FWIW, while Dolphin doesn't accept donations, the non-profit foundation behind it has been collecting money for almost 15 years via ads and referrals. All of the financials are transparent: https://opencollective.com/dolphin-emu
Don't use a user agent that sends signed headers identifying you as a bot? How are any of the failure modes you mention not /improved/ by the spec proposal this comment section is about?
> I feel bad about my tweet, I don’t feel it was fair, and it fed the current era of outragism-driven-reading that is the modern Internet, and thus went viral, and for that I am truly sorry.
Building popular software doesn't mean you're a good programmer, especially since at that point Google was looking heavily at CS concepts and he admittedly wasn't good at that.
It's also possible he would have been hired if he applied for L-1. A lot of people get an ego check applying to Google where they're a senior staff engineer or a CTO at a small company and get an L5 offer.
True but surprisingly grinding leetcode puzzles also doesn't mean you're a good programmer. In fact, in my decades-long now programming career, I've had to take many more decisions of the homebrew kind (e.g. how the thing is going to work, how the API is going to look like, will the users love or hate that feature, etc.) than the leetcode kind. And now I am thinking the former is even more important. If you get the leetcode part wrong, worst thing your code would be slow. Not a good thing but also not a complete disaster - you can come back and optimize later. If you screw up the design and interface part, nobody would be using it - or worse, they'd be using it in ways it wasn't supposed to be used - and then it doesn't matter how fast it is.
it kind of happened, he went through seven interviews. from the same post:
> But ultimately, should Google have hired me? Yes, absolutely yes. I am often a dick, I am often difficult, I often don’t know computer science, but. BUT. I make really good things, maybe they aren't perfect, but people really like them. Surely, surely Google could have used that.
I don't think most people who behave in this manner have enough self-reflection to write something like that. They would rather write that they are opinionated, principled or decisive or some other bs.
Exactly this. No amount of cred, smarts, and genius that ends with "and I'm a bit of dick" will save you from my automatic red-line veto when hiring. I'm far from alone in this.
None of those people ever applied for a job at Big Corp where one of the most important aspects is to be able to work well with other people and tactfully navigate the social structure of the company.
Not everyone is a great fit for big companies. Not everyone is a great fit for startups. Not everyone is great at being a small business owner. And not everyone is great at being a regular employee.
Point is that Linus would be fucking miserable and ineffective at a generic BigTech co. He’d hate every second of it. And that’s ok!
Nobody is saying it hinders their prospects in general. They're just saying that "being a dick" is incompatible with a specific kind of job: one that requires collaborative and cooperative work with other people and navigating the social hierarchy of a company.
In my experience, it's the nice people that get fired and the assholes that get promoted. It's not exactly a secret that silicon valley is full of arrogant assholes.
I mean, he's also the same guy who apparently thought "Unix ideas that have worked for literally decades, nah fuck that. I know better".
It took over a decade before the project made some improvement on how the default install path is handled.
To my knowledge it still has absolutely atrocious dependency resolution relative to things like DPKG.
Not hiring this guy is honestly like a fancy restaurant not hiring the guy who comes up with the new McDonalds obesity burger special menu. What he created is popular, it's not good.
Google is not a fancy restaurant. Five-guys private consultancy is a fancy restaurant. Google is the McDonalds of all McDonaldses, it makes software that is used by everybody, whether they want it or not, and you can't turn a corner without hitting something they control.
It's nice to see TSMC's internal security teams are detecting these things, but it would be more surprising news if this kind of IP theft wasn't happening to be honest...
The soft prediction metric seems especially ridiculous to me. If I'm not mistaken, just picking at random gets better results than their ML selection at >= 5 predictions (1-(2/3)*5 > 0.8438).
However:
> your opponent's team is only partially known (you see their Pokemon species but not the moves, stat distributions, etc)
That's not true in the main competitive live format (e.g. NAIC 2025 which is the main case study here). These tournaments are "open team sheet", aka. moves, ability and held items are known (but not IVs/EVs).
I'm not sure whether this is the case on Smogon though, which means they might even be mixing two completely different datasets...
Google Reader was the last major user of the old social sharing stack at Google designed for Buzz, a product mostly remembered to these days for United States v. Google and the 2011 FTC consent decree. When people redesigned Google's social stack for G+ (e.g. all the infrastructure like Zanzibar underlying Circles, which to this day is close to state of the art!) the choice was between migrating Reader to the new tech - which nobody could justify the cost of - or keeping the old tech around for Reader when that tech was known to have had serious privacy issues leading to a major lawsuit.
There are several other programs like STF funded by the EU (often mediated via NLNet), and for example Servo gets some amount of its funding via NGI (an EU Commission initiative): https://nlnet.nl/project/Servo/
> AFAIK it's software RE work, and nothing done in the console hacking scenes is truly cleanroom at all
There's a wide gradient of how much effort people put into reverse engineering consoles in a legal way vs. just copying code straight from their decompiler and slapping an open source license on it. libogc is very much on the "didn't even try" side of that gradient, it's been known since pretty much forever, and even their documentation is straight up copied from Nintendo's SDKs for part of their libraries.
What's new here is discovering that even the parts people thought were developed "fresh" and not just straight-up asm2c'd from Nintendo are actually stolen from other open source projects in a way that tries to conceal the origin of the code.
Whether you'll find that "more morally reprehensible" or not will largely depend on your personal morals, but clearly for some people that seems to be the case...
Yes, libogc is a dumpster fire and the dkP org would be better served by rewriting a libogc replacement (w/ a different API) from scratch, quite honestly.
What I find odd is the timing, I highly suspect he learned about it many months ago.
> There's a wide gradient of how much effort people put into reverse engineering consoles in a legal way vs. just copying code straight from their decompiler and slapping an open source license on it.
English has no literal word-to-word equivalent to this - this french "à" is used to describe the main property of a noun, and the translation in English when no original word exists is via a nominal group or a concatenation of nouns. An "avion à hélice" is a propeller plane, a "bateau à vapeur" is a steamboat, or an "étui à lunettes" is a glasses case. So a "train à grande vitesse" is similarly just a high-speed train.
"of" in English here sounds like you're describing what the object is made of instead of its property. A "boat of steam" is made of steam, it's not the same as a steam boat.
You don't translate it, that's the point. Train à grande vitesse means high-speed train. There is no "of", "at" or "with" there.
Similarly, pain au chocolat does not mean "bread of the chocolate" or anything silly like that. "Chocolate bread" would be the closest translation but since this is ambiguous in English we just use the French word as a loanword.
You won't learn anything by trying to find an English analogue for words like à in French. It will probably actually set you back. You just have to learn it how natives learn it. It's French because it's French. There is no other definition and you can't draw on any other language for guidance. This goes for all natural languages.
It's not the "of", it's just that "grande vitesse" means "high speed", it doesn't have the undertones that "great" has in English. Unless I'm overinterpreting the meaning in English (French is my native language, not English).
