> I’m 100% aware that most high OS players on Front are using interface mods to manage their units and send back hurt units automatically to get healed.
Uhhhh no? This is just micro and people do that manually. No mods are used. In tournaments etc. the widget that disallows such mods is always active. Also this widget is commonly active in the high OS lobbies so that's not possible either.
AND high OS streamers like HellsHound do this where you can clearly see them clicking the units. I'd be curious who exactly you think is doing this. I've never seen this widget used in high os play.
hey, honestly I personally wouldnt mind "unusual" english or some weird sentences. Obviously using AI to proofread and give suggestions is great use of it and I dont see a problem in that. Not a native speaker either so I can definitely relate :) I hope I didnt come off as too harsh, its just due to me seeing a lot of half-baked blog spam on r/emacs Ive gotten a bit sensitive when noticing AI writing.
Very much this. I really dislike the somewhat corporate and characterless sounding tone of AI.
I really liked the part where he tried to get it into upstream emacs, most of these type of projects never even get there. But yeah things like "bring honest numbers" sounds just weird.
> My OS floated around 10-15 and I virtually always ended up having to go front in every lobby, which is the position I hate the most because I don’t like playing my strategy game like an RPG
So the truth is, "Front" is the absolute standard. There are only two other "types" of positions which are tech and air. And a good tech player usually also plays that role more like a front player just with more time in the early game to scale his economy. (with the exception of a few maps like supreme and glitters)
What I'm saying, if you don't like playing front then you should not play the regular 8v8 PvP lobbies on most maps since playing front is the optimal play.
> What also enraged me is that the back players would have the nerve to make the front player “pay” for their T2 constructor units after working so hard to keep everyone alive
Again this is the somewhat optimal play. It is much more efficient to only pay for 1 T2 lab instead of 8. This being said, if you don't "pay" the player giving out t2 you MASSIVELY slow down the production of T2 constructors since the player can't get the economy to comfortably produce 8 of them by 6-7 minutes. Thus not paying leads to the whole team massively losing tempo and upgrading their mexes etc. more slowly which will lose you the game.
> the front player has zero resources at any given time because it’s all going into units that are being meat grinded.
You should be able to save up 400 metal during the 5-6 minutes of early game by building some defenses and playing more passively around that time. You will notice your opponent will too. All-In'ing in T1 is a very risky strategy and 400 metal are usually not the deciding factor if it succeeds or fails. Ofc there are cases were you ARE poor, in those the tech player should understand it and not require payment, but this is usually only the case if you got raided early on for example.
On last thing:
> and never really get to strategise.
Soooo there is a lot of strategy but it's essentially locked behind very high skilllevels. As a 10-15 OS player keeping your units alive and managing your eco is hard enough and what you should be focusing on. Only once that becomes second nature you will notice the more strategic part of BAR.
Source: 37 os with 58% wr playing only in the highest OS rotato lobby.
I think all these comments here are kinda talking past each other.
It all depends on the amount of duplication and the complexity of the abstraction. Like you said, no generic advice is possible that clearly separates it into "abstract here" and "duplicatehere".
In your example it sounds like we aren't talking about 2-3 places where duplicate code existed that just needed to be refactored into separate units. It sounds more like a complete disregard for abstraction to move on quickly.
If you see duplicate code and have a good understanding how to solve that then it's totally a good thing. The real problem comes in if you add abstractions without knowing wether they will hold up. And this is where the blogpost comes in. In my opinion 2 duplicates are fine, at 3 you should start thinking or implementing an abstraction if you have a good understanding of the code and usecases.
It's weird. For me the problem stems from how society uses AI, not from AI itself. I personally had totally positive experiences in my job but seeing people using ChatGPT like some magic truth machien is scary.
What I don't get is, this makes it sound like applications can have peer to peer connections "on their own" but where does this actually work. If I have control over the whole device I might as well use a vpn, if I don't how do I ensure the firewall, network, etc. are all set up to allow the traffic necessary?
Rewarding entrepreneurship for example a good thing, but I'm also very much of the opinion that a single person controlling a billion dollars is extremely bad for the society while spreading some of that wealth out would do a lot of good.
The big problem we as a society face right now (in my opinion) is that a lot of political energy (votes and discourse) is spent on things that don't fix the economic imbalance right now. Poor poeple vote for politicians making the poor poorer and rich richer.
There is a difference between the work most do: working for an hourly wage, and effectively getting rich through capital gains.
This is what aoc is referring to essentially. It's practically impossible to become a billionaire through "regular" work alone that pays you a salary.
I'd argue that for all super wealthy people, their salary isn't the major factor in how they gained their net worth. Lets take Googles CEO, he makes 2 mict llion per year (the exanumber isn't that relevant here). With this salary it'd take him 500 years to earn his net worth. Again, completely different proportions to "normal" people earning their net worth through their job. And I'd argue you can do this for everybody with more than 100 mil. dollars.
> Using qt bindings is a good option too, but depending on non rust code means you are more likely to catch some weird crash. My experience with Qt in Rust is years old, so I can't comment on stability.
Qt QML is already annoying in C++ since you have to juggle 2 lifetime systems, c++ manual lifetime management and QMLs QML engine (aka gargabe collection).
> He used Claude Code! What an incredible enabler of fun little side projects it's turning into.
I kinda thought so since it has that look to it. Blue'ish theme, rather dense, small fonts and things with borders.
Don't get me wrong, I don't mind AI being used here, quite the opposite, I'm sure without it this would never have existed in the first place. Just find it interesting that there is a certain pattern to AI-generated websites.
Exactly my (and my coworkers) experience. AI generally amplifies the skillset, both in the good and the bad.
One fantastic usecase for me just recently was writing up a concept for an authentication daemon. With codex this is like a conversation where I pick from the suggestions, cross reference them with normal web-search and decide on a final draft which I then discuss with colleagues.
This "conversational" planning with integrated web-search (aka plan mode) is insanely useful. Also reviewing already written code with AI is purely beneficial in my opinion.
In my opinion the main caveat of AI is, you eventually have to be smarter than then tool. So for example if Codex suggests I should use tech-stack X then I must research and fully understand why this is actually good and still have to compare to other solutions. I think this is where the problem lies, some people skip this step which leads to so so many problems, and that's fatal. You MUST be smarter than the AI after your conversation and fully understand and be able to critique what it said.
Yeah. The real thing that creates pressure is the people applying that pressure if progress is not made. If people act that way the meeting is an effective way to do this on a weekly base instead of letting it languish over month(s).
If nobody in the meeting actually cares that the feature isn't getting finished, then the meetings value is rather small.
> largely because I had no expectation that it would provide additional benefit..
An interesting thing with ibuprofen is that at the regular dose of 400mg it inhibits pain but if you take 1600mg it doesn't inhibit much more pain than the 400mg dose, but the inflammatory effect does increase significantly. A lot of people don't know that and take too much thinking it scales linearly.
Uhhhh no? This is just micro and people do that manually. No mods are used. In tournaments etc. the widget that disallows such mods is always active. Also this widget is commonly active in the high OS lobbies so that's not possible either.
AND high OS streamers like HellsHound do this where you can clearly see them clicking the units. I'd be curious who exactly you think is doing this. I've never seen this widget used in high os play.