>It's a lot harder to take a creative risk when a lot of money is on the line. It's also harder aligning a large team to execute on a novel vision.
well indie games are their own separate thing and large studios will never have the creative freedom and the ability to align a small team to a novel vision that they do. However studios with deeper pockets and larger teams can still innovate and push the boundaries of what gaming can be so long as the executive team isn't a bunch of spineless losers.
i'd rather see studios take creative and financial risks personally, not saying I care about yet another battle royale game, but in principle it should be about good games that are innovative and push boundaries, not milking a sequel from an established ip for the sake of stable employment.
i agree, no matter how much wishful thinking jensen sells to investors about paradigm shifts the days of everyone rushing out to get 6 figure tensor core clusters for their data center probably won't last forever.
i'll be a contrarian, that css and svg "hacks" like this are "impressive" are a symptom of a web-platform that is dogshit for multimedia. If a game did this nobody would even blink, the fact that it's another convoluted css hack makes it "notable".
i started writing a response about how the human brain is designed to operate in an environment where classical physics is the norm, so we need to bridge the deviations from that if we are to really understand the world. But I don't know how much that's really true if you consider neural biology and I won't claim to know where quantum stops and classical begins as it relates to brain function.
just because QFT follows an internal logic, doesn't mean the jump from macro physics to quantum physics itself is logical. In my opinion we still don't have a logical explanation for why the model changes so dramatically from classical to quantum physics.
The church has a long history of defending and clarifying the principles and practices of faith in a relatively academic way, in a way that would surprise people who believe religion is an anti-intellectual endeavor.
it's such false power though, the politicians don't realize we can regulate the shit out of big tech and reallocate the money to more noble causes and google and facebook and all the other "tech" companies that aren't doing much but sitting on monopolies will be just fine. They don't need 1/100th of the capital they have to provide the service they do to society.
flappy bird is a simple game, 1000 lines sounds like a normal amount(assuming there is a graphics scaffold, which in this case appears to be SDL), and it would indicate that it's not compressed code-golf style
It's not always that simple, sure the more time you spend researching and reading books, the more certain types of knowledge accumulates but we all know someone that is book smart and life stupid. And so much about being truly intelligent and successful is having a framework in which you are able and motivated to apply what you've learned as well as the motivation to keep learning and doing more. Many kids will burn out(or worse, always shuffled into one matrix or another) if they don't have internal reasons for doing what they doing, not just parents or schools encouraging them but actual drive within themselves that goes beyond social validation, and part of that comes from exploring and learning about life and yourself through first hand experiences.
I picked up SICP expecting to read something really interesting or profound with the way it's been hyped up over the years however it's more of a how-to manual for working with Scheme/LISP and frankly that didn't interest me. Unfortunately most people have come to accept that LISP isn't a particularly effective way of programming even if some people get really excited by the idea of mutable and interchangeable data and code it's just not as powerful as they make it out to be and the obfuscation of program flow and execution and the lack of separation/delineation of data and code proves to be a hinderance more often than it is helpful. This doesn't discount LISP's contribution to computer science historically and how it's influenced modern day language design over the years, just that in my opinion LISP/SCHEME is more of a historical curiosity than a modern day guide to effective programming. (And certainly one that has no place as the introductory class at MIT). Anyway I've said something negative about SICP so prepare for this to be downvoted to the bottom :)