the problem, and not a thirteen year old boy trapped in the bod of a grown man talking about the game he’s going to create once he has read through c++ for dummies.
Yes. But strangely, he always promised wide simulations of worlds with fascinating emergent behavior. But even his truly great games were never like that. But it took journalism roughly 25 years to notice.
I wonder if it might have been more than that: maybe the problem wasn't games journalism repeating, but games journalism listening? Every piece of entertainment that is a multi-person effort has a little more thought put into it than visible on the surface (the opposite seems to be true for most solo art). That's nothing special. But when journalists start digging for more, trying to outdo each other in deep questions at interviews, the interviewee will be flattered and try to deliver more of that. Perhaps he would have continued doing well executed simple ideas if he never got that "the big ideas guy!" spotlight pointed at him. Remember how the matrix sequels felt like force-fed intellectual posturing? Same effect I think, inability to resist the flattery of attention, and as a consequence all the subtlety of "there might be more beneath just the explosions" gone.
I have to hard disagree with you here on a personal level, a lot of my formative years I spent playing his games and they mean a great deal to me. But I wish he would take a step back to look at the market today and make something that's really needed, not try to relive the old glory days.
Why can’t everyone be as productive as Steve? When I assign something to him, it’s done in a week! When I want you to add a tiny feature, it takes three!
