I think of it like a technology checkpoint. Make sure you got as far as everyone else when they gave up, so when the next innovation in that space comes along you can start back up on even footing.
You want to have your own pathway to production that dodges competitors’ patents, is somewhat defensible itself, maybe a brand, etc.
From the outside looking in, it's an incredible waste of resources on Apple's behalf to use Vision Pro as a design exercise.
Apple would have had a much stronger position (for much cheaper) if they supported OpenXR and obsoleted the Windows Mixed Reality/Quest/Hololens brand for good. As a "15 competing standards" platform, visionOS is a net negative project when it could have been a direct shot at Microsoft and Valve.
Listed in the article are the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and the Internet Watch Foundation, which monitors and removes child sexual abuse material from the internet.
The recent Meta lawsuits also mention opposition from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and Meta's own executives: Monika Bickert (head of content policy) and Antigone Davis (global head of safety). Both executives mention the danger end-to-end encryption poses to children when attached to a social media graph.
> Both executives mention the danger end-to-end encryption poses to children when attached to a social media graph
So the fact that we welded a messaging platform onto a global-child-discovery-service is bad? Sure. Not encrypting that messaging platform is sort of closing the barn door after the horse has gone walkabout
It is a considerably larger threat for anonymous strangers to be able to establish private lines of communication with children than for them to know that Lisa Simpson (8) lives in Springfield and attends Springfield Elementary. In terms of discovery, most people are already aware that children can be found in school.
I don't see how you arrive at that conclusion? The risk in being able to connect to a random victim somewhere in the world appears to be strictly less than being able to target a specific victim in your local geographical area to whom you could gain physical access
Hence why nobody up in arms (in either direction) about e2e encryption for Chatroulette
Good to see this called out. The HN echo chamber has this really terrible habit of attributing any disagreement with the prevailing opinion here to big, shadowy forces with evil motives (billionaires, corporations, three letter agencies, politicians, etc) instead of facing the reality that sometimes well meaning people just have different values and priorities than us. Very rarely does that narrative get challenged directly.
I’ve given these sorts of haystack search struggles completely over to the LLM. Whether it’s finding a bug in code or searching documentation for the answer, I view it as a near-obsolete skill. The past couple of decades it was important to know how to chase down documentation and zero in on the one line of config you were missing. Now it’s not.
I don’t view this as a hollowing out of my skill tree, I view it as freeing myself to focus on modern skills I need to develop. Such as learning how to steer LLM context windows towards maintainable solutions in large codebases.
I’m sure I’ll be thankful now and then that I know how to manually sift through stack traces for answers. But I expect those moments to be rarer and rarer. I basically never look at machine code, but I bet that used to be an important skill for programmers many decades ago.
If you search for ‘vectorization AI’ there are a handful of specialized tools and apis that can do it. It worked well for a handful of logos I wanted to convert. Nano banana generated the raster logos, and these other tools vectorized them
I haven't seen one that worked properly—can you list a couple examples? Some of the ones that say they're "AI" are just VTracer / Potrace and don't give nice control points.
I liked the results of vectorizer.ai and recraft.ai
Input image is important too. When working with the generalist LLM on the raster art, give it context that you are making a logo, direct it to use strokes and fills and minimal color palette, readable at small sizes, etc.
vectorizer.ai is amazing. It's worked great for like over 10 years (back when it had a name like vector magic or something). I'm super curious how it's implemented
Atomic commits compose easier. In case you want to pull a few out to ship as their own topic. Or separate out the noisy changes so rebases are quicker. Separate out the machine-generated commit so you can drop it and regenerate it on top of whatever.
My commit messages are pretty basic “verbed foo” notes to myself, and I’m going to squash merge them to mainline anyway. The atomic commits, sometimes aided by git add -p, are to keep me nimble in an active codebase.
I've come across this kind of comment elsewhere, and the recommendation was that "the book" is Designing Games by Tynan Sylvester (the author of Rimworld)
Also your style. Game design is influenced by the mind of the designer. Some take a systematic, methodical approach to it. While others treat it like a painting, designing as they go from a core of an idea. And others go full ad hoc, with multiple prototypical designs until they find something that hits.
This is oversimplifying, most designers fall into a bucket of mixed styles; but the point is, no "book" will be perfect for all. Same as with software engineering, graphic design, etc.
Tynan's book is popular, but in my limited experience the first book most people recommend for anyone looking into design is Book of Lenses. Mind you I think both are worth reading. Lenses is just a more systemic and deeper dive.
That's why I put it in scare quotes; personally I don't believe The Book has yet been written. There's not an Art of War for every subject yet, and game design is one of those subjects not yet mastered, at least in writing.
reply