mrcsharp
The problem was that majority of players wanted to have enough content in the game to play it multiple hours a day for months.
Personally, I think the game, despite it being a "failure", is going to be important in the future. It is an online multiplayer "live service" game built on Northlight. Remedy had to build networking and multiplayer capabilities into their in-house game engine. And it worked really well. This could allow them, in the future, to expand more if they want to.
- Alan Wake 1 & 2 - Control & Control Resonant (came out last month) - Quantum Break
They are a small studio but release fantastic works of art every time. If you haven't heard of them, you might've heard of Max Payne. It was developed by these guys.
I can output 5 useless/bad features in a day with Claude or I can output 1 useful feature per 2 day period. Which one has better impact on ROI?
In this example, it might seem like it's an easy answer. But, in the real world, it is a lot more nuanced and much more difficult to measure and so not many are bothering to do it and are opting in for the simple solution of following the hype.
Not only that but you can't really plan everything. It is impossible. Without LLMs, with every line of code you are making a decision or discovering something new that must be dealt with or realizing how the current thing might impact something else and so on.
There is no way for a programmer to consider all of these little things ahead of time and if an attempt is made, it will take as long as actually writing that code.
Reason dictates having redundancy in place. Having prepared scenarios for what to do. A lot of countries clearly don't have that and they are operating on the assumption that no major disruption is going to happen.
Depending on resources coming from historically unstable locations and not having plans to prepare for such instability is just foolish.
I am running them at about 800rpm and the CPU is usually between 33~37 degrees.
When I rebuild my main PC, I will surely go with them again.
I miss this side of HN nowadays.
> The WSJ report added that the rule is expected to make quarterly reporting optional and not eliminate it altogether.
So companies can still do their quarterly reporting if they and their investors want that.
Good argument for it but I think 80/20 split applies here. It is likely that 80% of the time it is used to farm for upvotes and add noise.
> And despite what people say, the way you write is very much judged as an indication of your education and intelligence.
I have come across plenty of content and online interactions in English where English was the Author's 2nd or even 3rd language and I find that putting a small disclaimer about this fact is more than enough to bypass such judgement.
It is very nice having an Operating system that respects the Hardware I own and makes efficient use of it. My experience has been very good so far. Every device in my custom built desktop PC worked immediately. The only driver I had to build and install was for my XBOX Wireless dongle.
Gaming has been really damn good. I installed Steam and my games just worked. No fiddling around with configs or anything. Even installing a custom Proton version to try it out is very simple.
I've been on Fedora now for nearly a month and only boot into Windows for work. Eventually, I might get rid of Windows entirely. It'll take a massive U-turn from Microsoft on the philosophy for Windows for me to change my opinion now.
Mostly dev-related topics but I'm trying to write about more than just that.
And btw, this is a brilliant idea. I've already found 2 sites in adding to my bookmarks.
A typical backend developer using C#/Java is likely solving more complicated problems and having all the concerns of an enterprise system to worry about and maintain.
Dismissing a dev or a system because it is enterprisy is a weak argument to make against a language. A language being used a lot in an enterprise to carry the weight of the business is a sign the language is actually great and reliable enough.
And that was my point. The choice of using JS/TS for LLM stuff was made for us based on initial wave of SDK availabilities. Nothing to do with language merits.
The language syntax has nothing to do with it pairing well with agentic coding loops.
Considering how close Typescript and C# are syntactically, and C#'s speed advantage over JS among many other things would make C# the main language for building Agents. It is not and that's because the early SDKs were JS and Python.
This is a good point. My answer would be that it depends on how many depend on the software and what is the tolerance for unintended interactions that users discover?
Based on which domain the software is written/deployed in, this answer will be different.
A table is a table. It has one core function. An argument can be made that it could be built in a way that a chair can't be pushed against it for example. But the number of such cases for a table are infinitely smaller than the number of edge cases and unexpected interactions a software system can have.
QA is a way to catch those edge cases that a single developer cannot find because of various reasons. One such reason is that devs are very close to their work and they might subconsciously not trigger the unhappy path in their code.
Testing if a table works is vastly different from testing a software system.
No, your "dear leader" didn't buy intel.
You're on HN not some crappy FB group. The bar is higher around here.
This is all just so silly now.
[1] https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/2025/11/29/inside-t...
Do you want to work on Oracle Database [1]?
By the way, I also don't want the software I use to suffer from quality drop due to new forced "features". I just don't think the way suggested here works well.