Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?
1,119 comments
The Illiad. As the foundation of Western literature, it may have received the greatest amount of hype that it is possible to receive.
I had attempted to read it and The Odyssey when I was much younger, in middle school, maybe too young, and failed miserably. But as it is always with cultural touchstones, references to it are inescapable, and a few years ago, in my mid 50s I overcame the reluctance accumulated in the intervening time and set out to read the Samuel Butler prose translation of 1898. Most of the translations I'd previously approached were in verse, which is in some ways its own hill to climb when one is customarily a prose reader, so this seemed perfect.
And so it was, and I was bowled over. It was a mind bending experience for me the likes of which I experience much to infrequently as age and experience take their toll on the novelties of youth. I can't say the last work I read I experienced as electrically. For all the stiltedness of epic story telling, the personalities of Agamemnon, Achilles, Zeus, et al are both vivid and convincing; the violence of battle is horrible, electric, and wierdly beautiful in a way that will resonate recognizably with fans Sam Peckinpaugh or Hong Kong action movies. Though the characterizations are far more stereotyped, as befits the age in which it was produced, than modern readers are accustomed to, they still evince a polish that rises above conventional story telling into true literature. Worth every ounce of effort you expend to summit this one.
I had attempted to read it and The Odyssey when I was much younger, in middle school, maybe too young, and failed miserably. But as it is always with cultural touchstones, references to it are inescapable, and a few years ago, in my mid 50s I overcame the reluctance accumulated in the intervening time and set out to read the Samuel Butler prose translation of 1898. Most of the translations I'd previously approached were in verse, which is in some ways its own hill to climb when one is customarily a prose reader, so this seemed perfect.
And so it was, and I was bowled over. It was a mind bending experience for me the likes of which I experience much to infrequently as age and experience take their toll on the novelties of youth. I can't say the last work I read I experienced as electrically. For all the stiltedness of epic story telling, the personalities of Agamemnon, Achilles, Zeus, et al are both vivid and convincing; the violence of battle is horrible, electric, and wierdly beautiful in a way that will resonate recognizably with fans Sam Peckinpaugh or Hong Kong action movies. Though the characterizations are far more stereotyped, as befits the age in which it was produced, than modern readers are accustomed to, they still evince a polish that rises above conventional story telling into true literature. Worth every ounce of effort you expend to summit this one.
Emily Wilson, whose 2017 English translation of the Odyssey is extremely readable, is now working on translating the Iliad.
https://www.capstan.be/british-scholar-emily-wilsons-fresh-a...
https://www.capstan.be/british-scholar-emily-wilsons-fresh-a...
So glad to hear that! I loved her Odyssey translation. Her introduction alone is worth the price of admission.
My 9th grade English teacher read the Iliad to us, explaining words and phrases as he went along. It was an incredible experience. He also read Romeo and Juliet in the same way. I considered it a great gift to allow us to experience the truly great literature at that age, in a way that I think most of us could understand and appreciate.
I think I would have liked this. I had a 6th grade teacher who read aloud to us daily, something more age appropriate, though, and this experience a remarkably large, and fond component of my recollection of those days. Unfortunately I was promoted right into an "innovative" program of "individualized learning" which ultimately crashed and burned in about 6 years, but consumed all of my middle school years. I didn't really encounter anything comparable again until high school
Very much looking forward to Emily Wilson's forthcoming translation. She translated the Odyssey a few years ago, still in verse but with less stilted language, definitely makes it more accessible. Looking forward to reading it to my children when they're just a couple years older.
Emily translated the first line of the Odissey as "Tell me about a complicated man". She almost went with "Tell me about a straying husband". Neither complicated nor straying husband appear in the original text. Pope's description (The man for wisdom’s various arts renown’d...) is closer to the epithets we are taught at school (ricco d'astuzie or dal multiforme ingegno). πολύτροπος means resourceful, of many skills, well-travelled.
πολύτροπος literally means "one of many ways" or even more literally "multi-turned". Translating it as "for wisdom's various arts renown'd" is just as much poetic license as "complicated".
That's the first line of the proem and complicated tells us nothing about the protagonist. Everyone can be complicated, but only Odysseus is πολύτροπον. It's a quality of character few people possess. I feel like Pope's line, despite the artistic license, kept that uniqueness.
My copy in Spanish says the man of many paths (hombre de muchos senderos).
"Complicated" seems trite, almost meaningless. Though I'm willing to read beyond the first line of their translation.
"Complicated" seems trite, almost meaningless. Though I'm willing to read beyond the first line of their translation.
If it’s good enough for Shaft it’s good enough for this guy.
I also found her Introduction and Translator's note very good. She acknowledges her goal was not the most direct word for word accuracy but from what I remember more the general feel to how things would have been interpreted by the audience at the time. After all, these were oral works enjoyed by not just "intellectuals" in ancient Greece. The idea of having a single best translation isn't really the right goal to seek and it really wasn't her aim.
From reading her notes (and her twitter account) I've definitely gained an appreciation of how much an art in itself translation is.
From reading her notes (and her twitter account) I've definitely gained an appreciation of how much an art in itself translation is.
Agreed. I remember when I read it I was like "wait, so modern epic blockbusters are actually > 2,000 years old". It's not "almost" as good as modern stuff, it's better than most.
It's kinda like the Western equivalent of how many of the tropes that make anime anime come from kabuki and other traditional forms of Japanese theater.
Wait, really? Like what?
Try reading about and watching (video of) kabuki. Typical plots involve the standard hot-blooded hero with a strong sense of justice exacting vengeance on a villainous rival. Kabuki actors deliver their lines in an over-the-top fashion, strike cool poses as they're introduced, and even undergo "transformation sequences" that make important revelations and up the stakes in the plot -- much like anime characters. (Transformations in kabuki are effected with rapid costume changes and traditional stage effects.) Like anime, kabuki is also recognizable by being highly stylized, with realism de-emphasized in favor of spectacle and looking cool.
Anime tends to share with Japanese theater a much more lingering emphasis on the atmosphere of the setting and the emotional states and thoughts of the characters compared to fast-paced, exposition-heavy Western media.
Of course there are plenty of exceptions, and some anime is even explicitly styled after Western media.
Anime tends to share with Japanese theater a much more lingering emphasis on the atmosphere of the setting and the emotional states and thoughts of the characters compared to fast-paced, exposition-heavy Western media.
Of course there are plenty of exceptions, and some anime is even explicitly styled after Western media.
or kurosawa
Perhaps I’m misunderstanding, but I think the question was referring to things that were hyped before they came out
Yeah I thought that too, this post has gone off the rails a bit! It’s just a fun discussion thread though, no harm in that
In the same vein, the Mahabharata. Literally mind blowing character building and arcs and all of this more than 2 millennia ago. It is also 10 times the length of the Iliad and the Odyssey combined.
Do you have a recommended English translation?
It's pretty hard to get your hands on a hard copy because of how large it is (usually published in multiple volumes for academia). The most accessible translation is Ganguli's, which you can find here [1].
[1] https://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/
[1] https://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/
Yes, the version by Ramesh Menon is easy to read and relatively unabridged.
I also enjoyed the N.K. Narayan translation/explanation of the Ramayana. That and Malgudi days really made me feel like I understood Indian culture. The Ramayana is also super important for other Buddhist countries, like Thailand and Cambodia.
Try The Odyssey: A Modern Sequel. By Nikos Kazantzakis, a true bonafide genius of a writer whose imagery in exploring the life of Odysseus after her returns home and finds it less than fulfilling after 20 years if adventure & struggle, with a son he sees as week and I unprepared for the world... It's poetry is as dense as either if Homer's works, and while I hesitate to say it, perhaps almost as good.
Madeline Miller's book Circe touches on the same themes for parts of it. It was a very good read. I haven't read Song of Achilles yet.
I thought you can only hype things before they're released. "Praise" is what things get once released.
My favorite part about the Illiad is that it's very possibly a super super gay love and revenge story. The greeks were debating about the relationship between Patrocles and Achilles since antiquity.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achilles_and_Patroclus
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achilles_and_Patroclus
The Wire.
I'd tried to watch it a few times, but only a few months ago actually got past the first two episodes. I think it helped that I quite quickly saw it as a morally ambiguous discussion of the institutional ineptitude of conservative western cultures in mitigating the effects of crime, rather than a typical 'good vs bad' cop show.
With that mindset, the possibly-underwhelming finale of S1 is much more effective, and the sudden pace-change in S2 is more meaningful.
I'd tried to watch it a few times, but only a few months ago actually got past the first two episodes. I think it helped that I quite quickly saw it as a morally ambiguous discussion of the institutional ineptitude of conservative western cultures in mitigating the effects of crime, rather than a typical 'good vs bad' cop show.
With that mindset, the possibly-underwhelming finale of S1 is much more effective, and the sudden pace-change in S2 is more meaningful.
The Wire is the greatest show that has ever been made in my opinion. It features thoughtful examinations of schools, corruption, media bias, policing policy, labor, drug legalization, addiction, politics, drug organizations, what it is like to be poor, and much more. The Wire also features the single most accurate portrayal of what it is like to exist in a large organization and how individuals within those organizations drive organizational momentum, policy, and culture at all levels. People complain about it being a little slow because real life is slow and the Wire is emulating real life. The ending of the show is also perfect in that it's absolutely not spectacular in any way. Season 1 is my favorite season.
It’s easy to sound hyperbolic calling anything the “best” thing of its category, but no TV has even come close to The Wire for me.
Season four broke my heart with the adolescent kids. I can’t believe how good they all were in their roles, phenomenal performances.
The one minor scene that always wrecks me is where Bodie is talking to McNulty near the end of the series and says, “I feel old...”
The character is supposed to be a late teenager in that scene, and is already feeling worn out of life he has almost no chance of escaping.
That to me was the big takeaway. Too many things are stuck where they are: people, systems, etc.
As Marlo says, “You want it to be one way, but it’s the other way.”
Okay I’m done fan-boying. Yes, I’m this annoying when I tell my irl friends about the show as well.
Season four broke my heart with the adolescent kids. I can’t believe how good they all were in their roles, phenomenal performances.
The one minor scene that always wrecks me is where Bodie is talking to McNulty near the end of the series and says, “I feel old...”
The character is supposed to be a late teenager in that scene, and is already feeling worn out of life he has almost no chance of escaping.
That to me was the big takeaway. Too many things are stuck where they are: people, systems, etc.
As Marlo says, “You want it to be one way, but it’s the other way.”
Okay I’m done fan-boying. Yes, I’m this annoying when I tell my irl friends about the show as well.
I'll never forget that scene with Marlo, with the lollipop in his mouth. It strangely makes him seem extra ruthless. My wife finds it odd that I remember such trivia, but that is one of the most prominent details of the whole series for me.
Yes, thank you! That scene with the lollipop is vicious and the way he is in such control of the moment, unforgettable.
The Wire really is a remarkable show in that, unlike a most of TV before it, it literally springs from who the characters are. The closest thing to an imposed narrative is the decision to focus on a specific segment of the phenomenon that is Baltimore, the police bureaucracy in S1, the white+ working class (well before DJT) in S2, etc. Literally everything else derives from the who the characters are, not the arc imposed by the writers. The scripts are as much channeled as written.
My issue with such a statement is that it most likely inevitably picks from a very specific subset of shows: that is, american and british shows (although the latter may even be quite a small subset of all british shows, if you are american), maybe with one or two other-anglospheric-country shows mixed in (probably a couple canadian shows, and maybe if we're lucky, one or two australian), and ignores the huge swathes of international tv production. That's without even going into the problem of age (most likely, your subset is composed mostly of shows of the > 1980s at best, probably a significant subset would be > 2000s). I don't mean to say that this is a "bad" subset, that is, I concede that it's inevitable that it contains great, and in some cases, sublime shows: we've gotten better at media production over the decades, and the financial and talent pools of the americans are nearly unparalleled. Yet I can't help but feel like the americano-centrism of the "Best shows of all times" list is worthy of criticism (I have similar criticisms for most "best album / songs of all time" lists), given that I've seen shows of extremely high quality from both european and russian media. (Of course, I myself am guilty of this, with respect to shows from asia and the middle east, for instance, which I've seen nothing of. It seems as though most westerners will consume media of the following categories: either american, or from their country, with at most a handful of what could be considered for them, a "foreign" show.) as I feel like tv in general seems to be a medium in which americans don't tend to really stray beyond looking at what's produced by their country, unlike say, films, where, perhaps because of the more "high-class" sentiment that comes with being a cinephile, there's a stronger push to look beyond the borders in an effort to stay informed and "cultured" about films around the world.
People rightfully discuss the wonderful themes, the memorable characters, the tragic arcs in The Wire, but one area they underrate is the form. I recently watched some of the HD restoration and the use of sound and image is really wonderful.
I suspect a lot of it flies under the radar because The Wire purposefully used a style that wasn't overly pretty, was closer to verite than visually stunning. But there's some great ideas there. The utter commitment to diagetic sound (barring one scene in the first season). The use of complex camera movements and an Altman-esque zoom to provide a documentary or even voyeuristic perspective.
You could make an argument that The Wire is more innovative in filmmaking than a lot of the typical prestige TV, who simply mimicked Hollywood big budget artistry.
I suspect a lot of it flies under the radar because The Wire purposefully used a style that wasn't overly pretty, was closer to verite than visually stunning. But there's some great ideas there. The utter commitment to diagetic sound (barring one scene in the first season). The use of complex camera movements and an Altman-esque zoom to provide a documentary or even voyeuristic perspective.
You could make an argument that The Wire is more innovative in filmmaking than a lot of the typical prestige TV, who simply mimicked Hollywood big budget artistry.
> barring one scene in the first season
Yes! Was that the one where Avon, String, and Stinkum arrive with the cash bonuses? I am rewatching a third time right now and couldn't figure out why it stood out as somewhat clumsy. It even popped into my head while I was driving yesterday. You've just reminded me, so thank you.
Yes! Was that the one where Avon, String, and Stinkum arrive with the cash bonuses? I am rewatching a third time right now and couldn't figure out why it stood out as somewhat clumsy. It even popped into my head while I was driving yesterday. You've just reminded me, so thank you.
Yep! It's this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpUHa2rCWeA
There's also the end of season montages, but I'm a lot more forgiving towards non-diegetic music for montages
There's also the end of season montages, but I'm a lot more forgiving towards non-diegetic music for montages
The Wire: Way Down in the Hole is a podcast that talks about each episode of The Wire. The hosts are Jemele Hill and Van Lathan.
Some of the background they give is that the cast and crew didn't think there would be a Season 2, that David Simon wrote Season 5 without Dennis Lehane or George Pelecanos, etc.
https://www.theringer.com/way-down-in-the-hole Now that The Ringer has been bought by Spotify you might have to be a subscriber to listen to it.
Some of the background they give is that the cast and crew didn't think there would be a Season 2, that David Simon wrote Season 5 without Dennis Lehane or George Pelecanos, etc.
https://www.theringer.com/way-down-in-the-hole Now that The Ringer has been bought by Spotify you might have to be a subscriber to listen to it.
The Wire does live up to it's hype.
Keep going beyond the second season, it gets better, when the lines between the gangs and the government blur
Keep going beyond the second season, it gets better, when the lines between the gangs and the government blur
It's very good, but the last season gets a little weird with the 'serial murder'.
We need to get better as a species at pretending certain seasons didn’t happen. Season 5 of The Wire, Season 3 of Homeland, anything after All Along the Watchtower in BSG etc
The thing about season 5 is that it doesn't stand up well to the other seasons, but it does stand up reasonably to most other television; I'm not sure it's quite in this category.
> Season 3 of Homeland
Oh, what a downer that season was. On the other hand, Homeland Season 1 was one of the best bits of television I’ve seen.
Oh, what a downer that season was. On the other hand, Homeland Season 1 was one of the best bits of television I’ve seen.
The last season of Homeland I thought was incredible. It felt like everything pushed to the extreme. Overall great show.
Honestly I just skipped it having seen the IMDB reviews. I’ve watched all the others and it’s one of my favourite shows.
"Community" made their lost season part of the show's lore by having the characters refer to it as "The Gas Leak Year": https://screenrant.com/community-season-4-gas-leak-year-expl...
I like the last season. I thought it was a comic masterpiece (darkly comic) and a master class in all sorts of irony. Maybe that's the rub. Still, these two scenes are gems:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn0ylNZhOJI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2-NkZ8lGsA
And it's still consistent with the "institutional ineptitude of conservative western cultures" (as @ddek puts it above) theme.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn0ylNZhOJI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2-NkZ8lGsA
And it's still consistent with the "institutional ineptitude of conservative western cultures" (as @ddek puts it above) theme.
One of the main writers left before season 5, which might explain it.
It's disappointing, because the season's focus on journalism and public optics was really interesting and educational and in many ways well-executed. But the serial murder stuff just made it kind of goofy.
Seasons 1 - 4 are so good that it's not a big deal, but it seems so rare that multi-season shows stick a graceful landing.
It's disappointing, because the season's focus on journalism and public optics was really interesting and educational and in many ways well-executed. But the serial murder stuff just made it kind of goofy.
Seasons 1 - 4 are so good that it's not a big deal, but it seems so rare that multi-season shows stick a graceful landing.
Yeah it lost believability there, felt like David Simon’s personal grudges against the Sun we’re getting in the way of the story.
The last season brings the whole series down IMO. But in a way, it was almost meant to be for the last season to be worse than the others. It was almost fitting based on its themes.
A good companion piece is Stanley Kubrick’s Paths of Glory, which gave David Simon much of his inspiration for The Wire. Excellent film.
Paths of Glory is one of my favorite films, after hearing David Simon speak about how it's essentially a movie about middle management and the dangers of being giving a task that's impossible to complete yet will still let down the people who look up to you!
Much better than movies or shows on the subject is Herbert Simon's work on Administrative Behavior. Unlike David Simon's work it gives people a way to think about problems and approaches to problems where their skills, resources, rationality aren't enough - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_A._Simon
Also -- for anyone here that loved The Wire, I really recommend Treme. It is almost as good, just more about musicians than drugs. Writing and story lines are the same David Simon-esque style.
> I'd tried to watch it a few times, but only a few months ago actually got past the first two episodes.
I did the same thing, and I'm not sure why. The first couple episodes are fine in retrospect, but at the time... I just couldn't get into them and couldn't keep the characters straight. When I finally did get over that hump though, it turned out to be one of my all-time favorite series.
I did the same thing, and I'm not sure why. The first couple episodes are fine in retrospect, but at the time... I just couldn't get into them and couldn't keep the characters straight. When I finally did get over that hump though, it turned out to be one of my all-time favorite series.
The wire is art. I don’t have enough superlatives for it. I’m only sad that something so good and timeless will portray black people so poorly. I don’t mean the art portraying them poorly, I mean their literal state of being.
Surely that's part of its power though? The real-life facts of that existence are tragic of course, but shining a light on the issues is surely a positive thing.
[deleted]
Yeah it’s positive if it leads to change that helps the situation. But I’m also an advocate of forget to move on and beautiful art like that doesn’t let you forget.
Even though it’s starting to show its age, it is still amazing. Pagers died such a quick death. The code/code cracking they use in the show seems almost quaint and innocent now. I would assume the level of sophistication has also exploded within criminal gangs. I also remember doing a double take when I first heard Dominic West and Idris Elba speak with their actual British accents. Stringer Bell is English!? He should have been Bond, I fear he’s aged out now.
If you liked The Wire and haven't yet, definitely check out The Sopranos. Absolutely amazing.
Years ago I read that The Wire made The Sopranos look...silly? Or at least not as serious and gritty. I kind of agreed for awhile, but I'm actually rewatching both and appreciate the different styles more. One thing that strikes me is the acting - The Sopranos is filled with amazing performances, particularly the dynamic between Edie Falco and James Gandolfini. I hate Tony Soprano and really dislike Carmella, but I'm so conflicted about both.
The Wire is amazing television for sure, but the last season kinda sucked. I know that they were forced to end it early because HBO cut it short, but I thought the whole serial killer story line just didn't add up.
Great show. My two favorite scenes are probably the death of Prop Joe (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ca4WeMd2MQ) and the death of Wallace (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hor_gOBU_GU).
The wire absolutely blew my mind and raised the bar on how great television can be. I have trouble getting past the first few episodes of Game of Thrones, how does it stack up to The Wire in terms of sucking you into the storyline and committing, looking forward to each new episode and pondering over episodes during your day to day like I experienced with The Wire?
I'd say most shows fall short of The Wire. Game of Thrones was /good/ for the first three seasons or so, then got worse and worse. The last season, in my opinion, is so bad that in hindsight I wish I hadn't watched the entire show.
> morally ambiguous discussion of the institutional ineptitude of conservative western cultures in mitigating the effects of crime, rather than a typical 'good vs bad' cop show.
That's a mouthful.
Basically you're saying that the cops operated questionably due to or because of the conservative government's inability to effectively fight crime?
That's a mouthful.
Basically you're saying that the cops operated questionably due to or because of the conservative government's inability to effectively fight crime?
Yeah I just combined an unrelated set of feelings into a single sentence.
> morally ambiguous
No character (save some in S5) is totally black or white. Take Omar, for example. When Omar responds to Levy in the S2 courtroom scene, we sympathise with Omar. When Bunk applies almost exactly the same criticism in S3, we don’t.
> institutional ineptitude
The show covers more institutions than just the BPD. S2 covers traditional economics, S3 has politics, S4 education, and S5 media.
> conservative western cultures
I kinda wanted to say ‘America’ here, but that wouldn’t entirely be true. I’m from Glasgow, a city which has been directly compared to the Wire’s version of Baltimore. Look up the ice cream wars.
These problems aren’t uniquely America’s, but are inherent to all (small c) conservative western cultures. Parts of Europe (Scandinavia, Netherlands) have made huge progress through progressive policy. This isn’t an issue of which government is in power - the US had 8 years of Obama, the UK had 13 of Blair/Brown, and made no progress.
> mitigating the effects of crime
The true victims of the drug trade are the bystanders. However, the war on drugs is fought through virtuous motivation - drugs are bad, impure, and destroy people and society. This motivation omits those most affected by the drug trade, the bystanders. Between street dealing, turf wars, and aggressive policing; the drug trade devastates communities.
> morally ambiguous
No character (save some in S5) is totally black or white. Take Omar, for example. When Omar responds to Levy in the S2 courtroom scene, we sympathise with Omar. When Bunk applies almost exactly the same criticism in S3, we don’t.
> institutional ineptitude
The show covers more institutions than just the BPD. S2 covers traditional economics, S3 has politics, S4 education, and S5 media.
> conservative western cultures
I kinda wanted to say ‘America’ here, but that wouldn’t entirely be true. I’m from Glasgow, a city which has been directly compared to the Wire’s version of Baltimore. Look up the ice cream wars.
These problems aren’t uniquely America’s, but are inherent to all (small c) conservative western cultures. Parts of Europe (Scandinavia, Netherlands) have made huge progress through progressive policy. This isn’t an issue of which government is in power - the US had 8 years of Obama, the UK had 13 of Blair/Brown, and made no progress.
> mitigating the effects of crime
The true victims of the drug trade are the bystanders. However, the war on drugs is fought through virtuous motivation - drugs are bad, impure, and destroy people and society. This motivation omits those most affected by the drug trade, the bystanders. Between street dealing, turf wars, and aggressive policing; the drug trade devastates communities.
I think it’s more that the worldview held by western institutions and police in particular does not equip police to actually solve the problems they are trying to solve - through no real fault of the individuals involved.
One of my favorites from HBO.
The first time I watched it the first few episodes felt a little weak (like a network tv cop show), almost gave up on it but glad I didn't.
The first time I watched it the first few episodes felt a little weak (like a network tv cop show), almost gave up on it but glad I didn't.
The Wire does live up to its hype, but I think The Shield is the better series.
I respectfully disagree. The writing on the Shield was good but kind of amateur compared to the Wire. I really want to like Kurt Sutter, and often I do, but he doesn't hold a candle to Simon and the rest of the writers on the Wire. The Shield had some really good socially aware arcs (the asset forfeiture season comes to mind) but even those pale compared to the whole Wire philosophy of institutions as Greek gods in a Greek tragedy. Also the pray-the-gay-away subplot in the Shield has not aged well.
I watched the Wire after The Shield and it was hard not to fall asleep. It was so slow in comparison. I understand art imitating reality but they really kill the pace with some of these stake out scenes.
I started watching The Wire recently expecting a very dry show that's difficult to understand but I found it gripping from the start. The characters felt real and the world very fucked up and interesting.
Season 2 was good, but I didn't understand why they kept the drug dealers plot on ice. It seemed like filler.
By season 3 it turned into every other TV show where characters are just tools used to express a story rather real people.
I stopped watching a few episodes into season 4 because I couldn't be bothered to care.
I would understand the heaps of praise The Wire gets if it were limited to season 1 (maybe 2 as well), but the reset doesn't seem that good.
Season 2 was good, but I didn't understand why they kept the drug dealers plot on ice. It seemed like filler.
By season 3 it turned into every other TV show where characters are just tools used to express a story rather real people.
I stopped watching a few episodes into season 4 because I couldn't be bothered to care.
I would understand the heaps of praise The Wire gets if it were limited to season 1 (maybe 2 as well), but the reset doesn't seem that good.
Season 4 is arguably the best bit of television drama, ever - it’s a masterpiece.
Agreed, 4 is my favorite. Then maybe 2,1,3,5. Enormous fan here
I get the argument that good tv/literature/whatever shouldn't need to be explained, but I think the Wire really benefits from reading a lot of serious criticism alongside watching. There were a ton of details and ideas and motifs that just flew over my head, but upon some reading and a second watching… well I started out loving The Wire, but the second time I loved The Wire. Even seasons 3 and 4. (not 5, at least I understand what they were trying to do)
do you have good pointers?
It’s been a couple years so would take a while to dig it up, but the New Yorker feature on Simon would be a fine place to start https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/10/22/stealing-life
But maybe instead I can give you an example of a thing that I hadn’t noticed, but once pointed out, became my favorite thing about the show: the first scene of the first episode of each season is an encapsulation of that whole season’s theme.
(Spoiler) in the first scene of the whole series, McNulty is asking a street kid about another kid, “Snot Boogie,” who had gotten gunned down. The kid explains that their friends had an ongoing dice game, and sometimes Snot would try to steal the money that was on the table. They would chase him down and beat him and go back to the game, and the next night Snot would just do it again. McNulty is incredulous, “if he always tries to steal, why do you let him play? If you keep beating him up, why does he come back?” “You’ve got to let him play. This is America.”
It’s easy to draw the parallel between Snot and the various players of the drug trade, who all play the game, some working their way higher up the ranks than others, but inevitably being beaten down, but they keep playing because it’s the only game in town. But that’s also the cops. Half of the are crooked and the there’s no “exit” and they’re fighting a war that can’t be won. Everyone in this game is Snot Boogie.
The set-up for the second season is even better, and the scene with Snoop and that nailgun... god
I’m going to give the series another watch alongside this podcast that goes through the episodes one at a time. Haven’t listened yet so I can’t vouch, but I’m intrigued. https://overcast.fm/+Zg-euhrSU
But maybe instead I can give you an example of a thing that I hadn’t noticed, but once pointed out, became my favorite thing about the show: the first scene of the first episode of each season is an encapsulation of that whole season’s theme.
(Spoiler) in the first scene of the whole series, McNulty is asking a street kid about another kid, “Snot Boogie,” who had gotten gunned down. The kid explains that their friends had an ongoing dice game, and sometimes Snot would try to steal the money that was on the table. They would chase him down and beat him and go back to the game, and the next night Snot would just do it again. McNulty is incredulous, “if he always tries to steal, why do you let him play? If you keep beating him up, why does he come back?” “You’ve got to let him play. This is America.”
It’s easy to draw the parallel between Snot and the various players of the drug trade, who all play the game, some working their way higher up the ranks than others, but inevitably being beaten down, but they keep playing because it’s the only game in town. But that’s also the cops. Half of the are crooked and the there’s no “exit” and they’re fighting a war that can’t be won. Everyone in this game is Snot Boogie.
The set-up for the second season is even better, and the scene with Snoop and that nailgun... god
I’m going to give the series another watch alongside this podcast that goes through the episodes one at a time. Haven’t listened yet so I can’t vouch, but I’m intrigued. https://overcast.fm/+Zg-euhrSU
It may be that your opinion would change if you pushed through to the end. I liked it the entire way through, but I think it took finishing the final season for me to realize how masterful it all truly was.
Factorio!!! (It wasn't really hyped, but if it was, it would have lived up to it.)
Actual video from the game doesn't qualify as hype! And the code is rock solid and wicked efficient.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR01YdFtWFI&ab_channel=Facto...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVvXv1Z6EY8&ab_channel=Facto...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqaAjgpsoW8&ab_channel=Facto...
Actual video from the game doesn't qualify as hype! And the code is rock solid and wicked efficient.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR01YdFtWFI&ab_channel=Facto...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVvXv1Z6EY8&ab_channel=Facto...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqaAjgpsoW8&ab_channel=Facto...
I started playing factorio a few days ago because I read Sriram Krishnan’s interview with Tobi Lutke who raved about it [1]. In fact, I’ve read here on HN that you can expense factorio at Shopify :)
It’s almost a perfect game for a software developer. Unlike software which is difficult to visualize, factorio is all about the visualization. It makes it really easy to see your “hacks”, your “scaling”, and your “async”. It also makes it really easy to see your bugs as well. It’s like working on a program that is always running, in a debugger, but with the ability to dynamically add and change the running code in real time.
Another observation: it’s kind of like Excel. The sheet is always live and the sheet acts as a debugger (you see the data and not the code, you see the outputs not the transforms).
Can’t recommend it enough.
[1] https://twitter.com/sriramk/status/1339257751873064961?s=21
It’s almost a perfect game for a software developer. Unlike software which is difficult to visualize, factorio is all about the visualization. It makes it really easy to see your “hacks”, your “scaling”, and your “async”. It also makes it really easy to see your bugs as well. It’s like working on a program that is always running, in a debugger, but with the ability to dynamically add and change the running code in real time.
Another observation: it’s kind of like Excel. The sheet is always live and the sheet acts as a debugger (you see the data and not the code, you see the outputs not the transforms).
Can’t recommend it enough.
[1] https://twitter.com/sriramk/status/1339257751873064961?s=21
> It’s like working on a program that is always running, in a debugger, but with the ability to dynamically add and change the running code in real time.
Which is actually pretty true of actual real world environments like SmallTalk.
Which is actually pretty true of actual real world environments like SmallTalk.
I’m an avid Factorio player. It is rare to see such commitment to craftsmanship that the Factorio developers demonstrate. Every aspect of the game is continually refined and improved. The game is very performant even when there tens of thousands of entities moving around at any moment.
The multiplayer gameplay also reveals a lot of fundamental truths about collaborative engineering as the player must debate architecture, prioritize and balance between the short term and the long term, join individual efforts into a group product, discover Schelling points, and so on.
The multiplayer gameplay also reveals a lot of fundamental truths about collaborative engineering as the player must debate architecture, prioritize and balance between the short term and the long term, join individual efforts into a group product, discover Schelling points, and so on.
> The game is very performant even when there tens of thousands of entities moving around at any moment.
You factory isn’t big enough if the game is still very performant ;) The factory must grow.
You factory isn’t big enough if the game is still very performant ;) The factory must grow.
This isn't a metaphor for the essential problems of capitalism at all.
Not really, no; unbound growth is hardly unique to one economic system, or economics at all.
oh please stop... don't take something as joyous and wonderful as Factorio and try to make it about misery. I play games like Factorio to not worry about the world's problems for a few hours.
I haven't checked the dev's actual intentions, but I'd be surprised if the misery isn't an entirely intended theme of the game. That's why the factory causes pollution, which the insects attack, earning you the aptly named achievement "It stinks and they don't like it". You're f'ing up an ecosystem with an ever growing, and maddeningly wasteful [0], contraption. Your factory is an invasive cancer of metal and plastic.
[0] The overwhelming majority of what you make gets thrown into a blender and turned into Science Juice.
[0] The overwhelming majority of what you make gets thrown into a blender and turned into Science Juice.
[deleted]
I tried fucking with Factorio and watching the green world get turned into a bare brown desert full of machines was immensely depressing. I sympathized with the bugs: destroy these machines, let the world stay pleasant. I think the misery is inherent in the game already.
You just need to research nukes and torch your base.
Factorio was one of the rare few early access games I paid for because even at like .30 I thought "This is a full game (and stable) and they still want to do more?!" Also I like the minecraft model of never changing the price. It always feels like a good buy then because it isn't instantly devalued at the next steam sale.
Factorio is freaking amazing and is my goto game. I've just gotten into the multiplayer aspects and it's completely rekindled my love after 1400 hours of game-time (according to steam, far bit of afk here to be honest). There are train worlds, mod worlds, pvp worlds, so many new and unique ways to play. One of the best parts of this game for me has been that both the depth and speed of it are totally up to you. Although many people simply try and speed run rockets or automate their factory, this is all completely optional. You can create works of art, music generators, blinking lights, even straight up computers!
One of my recent side projects has been building out a modded multiplayer server that allows me to sell plots of land to players. My idea is to create a city of player-owned museums and shops, all with the backdrop of a custom story narrative in a high-end designed mall of sorts. My inspiration for doing so has been from watching first person videos of people walking in Japan, wanting to experience that but being unable due to the lock-downs. My favorite aspect has been creating an in-game 'paid' train line that lead the player out of the dense concrete shopping district and into one of the beautiful blue and green tree parks, the visual switch-up makes the experience fantastically enjoyable. I'm not really sure I'll end up making any real income from it but the process has been a complete blast. Playing the game in this fashion feels the same as Minecraft did, just with more automation and potential for world building.
Although not strictly Factorio related, something else I've pursued within the game has been setting up a semi-interactive self in my room. I have a few small monitors all linked up playing, and I just set my character to hang out in various places online. One game sits in a train-world just cruising along, another sits in a beautifully animated forest, another still hangs out on a pristine beach that I found. Sitting inside a small room day after day due to the pandemic has been brutal but this setup has greatly improved my sense of connection to the outside. Apart from getting to look over and see something that is visually appealing (and green now that bleakness of winter is here), I'll occasionally see random people join a server and become friends trying to build something together, it's awesome! My shelf has become an interactive, aquarium, IRC, hybrid, all thanks to this game.
One of my recent side projects has been building out a modded multiplayer server that allows me to sell plots of land to players. My idea is to create a city of player-owned museums and shops, all with the backdrop of a custom story narrative in a high-end designed mall of sorts. My inspiration for doing so has been from watching first person videos of people walking in Japan, wanting to experience that but being unable due to the lock-downs. My favorite aspect has been creating an in-game 'paid' train line that lead the player out of the dense concrete shopping district and into one of the beautiful blue and green tree parks, the visual switch-up makes the experience fantastically enjoyable. I'm not really sure I'll end up making any real income from it but the process has been a complete blast. Playing the game in this fashion feels the same as Minecraft did, just with more automation and potential for world building.
Although not strictly Factorio related, something else I've pursued within the game has been setting up a semi-interactive self in my room. I have a few small monitors all linked up playing, and I just set my character to hang out in various places online. One game sits in a train-world just cruising along, another sits in a beautifully animated forest, another still hangs out on a pristine beach that I found. Sitting inside a small room day after day due to the pandemic has been brutal but this setup has greatly improved my sense of connection to the outside. Apart from getting to look over and see something that is visually appealing (and green now that bleakness of winter is here), I'll occasionally see random people join a server and become friends trying to build something together, it's awesome! My shelf has become an interactive, aquarium, IRC, hybrid, all thanks to this game.
Huh, I literally just purchased this from www.gog.com
I am looking forward to its complexity :)
I am looking forward to its complexity :)
How does it compare to Satisfactory and Shapez.io (which is sold as a minimalistic factorio). I bought shapezio on steam some time and realized just yesterday i already collected 60h playtime on it... Now I'm thinking about digging sonewhere deeper.
I’ve played all three games and for me factorio is easily the best.
Designing big factories in Satisfactory feels awkward - it’s very hard to refactor and redesign because the buildings are so big and you need to build them one by one. The engineer in me is always vaguely dissatisfied with what I make in satisfactory. Satisfactory’s world is beautiful to explore - but that makes it a different sort of game.
And shapez was ok, but it lacks factorio’s loop. In factorio you build things out of what you mine and construct. Shapez needs its artificial level structure to motivate you to do anything - and I find that much less satisfying because it saps my intrinsic motivation. Factorio feels grounded in the world, whereas shapez feels like a puzzle game with almost no constraints.
The factorio modding scene is also incredible. Their are so many alternate ways to play factorio - complete with way deeper tech trees, or a base that teleports between planets every 10 minutes, Seaworld - where you start on a tiny island with nothing but ocean in every direction. And as others have mentioned, the game is rock solid. Multiplayer is an absolute blast.
Designing big factories in Satisfactory feels awkward - it’s very hard to refactor and redesign because the buildings are so big and you need to build them one by one. The engineer in me is always vaguely dissatisfied with what I make in satisfactory. Satisfactory’s world is beautiful to explore - but that makes it a different sort of game.
And shapez was ok, but it lacks factorio’s loop. In factorio you build things out of what you mine and construct. Shapez needs its artificial level structure to motivate you to do anything - and I find that much less satisfying because it saps my intrinsic motivation. Factorio feels grounded in the world, whereas shapez feels like a puzzle game with almost no constraints.
The factorio modding scene is also incredible. Their are so many alternate ways to play factorio - complete with way deeper tech trees, or a base that teleports between planets every 10 minutes, Seaworld - where you start on a tiny island with nothing but ocean in every direction. And as others have mentioned, the game is rock solid. Multiplayer is an absolute blast.
That was my experience with Satisfactory as well. Factorio's greatest gameplay achievement is taking away mundane things once you've mastered them to the point of mind-numbing repetition. It's a sliding window, whereas Satisfactory just keeps piling on more layers of complexity without really abstracting anything away, save only for the running around with a chainsaw to keep your generators running.
In spite of the years of careful optimization, aggressive multithreading and 2d sprite-based graphics, Factorio still needs a pretty good computer to keep up 60 UPS (simulation updates per second) when you have a truly gigantic factory.
I have to imagine that if you tried to take a Factorio mega-factory (like a 1 rocket per minute factory) and load up the equivalent in Satisfactory, with its 3d graphics and off-the-shelf rigid body dynamics, it would crash to desktop immediately.
Don’t get me wrong, Satisfactory looks like a fun game! But nothing can match Factorio’s depth.
I have to imagine that if you tried to take a Factorio mega-factory (like a 1 rocket per minute factory) and load up the equivalent in Satisfactory, with its 3d graphics and off-the-shelf rigid body dynamics, it would crash to desktop immediately.
Don’t get me wrong, Satisfactory looks like a fun game! But nothing can match Factorio’s depth.
Factorio is the direct inspiration for both those games.
Yes, I know. Not what I asked.
It doesn't matter anyway. A good copy can be better than the original.
It doesn't matter anyway. A good copy can be better than the original.
In this case, I will tell you that I don't think that Satisfactory is better than Factorio. I was incredibly excited for the idea of 3D Factorio, but so far, it just leaves me asking, "What's the point"? It doesn't get me anywhere near as excited as a new build in Factorio.
If you want 3D Factorio just get Minecraft and a modpack like Omnifactory or Skyfactory or Gregtech New Horizons. Minecraft is something that easy to keep coming back because of the large modding community.
If you want want an economy simulation MMO then checkout prosperous universe.
If you want want an economy simulation MMO then checkout prosperous universe.
for something that scratches a similar itch, but is much more constrained and puzzle like (in a good way) try Infinifactory. It actually predates Factorio and all of the games mentioned and is very much worth playing.
http://www.zachtronics.com/infinifactory/
http://www.zachtronics.com/infinifactory/
I liked shapez the best of those three. Felt like it was streamlined to just the fun part.
coffee stain studios in general are phenomenal at delivering exactly what they promise. whether that's a balanced, fun factory automation sim or a game where goats lick stuff for no reason.
Factorio was made by Wube Software though? Or are you referring to Satisfactory?
oh; you're right. i'm more familiar with satisfactory than factorio, i thought they were by the same studio, whoops.
They also made the Sanctum series, which is an extremely satisfying tower defense/FPS hybrid.
So I tried it for 5 minutes and didn’t get into it. How much time do I need to spend to make it to fall for it? Or am I the minority who didn’t vibe off it at the beginning?
How much did you automate before you quit? Because everything, on almost every level of abstraction, is automatable. That, to me, is a lot of the appeal. If you manually mine more than the first few minutes in the game, you are doing something wrong. It's like Minecraft but with many many more levels in the tech tree, and it is automated.
My experience was it clicked pretty much immediately. I think if you don't get it by the time you're on green science, then it might just not be for you.
Same here. For me I find the UI very poor and this breaks everything.
I initially played through the tutorial levels (that you can get for free) before buying the full game, and I think that helped a lot; it's a very keyboard-centric interface that takes awhile to get used to and isn't likely to appeal to everyone. But the tutorials are pretty good.
Also, a lot of the stuff that's kind of tedious and awkward, like laying out complex belt systems, gets a lot easier when you get construction bots and can start building from blueprints. It's like a different game from that point.
A theme of the game seems to be to make the player do things that are hard or laborious but which can be accomplished in an easier way by using the the tools at hand more effectively, or eventually the problems can be worked around with new technology. It's not quite like a puzzle game where you have to solve each problem in front of you correctly before you can advance; rather you can keep advancing until the point where you're overwhelmed by technical debt (e.g. you end up spending most of your time running around fixing train deadlocks).
Not everything that's awkward or hard is a deliberate game mechanic, though. In the 1.1 release they've said they're planning to change some things that have been pain points for users.
Also, a lot of the stuff that's kind of tedious and awkward, like laying out complex belt systems, gets a lot easier when you get construction bots and can start building from blueprints. It's like a different game from that point.
A theme of the game seems to be to make the player do things that are hard or laborious but which can be accomplished in an easier way by using the the tools at hand more effectively, or eventually the problems can be worked around with new technology. It's not quite like a puzzle game where you have to solve each problem in front of you correctly before you can advance; rather you can keep advancing until the point where you're overwhelmed by technical debt (e.g. you end up spending most of your time running around fixing train deadlocks).
Not everything that's awkward or hard is a deliberate game mechanic, though. In the 1.1 release they've said they're planning to change some things that have been pain points for users.
I would say the game is very much like a CLI - you might at first recoil at the visual style, but almost immediately you understand why - there's going to be a LOT of stuff on the screen, and your little simple man and his simple stuff leads to a simple way of assaying what is happening where.
I would say to enjoy the game you really have to play it to the point where you build robots. Factorio is a game that is amazing for many reasons, but to me the main one is exponential growth.
At a certain inflection point you can basically tear down everything you've ever built by hand, and have robots recreate it all in a minute or two.
The combination of blueprints and robots turn the game from some tedium to a game purely of mind and very little tedium.
I would say to enjoy the game you really have to play it to the point where you build robots. Factorio is a game that is amazing for many reasons, but to me the main one is exponential growth.
At a certain inflection point you can basically tear down everything you've ever built by hand, and have robots recreate it all in a minute or two.
The combination of blueprints and robots turn the game from some tedium to a game purely of mind and very little tedium.
I forgot that. Yes, I really hated it when I first played it. I got attacked and couldn't select things quickly and I died and couldn't get to my stuff anymore. I almost gave up.
It turns out the UI is fairly configurable and after I made it so right click cancels I sort of adapted.
But yes, when I first played it the UI was horrible. It needs some sane defaults like more common RTS games.
It turns out the UI is fairly configurable and after I made it so right click cancels I sort of adapted.
But yes, when I first played it the UI was horrible. It needs some sane defaults like more common RTS games.
im with you i hated it because instead of letting me enjoy the game it forces me to use my remaining brain cells
their development blog was also one of my favorite engineering blogs before they released 1.0
It does actually get a lot of hype in tech circles. I tried it recently and found it to be addictive as advertised, but in all the wrong ways. Programmers kept going on and on about how great it was, but all I saw was ever increasing complexity for no real reason. I launched the rocket and haven't touched it since. I think I would have enjoyed it more if bots were available much earlier in the tech tree or something.
The game makes you think that the goal is to launch a rocket with a satellite aboard. And when you do, you get the “Congratulations!” message. But you also get a counter in the UI, showing how many rockets you’ve launched (Just 001?). And you get 1000 white science, which up until this point had never been seen in the game...
...and after a few minutes, a new goal comes to mind: Launch one rocket every minute. And that’s when the deep game begins. You’ll need massive power production and manufacturing infrastructure, you’ll start using the online calculators to figure out ratios of this to that, and when you get to 1 rocket per minute, you’ll want to see if you can design a system that does that while running completely untouched for 24 hours.
...and after a few minutes, a new goal comes to mind: Launch one rocket every minute. And that’s when the deep game begins. You’ll need massive power production and manufacturing infrastructure, you’ll start using the online calculators to figure out ratios of this to that, and when you get to 1 rocket per minute, you’ll want to see if you can design a system that does that while running completely untouched for 24 hours.
Just the thought of further scaling the beast of a factory I made, again, to deal with all the added complexity makes me want to purge that game from my Steam account. No thanks, I am not interested in additional slog for its own sake.
At a certain point I definitely get to the “wait, I’m just managing complexity in a game, if I’m gonna do this, I should actually make something” thought, and then I stop. But there’s something really satisfying about watching a huge but well oiled mechanism perform its motions, and that’s why I personally like this game.
It’s certainly a personal preference.
I experienced exactly what you meant on my first run. Launched a rocket after a lot of slog, and lost interest after that. But I never got to actually use eg the nuclear tech very much, which itself makes me want to go back and try it again.
Personally, I wish there were more combat/enemy dynamics involved rather than “just” insectoids swarming the base. And that’s just one angle: other compelling reasons to build more efficient factories would have made me want to go back too.
I try every now and then to start from scratch, but just the idea of starting from the basics seems so daunting and not motivating enough so I kinda just give up after the first day.
I experienced exactly what you meant on my first run. Launched a rocket after a lot of slog, and lost interest after that. But I never got to actually use eg the nuclear tech very much, which itself makes me want to go back and try it again.
Personally, I wish there were more combat/enemy dynamics involved rather than “just” insectoids swarming the base. And that’s just one angle: other compelling reasons to build more efficient factories would have made me want to go back too.
I try every now and then to start from scratch, but just the idea of starting from the basics seems so daunting and not motivating enough so I kinda just give up after the first day.
You aren't the first person to feel that way; there are mods specifically for pushing bots to the very early game (if not the very start).
For me Factorio is a way to safely confront my feelings about ever increasing complexity and mess and somehow get past them to find strength to improve things.
After I launched a rocket, it was a bit of a letdown. (I mean I was sad it ended)
Before that, it was amazing.
"Do I fumble my way forward with my current way of doing things or try this new thing? (struggle struggle) Oh wow!"
Before that, it was amazing.
"Do I fumble my way forward with my current way of doing things or try this new thing? (struggle struggle) Oh wow!"
how factorio compares to rimworld? it seems to focus more on the factory aspect instead of the social, but besides that they seem pretty similar
They are very different games IMHO, to the point that I find it difficult to name what outside some superficial UI similarity and a vague survival setting (that many factorio players disable entirely) is similar.
I’ve sunk a lot of time into both games. They’re complimentary to each other.
Factorio is fantastic if you love automation and building complex production pipelines. The game gives you incredible control over building and controlling the manufacturing of stuff. The main motivation is to optimize that, and there are many avenues to do so. You care very little about your “person” (the being that you control) except to keep it alive.
Rimworld is much more rich in what you can choose to do, since it’s primarily a story generation game. You have a lot less control over your manufacturing pipeline. You also have to deal with the humanity of your pawns, who need to eat, sleep and enjoy recreation. You have to keep them alive through natural disasters and raids. Your pawns may die but the story doesn’t end there.
They’re really different games. When I get upset with stupidity of pawns and want more precise automation, I switch to factorio. When I get bored with the dreariness of an automated factory churning out trinkets, I switch to rimworld.
Factorio is fantastic if you love automation and building complex production pipelines. The game gives you incredible control over building and controlling the manufacturing of stuff. The main motivation is to optimize that, and there are many avenues to do so. You care very little about your “person” (the being that you control) except to keep it alive.
Rimworld is much more rich in what you can choose to do, since it’s primarily a story generation game. You have a lot less control over your manufacturing pipeline. You also have to deal with the humanity of your pawns, who need to eat, sleep and enjoy recreation. You have to keep them alive through natural disasters and raids. Your pawns may die but the story doesn’t end there.
They’re really different games. When I get upset with stupidity of pawns and want more precise automation, I switch to factorio. When I get bored with the dreariness of an automated factory churning out trinkets, I switch to rimworld.
Factorio has a veneer of RTS but its challenge and interest comes from factory design and managing queues of supply and demand (if you want to think about it like that). It layers complexity on complexity.
Rimworld is all about character management and anecdote creation in my view. The challenge and interest is about managing randomness and character driven conflict in a game designed to produce conflict.
They play very differently in my experience.
Rimworld is all about character management and anecdote creation in my view. The challenge and interest is about managing randomness and character driven conflict in a game designed to produce conflict.
They play very differently in my experience.
Factorio is almost exclusively about factory building and automation.
Rimworld is much more of a social/survival game, with hunting, gathering, cooking, diseases, invaders, exploration, character emotions, etc.
Factorio has basically none of that; it's much more about plumbing together inputs and outputs into increasingly complex and useful items. The survival aspect of Factorio is just that you are surrounded by bugs that will attack you if you pollute too much or antagonize them.
Rimworld is much more of a social/survival game, with hunting, gathering, cooking, diseases, invaders, exploration, character emotions, etc.
Factorio has basically none of that; it's much more about plumbing together inputs and outputs into increasingly complex and useful items. The survival aspect of Factorio is just that you are surrounded by bugs that will attack you if you pollute too much or antagonize them.
They're the opposite. Factorio is an extreme about having control. Rimworld is an extreme about control being ripped from your hands.
Every national park I've visited in North America seems to not only live up to hype but surpass expectations once visited. I've been to many parks in the U.S and Canada. I don't have a favorite. My favorite usually winds up the park that I last visited. So, currently that would be the rainforest, beaches and mountains of the Olympic peninsula in Washington. Camping inside the parks makes a big difference. Backpacking, even more so.
One park that I visited on a whim was Capitol Reef, in Utah. My plans for several days backcountry camping in Zion fell through because of snow fall late in season. I had to improvise. Hikers are some of the most friendly people and love sharing knowledge on the trail. One suggested I check out Capitol Reef. What a gem! It was far less crowded than Zion and absolutely gorgeous.
See the parks! Camp there! You'll need to plan 6 months in advance for permits to the most popular destinations.
One park that I visited on a whim was Capitol Reef, in Utah. My plans for several days backcountry camping in Zion fell through because of snow fall late in season. I had to improvise. Hikers are some of the most friendly people and love sharing knowledge on the trail. One suggested I check out Capitol Reef. What a gem! It was far less crowded than Zion and absolutely gorgeous.
See the parks! Camp there! You'll need to plan 6 months in advance for permits to the most popular destinations.
Oh yes this is a great answer!
I can’t tell you how many times I had seen pictures of The Grand Canyon only to be completely overwhelmed when we walked through the parking lot and bam! there it is in all its glory.
I live in Seattle and thus near-ish to Mount Rainer National Park. I love seeing “the mountain out” on sunny days in the city, but being right next to it in the park is unbelievable.
Here’s hoping I have the opportunity to see many others.
I can’t tell you how many times I had seen pictures of The Grand Canyon only to be completely overwhelmed when we walked through the parking lot and bam! there it is in all its glory.
I live in Seattle and thus near-ish to Mount Rainer National Park. I love seeing “the mountain out” on sunny days in the city, but being right next to it in the park is unbelievable.
Here’s hoping I have the opportunity to see many others.
I was going to nominate the Appalachian Trail in a top-level thread, but I'll just leave it here since it's outdoors-related. Also, the Appalachian Trail Conservancy is an org that totally lives up to the hype and one which people who are interested in preserving the outdoors and natural beauty of America should support.
Absolutely. I grew up surrounded by nature but it was mostly flat and not very varied. I went to my first park (Mt. Rainier) at over 30 years old and it honestly completely changed my outlook on nature. Try to get a chance to get away from the crowds however you can and just stop and be surrounded by one of the most majestic natural places in the world. It can very much be a spiritual or at least very meditative experience. I can’t wait to camp out once the kids are older.
FWIW, both times I camped in Yellowstone, I just showed up early and got a spot. One was even over 4th of July.
Sometimes you have to be careful with your timing.
I went to Yosemite once mid-summer and it was crowded. Slightly off-season (after school starts for example) and it's a much different experience.
I went to Yosemite once mid-summer and it was crowded. Slightly off-season (after school starts for example) and it's a much different experience.
Seconding Capitol Reef, what a unique place, if a bit hard to get to.
AMD's Zen microarchitecture. At the time, AMD was years behind Intel in both performance and power consumption. There were constant jokes about the Bulldozer cores burning people's houses down. The few remaining 'team red' loyalists had been hyping Zen were largely ignored.
Then, boom. Over night AMD leapfrogged Intel, and now on the third generation has a firm lead in mid range desk top all the way up to high end server silicon. Obviously, Intel has major partnerships with most OEMs, so despite their shortcomings they're still doing strong.
Of course, if ARM or RISCV really is the future this is just a blip. Honestly, I don't see x64 going anywhere for at least 15 years - though hope I can look back at this and roll my eyes someday...
Then, boom. Over night AMD leapfrogged Intel, and now on the third generation has a firm lead in mid range desk top all the way up to high end server silicon. Obviously, Intel has major partnerships with most OEMs, so despite their shortcomings they're still doing strong.
Of course, if ARM or RISCV really is the future this is just a blip. Honestly, I don't see x64 going anywhere for at least 15 years - though hope I can look back at this and roll my eyes someday...
There are two parts to the story: architecture and process. On architecture, AMD deserves praise. On process, not so much. They didn't "git gud," they gave up. Which clearly was the right move for them, don't get me wrong, but I think all this partying in the streets about the TSMC monoculture is... shortsighted.
I think where they deserve praise related to process is the pragmatic and frankly pretty brilliant way they worked around 7nm processes yield issues in Zen 2.
To improve yields they used a number of 8-core "chiplets" manufactured in 7nm tied together with a 14nm I/O die. This meant that while a certain blue competitor was still trying to get 28+ core monolithic dies, AMD could scale to huge core counts without reducing yields by tying together more chiplets.
Their 64-core 128-thread Threadripper workstation parts should have yields almost exactly as good as their low-end CPUs. The Xeon W 28-core monolithic monster? Not so much.
AMD did a lot of things right this time. Intel's got some catching up to do.
To improve yields they used a number of 8-core "chiplets" manufactured in 7nm tied together with a 14nm I/O die. This meant that while a certain blue competitor was still trying to get 28+ core monolithic dies, AMD could scale to huge core counts without reducing yields by tying together more chiplets.
Their 64-core 128-thread Threadripper workstation parts should have yields almost exactly as good as their low-end CPUs. The Xeon W 28-core monolithic monster? Not so much.
AMD did a lot of things right this time. Intel's got some catching up to do.
Yeah, I just hope they do catch up, instead of bailing like AMD and leaving TSMC the only advanced node player in town.
(Yes, I'm aware of Samsung.)
(Yes, I'm aware of Samsung.)
Yep, for the health of the industry I want for the same thing. More competitive foundries are always better.
GloFo isn't really interested in building anything super competitive moving forward either - they announced they weren't going to pursue 7nm.
I think Intel's still pretty dead set of getting back into the foundry game, doing so is kind of necessary for defense contracts right?
Maybe we'll see On Semi get in the game. They did pick up IBM's Fab 10 from GloFo last year.
GloFo isn't really interested in building anything super competitive moving forward either - they announced they weren't going to pursue 7nm.
I think Intel's still pretty dead set of getting back into the foundry game, doing so is kind of necessary for defense contracts right?
Maybe we'll see On Semi get in the game. They did pick up IBM's Fab 10 from GloFo last year.
Sometimes giving up deserves praise. It's not an easy decision to write off all the money you've invested in process, AMD realized it's what they had and made the right choice. That deserves praise.
It's not like TSMC is not replaceable - after all their EUV machines were designed and manufactured by ASML.
RISC-V is probably going to be the Linux-Desktop of the future. Ultimately I think a lot of people hyping don't necessarily grasp that the ISA itself doesn't have a huge amount to do with a CPU in your pocket.
I'm curious why you think RISC-V is the future and not ARM. I guess part of it depends on how far into the future we're looking, but it doesn't seem like ARM license fees are so high that they're prohibitive.
ARM generates less than $2B in revenue. Apple posts $275B in revenue. Are ARM's fees just a rounding error to anyone with scale? And ARM knows that it needs to remain competitive on its licensing fees to make sure that people don't move to RISC-V.
I'd guess that a lot of ARM's revenue actually comes from the processor design, not the ISA. ARM will license you cores. RISC-V won't license you cores since they're not designing them.
It's possible that RISC-V will see great things, but I'm kinda thinking that ARM's license fees probably aren't much. Apple especially wouldn't be paying much since they're not licensing cores. Anyone that is licensing cores would need to replace that R&D with their own - which might be more expensive than it's worth. Qualcomm seems to still lean on ARM's designs.
And I think there's certainly a big head start in optimizing things for ARM that will be tough to overcome.
I just think it seems unlikely that current customers will drop ARM to save 0.1% of their revenue - especially if they need to start taking on the costs of designing the chips themselves, contributing to compilers, etc.
The exception I can see is China. China might want a free-and-clear route to their own processors without worrying about other nations denying them access to IP.
ARM generates less than $2B in revenue. Apple posts $275B in revenue. Are ARM's fees just a rounding error to anyone with scale? And ARM knows that it needs to remain competitive on its licensing fees to make sure that people don't move to RISC-V.
I'd guess that a lot of ARM's revenue actually comes from the processor design, not the ISA. ARM will license you cores. RISC-V won't license you cores since they're not designing them.
It's possible that RISC-V will see great things, but I'm kinda thinking that ARM's license fees probably aren't much. Apple especially wouldn't be paying much since they're not licensing cores. Anyone that is licensing cores would need to replace that R&D with their own - which might be more expensive than it's worth. Qualcomm seems to still lean on ARM's designs.
And I think there's certainly a big head start in optimizing things for ARM that will be tough to overcome.
I just think it seems unlikely that current customers will drop ARM to save 0.1% of their revenue - especially if they need to start taking on the costs of designing the chips themselves, contributing to compilers, etc.
The exception I can see is China. China might want a free-and-clear route to their own processors without worrying about other nations denying them access to IP.
I suspect it's due to fundamentally different ownership forces acting on the ISAs. ARM may be a good choice now, but it's recently been put into the hands of someone who has a stake in the market which buys ARM licenses (Nvidia), and became non-neutral.
ISAs change, and there was a recent article written about this particular situation too: https://codasip.com/2020/12/22/does-isa-ownership-matter-a-t...
ISAs change, and there was a recent article written about this particular situation too: https://codasip.com/2020/12/22/does-isa-ownership-matter-a-t...
> I'm curious why you think RISC-V is the future and not ARM
I don't really, I was just keeping the comment short and avoiding the ire of any RISC-V fans. It could be either, but it's important to remember that instruction sets don't usually win solely based on merit.
For example, if you read most compiler books - because they were written in the early 2000s or late 90s, they spend almost all of their time discussing various RISC architectures (particularly the Alpha). The (then) 386 is usually mentioned in passing, ARM isn't even mentioned at all.
(You probably can guess what I'm getting towards) They're all dead, somehow ARM lives. It's also not really a question of money, Itanium wasn't that bad and Intel couldn't save it.
If I were God, the only CPU that I really really want to see make it to Silicon (even just to see if they're right) is the Mill. Even if they can't walk the walk it's a really nice concept (I think the belt will see use after their patent expires)
I don't really, I was just keeping the comment short and avoiding the ire of any RISC-V fans. It could be either, but it's important to remember that instruction sets don't usually win solely based on merit.
For example, if you read most compiler books - because they were written in the early 2000s or late 90s, they spend almost all of their time discussing various RISC architectures (particularly the Alpha). The (then) 386 is usually mentioned in passing, ARM isn't even mentioned at all.
(You probably can guess what I'm getting towards) They're all dead, somehow ARM lives. It's also not really a question of money, Itanium wasn't that bad and Intel couldn't save it.
If I were God, the only CPU that I really really want to see make it to Silicon (even just to see if they're right) is the Mill. Even if they can't walk the walk it's a really nice concept (I think the belt will see use after their patent expires)
> I'm curious why you think RISC-V is the future and not ARM
I'm not sure Risc-V will win out over ARM, but if it does, I think the acquisition by nvidia will play a big part of it. It really depends on how open and cooperative Nvidia is with ARM IP now that they have it.
I'm not sure Risc-V will win out over ARM, but if it does, I think the acquisition by nvidia will play a big part of it. It really depends on how open and cooperative Nvidia is with ARM IP now that they have it.
The future is still unevenly distributed:)
- Typed from my Laptop running Linux
- Typed from my Laptop running Linux
It wasn't meant as a pejorative. Just as Linux dominates the datacentre, RISC-V will carve out a slice of it's own, I just don't think we'll be playing Cyberpunk 3089 on our RISC-V gaming machines.
Personally, I don't particularly care whether my computer runs RISC-V or not (for the reason above, it's only open source at the edges) - I'm more concerned with the openness of the rest of the machine
Personally, I don't particularly care whether my computer runs RISC-V or not (for the reason above, it's only open source at the edges) - I'm more concerned with the openness of the rest of the machine
Oh, yeah, then we agree. I'm expecting it to make inroads in embedded stuff first (which, I mean, it already has, ex. WD using it for controllers) and eventually wind up as something where you can get a single board computer running on it pretty easily but as a second-class option for a long time. But we already are in a place where you can use Linux for most daily tasks if you want, you can run NT games via Proton, plenty of folks use Pis for side projects, etc. So if we get there with RISC-V in a few years I'll be happy.
> playing Cyberpunk 3089 on our RISC-V gaming machines.
Maybe via Stadia :).
Maybe via Stadia :).
Or qemu user mode; that'd probably be simple enough once performance catches up.
> Obviously, Intel has major partnerships with most OEMs, so despite their shortcomings they're still doing strong.
There's this weird obsession with blaming AMD shortcomings on Intel...
AMD can't produce enough chips for OEMs so they get left out in places. End of story.
It's fun to joke about "14nm++++++" but it just so happens actually being able to stock your chips is a pretty big competitive advantage.
There's this weird obsession with blaming AMD shortcomings on Intel...
AMD can't produce enough chips for OEMs so they get left out in places. End of story.
It's fun to joke about "14nm++++++" but it just so happens actually being able to stock your chips is a pretty big competitive advantage.
That's absolutely true, at least historically, but unfortunately it's not the full picture.
Take for example the 'Ultrabook' branding. It's an Intel trademark, and for a few years that word was _everywhere_. However, to get the shiny badge on your system you had to give a lot of control to Intel over the design and characteristics [1]. That's not to say AMD doesn't do the same thing to a degree - They own the term "APU" and will never let Intel refer to an i7 with 'Iris Xe Graphics' as an APU, Never.
The point is that Intel for a long time had leverage over most of the PC industry and used it to get exclusivity over certain parts of the market.
---
[1] https://www.eweek.com/mobile/intel-ultrabook-partners-look-f...
Take for example the 'Ultrabook' branding. It's an Intel trademark, and for a few years that word was _everywhere_. However, to get the shiny badge on your system you had to give a lot of control to Intel over the design and characteristics [1]. That's not to say AMD doesn't do the same thing to a degree - They own the term "APU" and will never let Intel refer to an i7 with 'Iris Xe Graphics' as an APU, Never.
The point is that Intel for a long time had leverage over most of the PC industry and used it to get exclusivity over certain parts of the market.
---
[1] https://www.eweek.com/mobile/intel-ultrabook-partners-look-f...
If anything it's the opposite, that historically Intel did have unfair advantages but now it's as simple as AMD failing to deliver.
I mean take things like the Ultrabook... you realize your article is literally a decade old?
I remember those days Intel was literally inventing a term and paying developers to come up with "ultrabook app ideas" and stuff. Now the usage of the term is pretty much toothless: https://store.hp.com/us/en/dlp/amd-ultrabook
And that was a bizarre example to choose anyways if you're willing to dig into ancient history, there was a point OEMs were afraid to work with AMD because of Intel...
-
Now a days their iron grip has waned, but AMD literally cannot produce. It's that simple.
I mean take things like the Ultrabook... you realize your article is literally a decade old?
I remember those days Intel was literally inventing a term and paying developers to come up with "ultrabook app ideas" and stuff. Now the usage of the term is pretty much toothless: https://store.hp.com/us/en/dlp/amd-ultrabook
And that was a bizarre example to choose anyways if you're willing to dig into ancient history, there was a point OEMs were afraid to work with AMD because of Intel...
-
Now a days their iron grip has waned, but AMD literally cannot produce. It's that simple.
Yes, it is a very old story and that's specifically why I chose to highlight it. Consumer electronics are rarely about 'the best' chips, just the ones that work. Intel may not be the leader technology wise, but they have the contracts to put their processors where they need to be. They don't have the strength they used to, they still leverage the existing relationships with OEMs.
And regarding AMD's production capabilities, that seems to be old news. According to a report [1] from August, there don't seem to be any major logistical issues anymore. They've massively scaled up output from TSMC, at some points this year making up about 20% of their production output [2]. Whether this is on the same level as Intel, it's hard to say - If you have information comparing them I'd love to see it.
---
[1] https://wccftech.com/exclusive-the-state-of-amds-supply-chai...
[2] https://hothardware.com/news/amd-7nm-production-at-tsmc-set-...
And regarding AMD's production capabilities, that seems to be old news. According to a report [1] from August, there don't seem to be any major logistical issues anymore. They've massively scaled up output from TSMC, at some points this year making up about 20% of their production output [2]. Whether this is on the same level as Intel, it's hard to say - If you have information comparing them I'd love to see it.
---
[1] https://wccftech.com/exclusive-the-state-of-amds-supply-chai...
[2] https://hothardware.com/news/amd-7nm-production-at-tsmc-set-...
Definitely not buying the "I chose an old and dead story because it's old and dead".
I dislike when I'm talking about something and start to get the impression the person rebutting is just googling random stuff to throw out and see what sticks.
Because then it falls on me to apply context to everything they say (since JIT googling doesn't give you that)
For example, anyone claiming that their mobile production issues are "old news" as HP is literally cancelling Ryzen based laptop orders and pitching Intel replacements a couple of months after that article https://phonemantra.com/amd-ryzen-mobile-shortage-confirmed-..., is obviously not up to date on the situation.
And I mean you're bringing up TSMC numbers but ignoring the fact consoles are a large chunk of that output and the fact the 20 percent number means literally nothing in a vacuum.
AMD is a public company, it's in their best interest to always say things will be better on the horizon.
-
The fact is OEMs are supply constrained on Ryzen laptops and not on Intel laptops. To the point they're retconning Ryzen skus.
This damages AMDs relationship with OEMs and is not Intel's fault.
I'm going to leave it at that.
I dislike when I'm talking about something and start to get the impression the person rebutting is just googling random stuff to throw out and see what sticks.
Because then it falls on me to apply context to everything they say (since JIT googling doesn't give you that)
For example, anyone claiming that their mobile production issues are "old news" as HP is literally cancelling Ryzen based laptop orders and pitching Intel replacements a couple of months after that article https://phonemantra.com/amd-ryzen-mobile-shortage-confirmed-..., is obviously not up to date on the situation.
And I mean you're bringing up TSMC numbers but ignoring the fact consoles are a large chunk of that output and the fact the 20 percent number means literally nothing in a vacuum.
AMD is a public company, it's in their best interest to always say things will be better on the horizon.
-
The fact is OEMs are supply constrained on Ryzen laptops and not on Intel laptops. To the point they're retconning Ryzen skus.
This damages AMDs relationship with OEMs and is not Intel's fault.
I'm going to leave it at that.
As far as video game examples go... The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild and Super Mario Odyssey. The trailers made them out to be the pinnacle of their respective franchises, and people's expectations for the two games was sky high. This plus all the changes made to the 3D Zelda and Mario formats meant there was a lot riding on these titles.
But both delivered on that hype. They've both done extremely well in terms of reviews (97% review score average on Metacritic) and sales (best selling games in their respective series), and delivered absolutely magical experiences that made the Nintendo Switch extraordinarily successful in its first year on the market.
But both delivered on that hype. They've both done extremely well in terms of reviews (97% review score average on Metacritic) and sales (best selling games in their respective series), and delivered absolutely magical experiences that made the Nintendo Switch extraordinarily successful in its first year on the market.
I was actually really sad to hear that Breath of the Wild was going to be an open world game when that was announced. I was sick and tired of the same broken mechanics that come with your typical AAA open world game, and thought it would do the Zelda universe a massive disservice.
And then I played it and holy hot damn was I wrong, I think it will go down as one of my favorites of all time. So so so well executed, the world never once felt empty and pointless, as was one of my main issue with other attempts at open world. Just an amazing title.
And then I played it and holy hot damn was I wrong, I think it will go down as one of my favorites of all time. So so so well executed, the world never once felt empty and pointless, as was one of my main issue with other attempts at open world. Just an amazing title.
What I loved about Super Mario 64 was that it used the same area for 6 stars (+ coin star). But for Galaxy for instance, you would just land on another area of the same planet and kinda follow "rail tracks" to the star. Haven't played Odyssey, but that's because I was a bit put off because of this. Is it better in this regard?
Odyssey is closer to 64 than Galaxy. You don't repeatedly enter the level for different stars, you just enter the level once and there's different objectives that reward you with stars. Definitely not on rails at all.
Yes, Odyssey feels much more like Mario 64 in that regard. Each level has many moons (like the stars in Mario 64). There’s even one level which is straight out of Mario 64, just expanded and updated.
While I love both I find them pretty repetitive and I had a hard time saying why until I watched Joseph Anderson's videos on it:
Mario: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYJx5xt2cB0 Zelda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T15-xfUr8z4
I think that eariler titles in both series had better balance between quantity and quality of content and what I like best about both titles is the mechanics while the content it acts upon feels sort of thin.
Mario: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYJx5xt2cB0 Zelda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T15-xfUr8z4
I think that eariler titles in both series had better balance between quantity and quality of content and what I like best about both titles is the mechanics while the content it acts upon feels sort of thin.
And then Pokemon Sword/Shield came along and did the exact opposite, sadly.
Really funny how that works out.
Really funny how that works out.
Sadly, the Pokemon series is stuck in a situation where it doesn't 'need' to innovate or do anything ambitious to sell well/get good reviews, so its creators basically don't bother and coast along without trying too hard. It's kinda like YouTube under Google to be honest.
Extremely high levels of popularity + no competition + unambitious creators that are out of touch with their audience/userbase can equal a mediocre product or series that just ticks along without any attempt to live up to its own promise.
Extremely high levels of popularity + no competition + unambitious creators that are out of touch with their audience/userbase can equal a mediocre product or series that just ticks along without any attempt to live up to its own promise.
It's kind of funny being 30 and loving Pokemon. I have been dying for a good Pokemon game since I was a kid. The GBC games were addictive, but I wanted something that would feel more interactive and require realtime battle skills. The RPG-style battle mechanics got really old. Pokemon Snap was and still is magical, but the user was stuck on rails. Pokemon Stadium was at least 3-d, but the battle mechanics were the same. I fantasized about having an open world with the battle mechanics of Super Smash Bros. A BOTW-style Pokemon game would be just incredible!
Nintendo benefits from the Tesla/Apple/Jeep effect.
Fanboys will be happy regardless.
As time goes on BOTW is being realized as lackluster. Empty, bad graphics, same story, boring environment.
Fanboys will be happy regardless.
As time goes on BOTW is being realized as lackluster. Empty, bad graphics, same story, boring environment.
Counterpoint: BOTW single-handedly got me back on Nintendo systems. I was not a Nintendo fanboy before. I had a Wii back in the day, but it was mostly a gimmick, never substituted the PC as the "serious gaming platform" for me. BOTW is one of these rare games that was so attractive that I bought the entire console just to play it. I am aware of and recognize its flaws, but I have over 200 hours in this game, so obviously it can't be all that bad. Heck, I watched a BOTW speedrunner on Twitch just yesterday. The community around that game is still going strong.
Hamilton. I'm not big into theater nor musicals, and I had heard so much about it by the time I watched it on Disney+, I wasn't expecting it to blow me away but it totally did. I'm a huge fan now, watched it several times, listened to the album hundreds of times, read the book, and recommend it every time I can :)
I thought the same when I saw it in SF, with just one nagging annoyance - the mentions of racial justice felt a bit... token. Abolitionism is mentioned in passing a few times (e.g. Laurens "redefining bravery"), but never really got the spotlight.
I later discovered that there was a third cabinet battle, which was cut from the final script. You can hear a demo of it on the Hamilton Mixtape album. It features the main cast discussing a letter from Ben Franklin asking for slavery to be abolished. On the one hand, I can see why it was cut - 3 might be too many cabinet meetings - but it adds so much to the thematic tragedy to have Hamilton quietly give up his morals for practicality. He starts act 2 with his youth, his career, his family, and his idealism; by the end, he loses the first three, and the foreshadowing was there for him to lose the fourth, but it doesn't have the payoff.
I later discovered that there was a third cabinet battle, which was cut from the final script. You can hear a demo of it on the Hamilton Mixtape album. It features the main cast discussing a letter from Ben Franklin asking for slavery to be abolished. On the one hand, I can see why it was cut - 3 might be too many cabinet meetings - but it adds so much to the thematic tragedy to have Hamilton quietly give up his morals for practicality. He starts act 2 with his youth, his career, his family, and his idealism; by the end, he loses the first three, and the foreshadowing was there for him to lose the fourth, but it doesn't have the payoff.
I feel like part of the issue was that the question of slavery just wasn't that important to Hamilton, was it? So tacking it in may have been too fake.
I think it's so good because it's a distillation of a true life that affects the modern world still in complex ways, made by an artist who understands it's subject matter deeply and intimately.
It both treats it's subject matter incredibly intelligently, yet never tries to show off with braininess and focuses on memorable stage characters and top notch songs.
It's so good on so many layers.
It both treats it's subject matter incredibly intelligently, yet never tries to show off with braininess and focuses on memorable stage characters and top notch songs.
It's so good on so many layers.
This is exactly the opposite of how I feel about hamilton. And lin-manuel miranda in general. As much as hip-hop is fundamentally a "telling" art form, I feel like Miranda's text is far far on the "show don't tell" spectrum in terms of it's emotional content, say, compared to 90s west coast hip hop. (See also moana, the lyrics in that are very tell-not-show). For a more intelligent fictionalisation of that era, I recommend Burr, by Gore Vidal.
I am a big fan of musicals and theater, been to a lot of shows living in NYC. I finally saw Hamilton on Disney+ because I could never get tickets for the show or didn't want to drop hundreds of dollars on it. I was worried before watching it that it was going to be over-hyped and I was going to be underwhelmed. I was wrong. It totally lived up to the hype and now i wish I had seen it live. Post-pandemic I might still go see it.
The show that WAS over-hyped and did NOT live up to it for me was Lion King. I saw it back in 2002-ish and was very disappointed. Sure the costumes were cool but the rest of the production was minimal and boring.
The show that WAS over-hyped and did NOT live up to it for me was Lion King. I saw it back in 2002-ish and was very disappointed. Sure the costumes were cool but the rest of the production was minimal and boring.
I've seen it in NYC and SF. One thing you won't get from Disney+, and I didn't get it in SF, was "the greatest city in the world" line from "The Schuyler Sisters" felt more magical, but maybe it was just fan service to the audience.
i was never into musicals. but the wife and i were visiting new york and she's a huge hamilton fan -- so i said fuck it and paid more than i should on two good tickets to see it.
it was more than worth it -- it was absolutely beautiful (although tiresome -- it's three hours of music with just a small intermission).
i watched the disney+ version and it's great. but it's not the same due to the angles they chose -- it feels more like a movie, than a broadway play.
it was more than worth it -- it was absolutely beautiful (although tiresome -- it's three hours of music with just a small intermission).
i watched the disney+ version and it's great. but it's not the same due to the angles they chose -- it feels more like a movie, than a broadway play.
If you want to save some of the 3 hrs use the weird al version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNEdEDbhTQw
I haven't seen Hamilton yet, but most "hyped" up musicals have lived up to the hype for me. Eg. The Wicked, Phantom of the Opera, Rent, etc.
Maybe Idina Menzel lives up to the hype.
Something about Rent aged poorly, especially if you saw it around 2009 during the recession. It was just hard to relate to characters who had no interest in work struggling to pay rent in a gentrifying slum while in the present day, people were struggling to pay rent and find a job.
I don't like the pacing of Wicked, but the staging and performance of Defying Gravity is amazing. I can't remember exactly what it was, but there was morality lesson that felt shoehorned in. Maybe Doctor Dillamond was an allegory on racism? I enjoy Wicked, but I felt like it need more work.
Phantom of the Opera is ok, but I wouldn't go out of my way to see it. I'm also not really an Andrew Lloyd Webber fan.
Something about Rent aged poorly, especially if you saw it around 2009 during the recession. It was just hard to relate to characters who had no interest in work struggling to pay rent in a gentrifying slum while in the present day, people were struggling to pay rent and find a job.
I don't like the pacing of Wicked, but the staging and performance of Defying Gravity is amazing. I can't remember exactly what it was, but there was morality lesson that felt shoehorned in. Maybe Doctor Dillamond was an allegory on racism? I enjoy Wicked, but I felt like it need more work.
Phantom of the Opera is ok, but I wouldn't go out of my way to see it. I'm also not really an Andrew Lloyd Webber fan.
Unfortunately, after listening to the soundtrack a bit, I find that I can only stand so much rap before my ears get tired.
I can appreciate the amount of talent that went into making Hamilton, but I found the pace too manic to fully enjoy it. The thing never lets up.
Oh man, I gifted the CDs this Christmas. I listened to the entire album dozens of times before watching it... It still blows my mind
[deleted]
I'm loving my Apple Watch. I wasn't entirely sure yet what to think of the watch as a form factor, given that a phone can do everything it can and more. But there's three interesting aspects that have really added value for me.
1) is health data, in a way a computer or phone just can't do. It tracks things like heartrate that a phone + heartrate strap is too convoluted for, for non-athletes. Plus it's all-day and quite accurate. My phone counts my steps in my pocket for example, but not when I'm at home or in the office. My watch can differentiate when I'm cycling to work with my phone in my jacket and detect exercise, whereas my phone may think I'm in a tram or on a motorised scooter.
2) is gamification of exercise. Closing rings, notifications, nudges, vibrations, competitions. It all demands attention and lets you 'jump in' from the wrist much easier, than an app on a phone. It's been a great extrinsic motivational tool to jump-start a change in behaviour for a few months, that can then turn into a long-term intrinsic habit.
3) freedom from the phone. You can open digital locks with the watch, pay with the watch, listen to music or podcasts, get directions on maps, make calls, send (dictated) messages, keep an eye on your mail and calendar etc. I can reliable leave my phone at home, or just leave it in my jacket when I'm visiting friends. Notifications can be set to only allow priority ones in certain settings. It's the first time in 10 years that I'm moving away from having a phone available and in-vision all the time. The Watch doesn't induce mindless scrolling and consumption in a way a phone does, and can be configured to only demand your attention for things you want it to (e.g. certain notifications).
It's definitely not quite where I'd like it to be. Things like battery life, looks, software etc, there's much to gain still. But as a form factor I'm pretty convinced I will be using this for many years to come, and getting upgrades when they become available.
First time series 6 user by the way.
1) is health data, in a way a computer or phone just can't do. It tracks things like heartrate that a phone + heartrate strap is too convoluted for, for non-athletes. Plus it's all-day and quite accurate. My phone counts my steps in my pocket for example, but not when I'm at home or in the office. My watch can differentiate when I'm cycling to work with my phone in my jacket and detect exercise, whereas my phone may think I'm in a tram or on a motorised scooter.
2) is gamification of exercise. Closing rings, notifications, nudges, vibrations, competitions. It all demands attention and lets you 'jump in' from the wrist much easier, than an app on a phone. It's been a great extrinsic motivational tool to jump-start a change in behaviour for a few months, that can then turn into a long-term intrinsic habit.
3) freedom from the phone. You can open digital locks with the watch, pay with the watch, listen to music or podcasts, get directions on maps, make calls, send (dictated) messages, keep an eye on your mail and calendar etc. I can reliable leave my phone at home, or just leave it in my jacket when I'm visiting friends. Notifications can be set to only allow priority ones in certain settings. It's the first time in 10 years that I'm moving away from having a phone available and in-vision all the time. The Watch doesn't induce mindless scrolling and consumption in a way a phone does, and can be configured to only demand your attention for things you want it to (e.g. certain notifications).
It's definitely not quite where I'd like it to be. Things like battery life, looks, software etc, there's much to gain still. But as a form factor I'm pretty convinced I will be using this for many years to come, and getting upgrades when they become available.
First time series 6 user by the way.
All of my friends told me something similar, so I got one.
It just collects dust now.
- The health tracking and gamification of exercise was somewhere between meh and useless for me. I don’t have exercise issues.
- The freedom from the phone has potential, but the ostensible ease of use just isn’t worth the hassle of wearing a watch. I’m ok just pulling out my phone.
- The deep breathing option was probably the app i liked most. Now I just do deep breathing exercises at regular times during the day for, what I assume, are similar effects.
I can certainly imagine that it can improve the quality of life for some (many?) people, but I don’t find myself to be one of these people.
That said, I really wish I did have a profound experience with it. I’m always down for good quality of life improvements.
If anyone has ideas for using the Apple Watch that some people seem to miss, please let me know. I’m willing to give it another go.
It just collects dust now.
- The health tracking and gamification of exercise was somewhere between meh and useless for me. I don’t have exercise issues.
- The freedom from the phone has potential, but the ostensible ease of use just isn’t worth the hassle of wearing a watch. I’m ok just pulling out my phone.
- The deep breathing option was probably the app i liked most. Now I just do deep breathing exercises at regular times during the day for, what I assume, are similar effects.
I can certainly imagine that it can improve the quality of life for some (many?) people, but I don’t find myself to be one of these people.
That said, I really wish I did have a profound experience with it. I’m always down for good quality of life improvements.
If anyone has ideas for using the Apple Watch that some people seem to miss, please let me know. I’m willing to give it another go.
> I don’t have exercise issues.
Well that's what I told my brother, don't get one because you do sports 3-4 times a week anyway. For me it was a motivational thing, seeing my trends in activity, getting nudges, doing competitions with friends, seeing my Vo2max go up over-time, are all great, but unnecessary for my brother.
> the ostensible ease of use just isn’t worth the hassle of wearing a watch. I’m ok just pulling out my phone.
I'd say there's a mix-up here. The watch isn't easy to use versus the phone, which is the primary reason that it allows freedom from a digital device that demands constant attention. Secondly, if you're okay pulling out your phone, then you're really saying you don't have any wish to be free from your phone, so there's an audience mismatch here.
The freedom from the phone first requires you to actually agree that you need it, for many of us that's the case. If you do, the second part is being able to leave your phone at home when you go for a walk, go to the gym, go see friends, go clubbing etc. But for many that's a step too far, without any alternative offering functionality like payments, music, maps, messages, calls. The watch offers that, but in a way that's not super easy to use, but will get the job done. This is why the watch will never be a place where you scroll through social media for hours, or refresh your 5 news apps for the news junkies among us, but the easy-to-use phone, will be.
Well that's what I told my brother, don't get one because you do sports 3-4 times a week anyway. For me it was a motivational thing, seeing my trends in activity, getting nudges, doing competitions with friends, seeing my Vo2max go up over-time, are all great, but unnecessary for my brother.
> the ostensible ease of use just isn’t worth the hassle of wearing a watch. I’m ok just pulling out my phone.
I'd say there's a mix-up here. The watch isn't easy to use versus the phone, which is the primary reason that it allows freedom from a digital device that demands constant attention. Secondly, if you're okay pulling out your phone, then you're really saying you don't have any wish to be free from your phone, so there's an audience mismatch here.
The freedom from the phone first requires you to actually agree that you need it, for many of us that's the case. If you do, the second part is being able to leave your phone at home when you go for a walk, go to the gym, go see friends, go clubbing etc. But for many that's a step too far, without any alternative offering functionality like payments, music, maps, messages, calls. The watch offers that, but in a way that's not super easy to use, but will get the job done. This is why the watch will never be a place where you scroll through social media for hours, or refresh your 5 news apps for the news junkies among us, but the easy-to-use phone, will be.
I haven’t come across anything profound with it, it mainly reduces friction from not needing to be taken out of a pocket and unlocked.
Contactless payments are fairly nice as you can double tap the button, and hold the watchface over a reader, no need to get out your wallet and find the card you want to pay with.
Back when going out with others was a thing, it’s calculator has features for tips and splitting checks.
Contactless payments are fairly nice as you can double tap the button, and hold the watchface over a reader, no need to get out your wallet and find the card you want to pay with.
Back when going out with others was a thing, it’s calculator has features for tips and splitting checks.
My biggest value-add is being able to leave my phone at home.
Being able to listen to podcasts and audio-books on my watch while going for walks and running errands has been great. With Apple Pay I don't even need to take my wallet with me and can just tap with my watch.
Also the reminder to "close my rings" and being able to enter "competitions" with friends has been a great motivator for me to exercise.
Being able to listen to podcasts and audio-books on my watch while going for walks and running errands has been great. With Apple Pay I don't even need to take my wallet with me and can just tap with my watch.
Also the reminder to "close my rings" and being able to enter "competitions" with friends has been a great motivator for me to exercise.
As for exercising, if one's into that one might as well buy a proper watch for that. My Garmin can play music via BT and pay without my phone present. In addition it's tracking and fitness functions are way better than a normal smart watch. And the battery lasts longer than a day. More than a week even though I use the gps for an hour a day.
Agreed, I'd say one is a smartwatch, the other is a fitness tracker. The Garmin can't make calls or send text messages, for example. Most don't even have NFC or wifi, although the Felix 6 pro does, but it's also quite a lot more expensive than the 6, let alone the SE. The resolution is typically about half as much, the screen size is smaller, thicker, heavier, brightness is lower, and the screen to bezel is much worse. It's just not something I'd wear with a suit to the office, or at a dinner, or when I go clubbing because it just doesn't look very nice. It's something I'd wear during workouts. But because of that, it's more limited in use, has less value, and isn't quite worth the price for me. It also means I'm not wearing it all day, so it won't give me all-day health data tracking. Dancing for 4 hours at a party would get tracked, heartrate, calories etc, on my apple watch. But I wouldn't bring the garmin felix 6 pro to such an occasion. (there's smaller versions but I find their specs/feature set is a lot worse).
As a fitness tracker I'd say it's superior to the apple watch.
As a fitness tracker I'd say it's superior to the apple watch.
I guess it depends on one's circle. In my eyes one looks kinda like a dork with an Apple watch. But a fitness watch signalizes health and taking care of yourself/sportiness. I wear my garmin 945 everywhere, and most people I hang out with do the same.
I'll grant you it certainly does depend on the circle, but we're on a pretty dorky forum so I don't think our circles are particularly representative :p
But to me, while a fitness-focused watch does signal sportiness etc, which are great qualities, so does a heartrate strap or sweat band. You wouldn't wear it in the office, at a dinner, or at a party. Of course those are some extreme examples that aren't 1:1 comparable with a garmin. But the general principle to me is the same, to me a garmin 945 looks great on people doing sports, and out-of-place on people not wearing sports clothes.
I think this looks really classy for example, and could easily be worn on something casual (that's not sport clothes) or formal, without looking out of place: https://media.karousell.com/media/photos/products/2019/04/15...
The way that the watch is mostly screen and that screen can show a style compatible with any situation, with swappable bands, is a lot more stylish and versatile than something bulky, with a very large bezel, limited watch face choices, a dim low-resolution screen, often not always-on etc. (not sure 'bout the 945 on all of these btw, just my general impression).
But to me, while a fitness-focused watch does signal sportiness etc, which are great qualities, so does a heartrate strap or sweat band. You wouldn't wear it in the office, at a dinner, or at a party. Of course those are some extreme examples that aren't 1:1 comparable with a garmin. But the general principle to me is the same, to me a garmin 945 looks great on people doing sports, and out-of-place on people not wearing sports clothes.
I think this looks really classy for example, and could easily be worn on something casual (that's not sport clothes) or formal, without looking out of place: https://media.karousell.com/media/photos/products/2019/04/15...
The way that the watch is mostly screen and that screen can show a style compatible with any situation, with swappable bands, is a lot more stylish and versatile than something bulky, with a very large bezel, limited watch face choices, a dim low-resolution screen, often not always-on etc. (not sure 'bout the 945 on all of these btw, just my general impression).
I disagree. Garmin's high end watches are styled just the same as standard timepieces, but they just happen to be serious fitness trackers (in particular, see the Forerunner 945, Fenix series, and Marq series). Even with the standard wristband they generally fit in where any other timepiece would, and even more so if you pair it with a classic metal band (which is easily swapped in). Likewise, the watch face is customizable and subdued, unlike the glaringly bright screen of an Apple Watch. It's hard to pass off an Apple Watch as anything but obvious, chintzy tech gear.
I agree with your assessment.
But it's just that in Norway, sports wear is so in fashion that it bleeds over to everyday- and even formal clothing. Instead of a wool sweater, one wears a sporty wool baselayer like "kari traa". Instead of sun glasses it's sports glasses. Instead of a winter coat it's a ski jacket etc.
But it's just that in Norway, sports wear is so in fashion that it bleeds over to everyday- and even formal clothing. Instead of a wool sweater, one wears a sporty wool baselayer like "kari traa". Instead of sun glasses it's sports glasses. Instead of a winter coat it's a ski jacket etc.
I don’t think Garmin offers enough fitness features to justify having two different watches.
The Apple Watch is much more versatile and general purpose. Having access to Siri on my wrist has been pretty helpful, paired with AirPods and I can navigate most of life without my phone.
We’re quite habituated to charging our phones every night. Doing the same with your watch (especially if you purchase a stand for it), is a very low friction habit to follow.
The Apple Watch is much more versatile and general purpose. Having access to Siri on my wrist has been pretty helpful, paired with AirPods and I can navigate most of life without my phone.
We’re quite habituated to charging our phones every night. Doing the same with your watch (especially if you purchase a stand for it), is a very low friction habit to follow.
For me it's the opposite. Fitness is the most important, and the basic smart watch features on the Garmin is enough that I can't justify a second smart watch.
It sounds like you bought this expecting life changing gains, and maybe that is how OP is coming across too?
These things are not life changing, but they have their fun use cases. If you can accept that it’s not going to 10x your productivity and just want something technically neat maybe you’ll find a use for it again.
Or not, and you can just sell it for a quick buck :p
These things are not life changing, but they have their fun use cases. If you can accept that it’s not going to 10x your productivity and just want something technically neat maybe you’ll find a use for it again.
Or not, and you can just sell it for a quick buck :p
“Full day, 18 hours” battery life ruined it all for me. Too much trouble to charge so often.
While 18 hours is what apple says, their scenario for 18 hour usage is probably very uncommon.
At least for me it is. And thus I get around 2 days battery life with a 4 year old series 2 watch.
Their official test includes "45 minutes of app use, and a 60-minute workout with music playback from Apple Watch via Bluetooth"[0] - so unless you plan on doing that you can easily expect double the battery time.
[0] - https://www.apple.com/watch/battery/
At least for me it is. And thus I get around 2 days battery life with a 4 year old series 2 watch.
Their official test includes "45 minutes of app use, and a 60-minute workout with music playback from Apple Watch via Bluetooth"[0] - so unless you plan on doing that you can easily expect double the battery time.
[0] - https://www.apple.com/watch/battery/
It does feel really good to go on a jog without bringing my phone. That’s my favorite part of my Apple Watch, upgrading from the series 0 to the Series 6 cellular. I barely wore my series 0 and got bored of it, but the 6 feels indispensable.
I have a series 6, and if I throw it on the charger while I'm in the shower in general I don't have to think about battery life
18 hours is absurd, IMO. I have a Garmin Instinct Solar that gets up to 24 days of battery life without any solar exposure (there's unlimited battery life with enough exposure unless you use GPS a lot). I get notifications for any phone app I want, plus GPS when I need it and a multitude of fitness tracking, including round the clock heart beat monitoring. I can't use it as a phone or send texts (though I can read them) so I guess that's where it "lags" behind the Apple Watch. I think it's the perfect fitness tracker that's also a rugged watch.
I miss my pebble time so much. 6-7 day battery life, always on screen, extremely customisable.. sigh :(
I have the series 6 and also wish the battery life was just a little bit longer. It feels like I have very little wiggle room, and have to charge it once a day around the same time or it’ll die. I’m writing this from an iPhone 12 Pro Max that hasn’t been on a charger since yesterday morning when I got out of bed.
I charge mine while I’m in the shower usually. Or if I’ve hit all my goals for the day I’ll toss it on the charger before bed.
It doesn’t take long to get a reasonable charge on it. I usually keep it around 80% at most anyway. It gets me through the day at 80% and through the night since I use it for sleep tracking and alarm.
It doesn’t take long to get a reasonable charge on it. I usually keep it around 80% at most anyway. It gets me through the day at 80% and through the night since I use it for sleep tracking and alarm.
It depends on how many apps you pair with the watch.
My colleague gets 24 hours battery life on her series 6. Still uncomfortable compared to the usual week+ battery life Garmins.
On the cheaper side, another colleague has an Amazfit Blip Lite which lasts 30 days on a 2 hour charge and can withstand up to 30 meters underwater.
My colleague gets 24 hours battery life on her series 6. Still uncomfortable compared to the usual week+ battery life Garmins.
On the cheaper side, another colleague has an Amazfit Blip Lite which lasts 30 days on a 2 hour charge and can withstand up to 30 meters underwater.
The Series 3 has better battery life than the Series 6 (from my experience owning both).
I think the difference is the Series 6 screen never fully turns off. I imagine disabling "always on" mode would likely push battery life much higher, but that's just a guess
I think the difference is the Series 6 screen never fully turns off. I imagine disabling "always on" mode would likely push battery life much higher, but that's just a guess
Yeah I can easily get 2 days when I turn off always-on. Sometimes I do because the watch distracts me sometimes when its always on. But the screen is also bigger, that doesn't help.
It’s actually no big deal for me. I charge mine 30min every morning and I’m done for the day.
Possibly a silly question, but does the Apple Watch work with Android? Or at least with a Mac?
https://old.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/iqg81v/what_fu...
This plus the first few Google search results tell me it's not going to work without an iPhone.
This is why I do not buy into the Apple ecosystem, even if individual elements are superior to competitors. I do not want to be completely constricted to one ecosystem. My world involves Microsoft, Google, Steam, Epic, Blizzard, Logitech, Fossil, Asus, HP, Lenovo, etc. and I will continue to swap in and out components as desired.
But I am sad that WearOS options are generally so terrible (at least in performance and features, though some of the physical designs are much better than anything else). And a little jealous of the happy M1-based Macbook users with their battery life!
Ah to dream of having your cake and eating it, too. But we each must choose our own collection of compromises!
This plus the first few Google search results tell me it's not going to work without an iPhone.
This is why I do not buy into the Apple ecosystem, even if individual elements are superior to competitors. I do not want to be completely constricted to one ecosystem. My world involves Microsoft, Google, Steam, Epic, Blizzard, Logitech, Fossil, Asus, HP, Lenovo, etc. and I will continue to swap in and out components as desired.
But I am sad that WearOS options are generally so terrible (at least in performance and features, though some of the physical designs are much better than anything else). And a little jealous of the happy M1-based Macbook users with their battery life!
Ah to dream of having your cake and eating it, too. But we each must choose our own collection of compromises!
Have a look at PineTime, the open-source smart watch.
You can get all this functionality and more working beautifully with Android with Garmin watches. Mine lasts for many days on a charge (perhaps a week without activity tracking), has better sport tracking features, but the screen isn't quite as good. There are currently a few good deals on the Vivoactive 3, but also many higher end models available too.
I use a Vivoactive 3, and the battery definitely doesn't last days if I actually use it to track a specific exercise. I'm quite unimpressed with the battery life, but the watch is fairly feature-rich, otherwise.
If I just wear it without running anything, then yes, it can last days. But if all I want is to track heart rate, sleep, and such, I can get that with a much cheaper watch.
If I just wear it without running anything, then yes, it can last days. But if all I want is to track heart rate, sleep, and such, I can get that with a much cheaper watch.
No it doesn't. But check out Samsung Galaxy Watch series, they are a very decent competitor and they offer superior battery life.
Nope. You need an iPhone...
Nope, Apple Watch requires an iPhone
I got one for free, handed down to me by my partner after she upgraded, the stakes were pretty low for what I expected out of it.
It’s great! I silence the hell out of my phone (on top of having almost all notifications off) so the watch vibrations are useful to me for not missing messages I care about.
Super easy to read 2FA codes through SMS without digging up the phone. The LastPass Authenticator has a watch integration but it’s never worked for me. I’m sure there are other authenticator apps that work for the watch though.
Logging workouts is easy, it’s fun to compare rings with my partner but we’re not serious about it and don’t really need the watch to get motivated about being active.
Hands down my favorite feature is surprisingly the maps integration. If you just ignore the baseless memes about “Apple Maps bad” (works fine for me these days, but I saw how bad it was at its inception back in the day too) and just use it, you get the watch integration for free too. The vibrations for left/right turn are a very nice feature that don’t require averting attention at all, but you have the option of viewing the watch for a quick preview of the maps route (distance to next event and a visual, i.e. right three lanes to exit right).
Just some feedback from a guy without strong opinions for or against the thing.
It’s great! I silence the hell out of my phone (on top of having almost all notifications off) so the watch vibrations are useful to me for not missing messages I care about.
Super easy to read 2FA codes through SMS without digging up the phone. The LastPass Authenticator has a watch integration but it’s never worked for me. I’m sure there are other authenticator apps that work for the watch though.
Logging workouts is easy, it’s fun to compare rings with my partner but we’re not serious about it and don’t really need the watch to get motivated about being active.
Hands down my favorite feature is surprisingly the maps integration. If you just ignore the baseless memes about “Apple Maps bad” (works fine for me these days, but I saw how bad it was at its inception back in the day too) and just use it, you get the watch integration for free too. The vibrations for left/right turn are a very nice feature that don’t require averting attention at all, but you have the option of viewing the watch for a quick preview of the maps route (distance to next event and a visual, i.e. right three lanes to exit right).
Just some feedback from a guy without strong opinions for or against the thing.
Agree on this. I thought I would hate the watch but it has been very unobtrusive nice add on. I don’t use email or texting on there and all notifications have been turned off. Great for quick checks in Heath, weather, workouts etc. and mine seems to be bomb proof!
Same - I resisted getting one for a long time, in general because I like to live minimally, but I finally caved in because I was interested in tracking biometrics, and it seems like the best option in terms of simplicity/performance for now.
I thought I might only wear it when I was training, but it turns out having information on my heart rate all day long is super interesting, and I'm really happy I have it.
Also I have turned off most of the notifications, but having the ones I want on my wrist without taking out my phone is actually super nice.
I thought I might only wear it when I was training, but it turns out having information on my heart rate all day long is super interesting, and I'm really happy I have it.
Also I have turned off most of the notifications, but having the ones I want on my wrist without taking out my phone is actually super nice.
Do you find the calorie tracking accurate?
I have the Series 4 and it's fundamentally changed the way I interact with my iPhone when I'm out and about.
* I can answer calls while driving and not have to fumble around for my phone while driving my truck (The wife's SUV has fancy bluetooth integration)
* I can open and close my garage from my watch.
* I can voice message my family through Messages.
I only wish that the battery life were much longer than it is and that Apple could settle on one method of charging their devices, especially in vehicles with limited room.
* I can answer calls while driving and not have to fumble around for my phone while driving my truck (The wife's SUV has fancy bluetooth integration)
* I can open and close my garage from my watch.
* I can voice message my family through Messages.
I only wish that the battery life were much longer than it is and that Apple could settle on one method of charging their devices, especially in vehicles with limited room.
The Apple Watch has been a really amazing gadget and is well worth the expense. I would add the ease of using Apple Pay from the Watch as a very useful feature to your list.
I agree wholeheartedly. The Apple Watch got me running 3 miles a day for the last six months or so. I’m wholly invested in closing the rings and I up the the difficulty every month or so. The biggest revelation was my resting heart rate was somewhere between 70-90 and that scared me. Doing the daily runs has reduced that to 65 so I really feel like I’m making progress.
Tell me your Vo2 max trend! That's been the one to watch for me, happy to say I'm making quite a bit of progress there!
You should try the new Fitness+ app on the apple TV. Really good integration with the apple watch.
I'd like to, but the fact they required the TV was pretty crazy, to me. They've captured a huge portion of the smartphone market, but apple tv is only 1-2% of the market, and in many countries much less than that.
They don't allow your phone to show Fitness+ on the TV through HDMI, nor through airplay. The phone screen is just way too small.
So what's left are iPads, which can be a really great experience, particularly on the 12 inch pro, but it's a shame they don't allow Macbooks... I'm okay with the buy-in to some extent but man... A watch, phone and an apple tv is necessary, all from the same company, plus a subscription just to do a video-assisted workout that shows your heartrate on the screen? That's a pretty insane proposition. Would've been great if they allowed more options or third-party stuff. Just casting from my iPhone would've been a good start, or casting on my macbook... Honestly it's pretty ridiculous.
Happy Macbook, iPhone, Apple Watch and Airpod Pro user, otherwise.
They don't allow your phone to show Fitness+ on the TV through HDMI, nor through airplay. The phone screen is just way too small.
So what's left are iPads, which can be a really great experience, particularly on the 12 inch pro, but it's a shame they don't allow Macbooks... I'm okay with the buy-in to some extent but man... A watch, phone and an apple tv is necessary, all from the same company, plus a subscription just to do a video-assisted workout that shows your heartrate on the screen? That's a pretty insane proposition. Would've been great if they allowed more options or third-party stuff. Just casting from my iPhone would've been a good start, or casting on my macbook... Honestly it's pretty ridiculous.
Happy Macbook, iPhone, Apple Watch and Airpod Pro user, otherwise.
I don’t know where you got your information about fitness+ playback via airplay but it is incorrect. I just tried it and it works fine.
From where to where? It's been all over the forums and news the past few weeks, e.g.:
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/12/14/apple-fitness-plus-no-a...
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/12/14/apple-fitness-plus-no-a...
I agree, as a proud owner of a latest gen Apple Watch, but I can see how its benefits are not enough for its price for most people (i.e. its very convenient, but also expensive)
I got mine through my insurance's cashback program, pretty cool. As long as you workout enough, you get 1/24th paid back monthly. The workout requirement isn't too crazy, commensurate with 2 weekly workouts and some daily activity (like a walk), and based on heartrate (so effort-based, instead of performance based. if you're out of shape and your heart rate goes up a lot from a simple walk, it'll get recognised as a serious workout for you, because in a way, it is).
Not sure I'd have gotten it otherwise. But at the same time, it's pretty easy to rationalise any cost when looking at it as a monthly payment haha. A 3-year usage and a 20% resale value on the SE ($280) will get you a $6 a month price. If that improves your daily activity by just 5 or 10%, that's probably the cheapest medical intervention in your life, ever. That's probably why the insurance companies offer cashbacks, it's a cool model. They can give me a watch for free every few years and get in return a person who, on average, spends >1x the apple watch less on healthcare costs, every year.
Not sure I'd have gotten it otherwise. But at the same time, it's pretty easy to rationalise any cost when looking at it as a monthly payment haha. A 3-year usage and a 20% resale value on the SE ($280) will get you a $6 a month price. If that improves your daily activity by just 5 or 10%, that's probably the cheapest medical intervention in your life, ever. That's probably why the insurance companies offer cashbacks, it's a cool model. They can give me a watch for free every few years and get in return a person who, on average, spends >1x the apple watch less on healthcare costs, every year.
I never knew how bad my breathing (stress) was until I got an Apple Watch. Beside health data... the reminders to breath has literally changed my life.
hmmm, I had bad experiences.
1) activity tracking is fake. Turn over on sofa, get told "congrats! you finished your activity"
2) sleep tracking is fake. Forget to wear it, get told "You slept great!
3) water proof is useless. I bought it because I was going to be surfing and wanted to know if it was close to time to meet up with others. But, while it is water proof you can't use it if the screen is wet
4) Not good for telling time - because often I'd twist my wrist and the face would not light up, try again fail, try again fail, RAGE! get out other hand to manually wake it up
Sold it 2 months after I got it.
1) activity tracking is fake. Turn over on sofa, get told "congrats! you finished your activity"
2) sleep tracking is fake. Forget to wear it, get told "You slept great!
3) water proof is useless. I bought it because I was going to be surfing and wanted to know if it was close to time to meet up with others. But, while it is water proof you can't use it if the screen is wet
4) Not good for telling time - because often I'd twist my wrist and the face would not light up, try again fail, try again fail, RAGE! get out other hand to manually wake it up
Sold it 2 months after I got it.
Stadia, the initial reviews were actually pretty bad, but I'm blown away by how good it is. There's something undeniably cool about playing cyberpunk on a macbook air with full graphical detail, and then switching over to play on my TV exactly where I left off. The latency is virtually imperceptible to me, and I love that I don't need a 50 GB download just to try out a new game. Everytime I use it I'm honestly impressed that it works as well as it does. My only concern now is whether I can trust Google not to eventually kill it, given their recent track record.
Came here to say the exact same thing. I can't stop talking to everyone and their brother about it. It feels like a clear leap into the future. For the uninitiated, here are some highlights of what it enables you to do:
- You can go to a friend's apartment with a Chromecast and just start playing games YOU own like CyberPunk & Assasins Creed within seconds on their TV (assuming they have a controller or you brought your own)
- You can go to Stadia.com on Chrome and just start playing these games from the browser using the Keyboard/Mouse
- The other day I was parked at a Target and I was able to play Cyberpunk on my phone using my phone's internet connection
- You don't have to keep worrying about constantly updating hardware, downloading game patches, deleting stored games etc.
- Time to load the game between saved checkpoints and missions is also much faster since the games run on a superior hardware.
- You can go to a friend's apartment with a Chromecast and just start playing games YOU own like CyberPunk & Assasins Creed within seconds on their TV (assuming they have a controller or you brought your own)
- You can go to Stadia.com on Chrome and just start playing these games from the browser using the Keyboard/Mouse
- The other day I was parked at a Target and I was able to play Cyberpunk on my phone using my phone's internet connection
- You don't have to keep worrying about constantly updating hardware, downloading game patches, deleting stored games etc.
- Time to load the game between saved checkpoints and missions is also much faster since the games run on a superior hardware.
You don't really own the games however, it relinquishes user control. If that's fine to you then sure, but I don't want to play games as a service, I just want to play them on my own hardware with minimal latency.
People used to go to the arcade parlour to play coin-op games. In one perspective, that was also games-as-a-service.
And it was a terrible experience. Just because it was all we had, doesnt make it good.
Many games had special peripherals or were impractically expensive for home usage though.
For example, the Neo Geo AES launched at a cost of $650 (~$1300 in today's dollars), with games costing $200 or more back then. Some versions of afterburner climax have a servo equipped chair which can tilt on multiple axes as well as vibrate, police 911 has body position sensors, and many of the music games have hardware that's completely impractical for home.
From that perspective, the games as a service makes more sense. Stadia doesn't really offer any of that, the games are the same as any other platform.
For example, the Neo Geo AES launched at a cost of $650 (~$1300 in today's dollars), with games costing $200 or more back then. Some versions of afterburner climax have a servo equipped chair which can tilt on multiple axes as well as vibrate, police 911 has body position sensors, and many of the music games have hardware that's completely impractical for home.
From that perspective, the games as a service makes more sense. Stadia doesn't really offer any of that, the games are the same as any other platform.
Most people gave that up a long time ago anyway, when they started buying all their games on Steam.
Not really, some games on Steam don't have DRM, and Valve has said if Steam ever goes down that they'd break Steam DRM themselves. This cannot be said of Stadia, I can't imagine Google would refund people that money or give them another copy of their games.
> start playing games YOU own
Except YOU don’t own them, google does, which exactly why I would never get stadia.
Except YOU don’t own them, google does, which exactly why I would never get stadia.
This doesn’t seem materially different than Steam+DRM. I do like getting games from GOG or itch.io when I can, though.
It sounds great- but do you trust google not to shut it down, increase the price or embed a bunch of ads everywhere?
You can’t take the games out (or resell them) so it’s a hard sell for me.
You can’t take the games out (or resell them) so it’s a hard sell for me.
Yeah, I just got burned by the cancellation of Nest Secure. I’m no longer keen on investing time and money in new Google products and services
I really like Stadia but I've been using GeForce Now and it's a VERY similar experience but I like the model of buying the games on libraries you already have. Stadia is a tiny bit better in the networking but GeForce Now has better graphics I feel like. Both are an amazing experience on a good internet connection. I actually think that once 5G is wide spread there is a chance it could have a MASSIVE impact on the gaming market.
I signed up for Stadia and was really confused about the value proposition. You stream games, and yet you have to... buy them?
There are some free games included, of course, but I didn't find anything I was interested in playing there.
What I want is something like Microsoft's Xbox Game Pass, where you pay a fixed price per month to play the full library of games, with nothing else on top of that. A Netflix for games, if you will. I don't want to shell out $60 for Cyberpunk 2077.
(The absence of an easy way to trial games on consoles is problematic, in my opinion. I purchased Cyberpunk on my Xbox One before I realized how bad it performs on that console, and fortunately I was able to get a refund.)
Unfortunately, Xbox Game Pass is predictably hobbled by a very limited library (and they keep removing good stuff), and the fact that the games are tied to the platform they've been developed for.
What I'd like is basically Game Pass + Stadia.
There are some free games included, of course, but I didn't find anything I was interested in playing there.
What I want is something like Microsoft's Xbox Game Pass, where you pay a fixed price per month to play the full library of games, with nothing else on top of that. A Netflix for games, if you will. I don't want to shell out $60 for Cyberpunk 2077.
(The absence of an easy way to trial games on consoles is problematic, in my opinion. I purchased Cyberpunk on my Xbox One before I realized how bad it performs on that console, and fortunately I was able to get a refund.)
Unfortunately, Xbox Game Pass is predictably hobbled by a very limited library (and they keep removing good stuff), and the fact that the games are tied to the platform they've been developed for.
What I'd like is basically Game Pass + Stadia.
Game Pass has streaming for Android. It's coming to more platforms in 2021.
Respectfully I disagree. I tried Stadia a couple months ago. Note: I’m on a Gigabit connection.
I found the library of games generally unappealing. I did play a few titles, including Player Unknown. The stuttering and lag in the game reminded me of playing Quake 3 Arena on a 56K circa 1999.
Also, graphically the game wouldn’t run at my monitors 1440p. The graphics generally looked washed out. I thought it was just a poorly built game, but then I saw gameplay (non Stadia) on YouTube and realized the Stadia version was itself awful.
I found the library of games generally unappealing. I did play a few titles, including Player Unknown. The stuttering and lag in the game reminded me of playing Quake 3 Arena on a 56K circa 1999.
Also, graphically the game wouldn’t run at my monitors 1440p. The graphics generally looked washed out. I thought it was just a poorly built game, but then I saw gameplay (non Stadia) on YouTube and realized the Stadia version was itself awful.
im a bit confused with your comment, doesn't Stadia Pro supports 4K and HDR ?
Officially I think it supports 4K and HDR, but that doesn’t mean every game runs at 4K or offers HDR.
I agree that Stadia sounds like it works awesomely, but Google's history of killing off products is what's keeping me away. That's Google's own fault and nothing on the Stadia team. I know eventually all services likely disappear, but there's a big difference between "most likely within a couple years" and "some indefinite date way off in the future".
I just went down a rabbit hole of streaming for a couple of hours. I tried out Stadia, Moonlight, and GeForce Now.
I want is a service that:
* Lets me play my existing library of games (what I own on Steam, Origin, Battle.net)
* Has League of Legends
* Streams in 1440p 144fps
I haven't found anything that does this.
I want is a service that:
* Lets me play my existing library of games (what I own on Steam, Origin, Battle.net)
* Has League of Legends
* Streams in 1440p 144fps
I haven't found anything that does this.
1440p 144fps is ridiculous.
Tough enough getting a 720p low latency feed, which is what stadia does. It then upscales to 1080p and 4k
> Tough enough getting a 720p low latency feed, which is what stadia does.
Do you have source for this? This sounds incorrect. My impression is that the Stadia Pro is capable of sending 4K, assuming the game developer can optimize their game to run at a good framerate with 4K.
Do you have source for this? This sounds incorrect. My impression is that the Stadia Pro is capable of sending 4K, assuming the game developer can optimize their game to run at a good framerate with 4K.
It might be ridiculous but it's what I want if I'm going to use cloud gaming software. I'm probably not the target demographic.
I have nothing against personal tastes, but I would prefer if the gaming community gave more appreciation to low-poly, artsy, cartoony, and/or stylized graphics that would donwscale better rather than (IMHO overused) hyper-realistic highdef textures and sophisticated lighting effects (that often end up making panorama views "foggy"). I have nothing to say about FPS, more is always better :)
It is also worth mentioning that ray-tracing will offer new depths for highdef textures and sophisticated lighting effects so I don't expect this trend to change soon.
It is also worth mentioning that ray-tracing will offer new depths for highdef textures and sophisticated lighting effects so I don't expect this trend to change soon.
Rainway? https://rainway.com
Moonlight will do this except for 144hz, trick is to 'stream' your entire desktop[1], allowing you to access any game/launcher regardless if nvidia detects a game or not.
[1] https://github.com/moonlight-stream/moonlight-docs/wiki/Setu...
[1] https://github.com/moonlight-stream/moonlight-docs/wiki/Setu...
At least as far as Steam goes, I've had reasonable success using Steam Link over Wireguard (since it's designed to be used locally); though I don't play games where lag is critical (like FPS's).
You could try wrangling 1440p144 from your hardware, not sure how high quality it can get
You could try wrangling 1440p144 from your hardware, not sure how high quality it can get
> Streams in 1440p 144fps
144 fps is one frame every 7ms. Are there even any residential internet offers where you can get a ping that low to anything on the internet?
144 fps is one frame every 7ms. Are there even any residential internet offers where you can get a ping that low to anything on the internet?
I'm on a cheap fiber plan in a European capital and consistently get a ping under 3ms to Google/Stadia. It's nothing uncommon.
The resolution and FPS is only limited by bandwidth. The long is only relevant for latency/interaction.
Have you tried shadow? (I haven't, but have heard generally positive things)
Stadia had hype?
You got me interested, What controllers does stadia support?
You missed a good deal. Prior to cyberpunks release if you pre ordered they gave you a controller and a chromecast for free (retail is $100). It got me hooked. Since then I bought red dead 2 and octopath traveler. Playing on an iPad in bed is nice.
https://support.google.com/stadia/answer/9578631?hl=en
To play on a TV you’ll need a chromecast ultra and the Stadia controller ($100) https://store.google.com/us/product/stadia
Source: I also bought Stadia for Cyberpunk
To play on a TV you’ll need a chromecast ultra and the Stadia controller ($100) https://store.google.com/us/product/stadia
Source: I also bought Stadia for Cyberpunk
I use an 8bitdo in xbox emulation mode -- I think as long as the controller emulates an xbox controller (I imagine a lot of them do), it'll work fine.
It just has to be recognized as an HTML5 gamepad (there are various HTML5 tester sites online)
It just has to be recognized as an HTML5 gamepad (there are various HTML5 tester sites online)
recently found out it works with switch pro controllers
Maybe technology-wise, but the games are all super expensive and there aren't enough of them to justify a subscription.
You don't need a subscription, it's free to play games you buy. The subscription gives 4k and surround sound + free games.
The current sale matches steam for the games I checked.
Library size is still a concern.
The current sale matches steam for the games I checked.
Library size is still a concern.
Yes I know. I didn't imply otherwise. The games are too expensive to buy outright (IMO) and too few to justify a subscription.
I think a good experience depends on the quality of your internet connection. Unfortunately, in the US this is hampered by the ISP duopoly
Yes unless you use the controller and it gives you carpal tunnel syndrome and rsi
> The latency is virtually imperceptible to me
Lucky you, I can't even play on most TVs hooked as-is via HDMI because of horrendous render lag.
Lucky you, I can't even play on most TVs hooked as-is via HDMI because of horrendous render lag.
I do not understand how people say there's virtually no latency. There is, and it's _huge_, because light is actually quite slow and no tech can improve on that.
Makes me think people that say this have never played on a high end PC, which in turn has lower latency compared to a last gen console. And that's considering the fact that even modern PC have a TON of latency. NVIDIA seems to be working towards that, thankfully.
I bet playing Quake 3 Arena multiplayer on Stadia would be noticeably worse that on a PC from 20 years ago.
Makes me think people that say this have never played on a high end PC, which in turn has lower latency compared to a last gen console. And that's considering the fact that even modern PC have a TON of latency. NVIDIA seems to be working towards that, thankfully.
I bet playing Quake 3 Arena multiplayer on Stadia would be noticeably worse that on a PC from 20 years ago.
I'd say there's effectively no latency, since most games don't need or benefit from <10 ms response times.
I mainly play twitchy shooters on a fairly high-end PC (CSGO, Tarkov, Q3A back in the day) and was super impressed with Stadia to play games like Assassin's Creed. It felt like I had my PC anywhere, but I attribute that to the forgiving latency requirements for the game.
I wouldn't expect CSGO to work as well (though I'd definitely try it).
I mainly play twitchy shooters on a fairly high-end PC (CSGO, Tarkov, Q3A back in the day) and was super impressed with Stadia to play games like Assassin's Creed. It felt like I had my PC anywhere, but I attribute that to the forgiving latency requirements for the game.
I wouldn't expect CSGO to work as well (though I'd definitely try it).
Why do you think light is actually quite slow?
Because sending a light beam 10 miles away is slower than not doing so, obviously. Light isn't instantaneous in this universe.
It's surprising people still don't get this. Operating a computer miles away will always be slower than operating a computer centimetres away. You can be smart about it and optimise as much as possible, but Google isn't running alien tech that magically is orders of magnitude better than consumer hardware so that it overcomes the distance issue.
It's surprising people still don't get this. Operating a computer miles away will always be slower than operating a computer centimetres away. You can be smart about it and optimise as much as possible, but Google isn't running alien tech that magically is orders of magnitude better than consumer hardware so that it overcomes the distance issue.
Light takes about a millisecond to travel 200 miles. Compared to the latency introduced by computation, it is pretty insignificant, unless you are connected to a server very far away.
My ping is 2. As the other responder notes there are more significant sources of latency on a local gaming rig.
Doesn't it depend on the person's network setup?
No. However fast is your Internet, it is still slower to send data out on the Internet pipes and back again than doing local computation.
5ms ping to your local Stadia server is at least 5ms of additional latency compared to a high end PC. Add virtualisation costs, CPU steal time, packet loss, video compression and decompression etc for another measurable increase.
5ms ping to your local Stadia server is at least 5ms of additional latency compared to a high end PC. Add virtualisation costs, CPU steal time, packet loss, video compression and decompression etc for another measurable increase.
How long is the rest of the latency chain? For example, keyboard input over usb is gonna be ~15 ms, processing time is gonna be >5ms, and display time like 12ms. Adding those comes to a minimum of around 32ms. [1]
I'm not sure if I can tell the difference between 32 ms and 37 ms.
[1] https://pavelfatin.com/typing-with-pleasure/
I'm not sure if I can tell the difference between 32 ms and 37 ms.
[1] https://pavelfatin.com/typing-with-pleasure/
Your 37ms is based on 5ms roundtrip and 0 CPU time, which is impossible. And add network jitter which might be worse than static latency.
And the Stadia market isn't people with fast monitors, Ethernet connected and ultra stable internet, but high latency TVs, avg tier Wifi, slow hardware to decode video.
And the Stadia market isn't people with fast monitors, Ethernet connected and ultra stable internet, but high latency TVs, avg tier Wifi, slow hardware to decode video.
> 0 CPU time
I meant to assume 5ms CPU time: 12 input + 5 processing + 15 output = 32. Add 5 for network round-trip to get 37.
> 5ms roundtrip
5 ms network round-trip or less is common in offices or homes with fiber. Here's ICMP ping 1.1.1.1 from my office just now: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.075/4.700/6.407/0.459 ms. (UDP wouldn't be so different.) Of course, on wifi or low-speed broadband it wouldn't be so fast.
> high latency TVs
High-latency displays makes network latency less noticeable relative to a conventional console game (but more noticeable relative to a PC game on a fast-updating screen).
I meant to assume 5ms CPU time: 12 input + 5 processing + 15 output = 32. Add 5 for network round-trip to get 37.
> 5ms roundtrip
5 ms network round-trip or less is common in offices or homes with fiber. Here's ICMP ping 1.1.1.1 from my office just now: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.075/4.700/6.407/0.459 ms. (UDP wouldn't be so different.) Of course, on wifi or low-speed broadband it wouldn't be so fast.
> high latency TVs
High-latency displays makes network latency less noticeable relative to a conventional console game (but more noticeable relative to a PC game on a fast-updating screen).
This is one of the reasons why Stadia is only available for these countries:
https://support.google.com/stadia/answer/9338852
https://support.google.com/stadia/answer/9338852
Turn on game mode and problem solved unless you can perceive low double-digit ms latency
Yeah, not surprisingly it’s not really that simple..
Some TVs just aren’t made for low latency, “game mode” enabled or not.
Interesting that people are substituting the hard question (what has been hyped and has lived up to it) with the easier question (what is good and has stood the test of time) and answering that instead, a form of attribute substitution bias [0].
My answers would be Mr Robot, especially after seeing what happened with Game Of Thrones. Having a story that is planned out from start to finish is miles better than improvising as one goes along;
and also React, especially hooks. Hooks are an incredible mechanism for creating compositional lifecycles, something I've seen only discussed really in this Flutter implementation issue [1], and it should be seen as an amazing contribution to complex tree management systems.
[0] https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribute_substitution
[1] https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/51752
My answers would be Mr Robot, especially after seeing what happened with Game Of Thrones. Having a story that is planned out from start to finish is miles better than improvising as one goes along;
and also React, especially hooks. Hooks are an incredible mechanism for creating compositional lifecycles, something I've seen only discussed really in this Flutter implementation issue [1], and it should be seen as an amazing contribution to complex tree management systems.
[0] https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribute_substitution
[1] https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/51752
Interesting, I would never have guessed Mr Robot was planned out start to finish. I loved the first season, but by the middle of the third season it felt very much like a show where the writers had no idea where to take the plot next, haven’t watched anymore since.
I had similar thoughts but was so glad I stuck with season 4, it is probably one of the best seasons of TV I've ever seen and provided satisfactory closure. IMO season 4 is worth watching no matter what you thought of the middle seasons, I've rewatched it a few times which I almost never do.
I felt the same way. It sort of fell apart during the later seasons. But the final season, especially the second half of it is easily one of my favorite seasons ever. The writing is absolutely incredible, especially as a software developer. Basically like an opposite lost, everything comes together in an incredibly satisfying way.
The project started out as a movie and so it is no surprise it had a great start and end but got a little lost in the middle when the idea needed to be stretched out.
You should continue watching, it all comes together in the last half of the 4th season. You'll understand why Elliot is the way he is.
I'm with the prior poster - season 1 is planned and is rewarding on its own. I personally don't think the series was satisfying after that.
Interesting, you didn't like the entire backstory and what was being alluded to in the flashbacks?
You are sorely missing out. Mr. Robot is laid out in three acts. You cannot skip the last season (Act III), it provides closure and ties the seeming chaos of the middle two seasons (collectively, Act II) into a cohesive plot.
When I read about season 5, I didn’t interpret it to mean that the entire show was planned out, just that the ending was.
React hooks are terribly implemented. They cause deadlock in the simplest of cases.
Check out Adam Haile's S.js and Surplus if you want a better example of this approach (which came LONG before "hooks"). Surplus also tops performance charts consistently, and has done so for years. Really underrated framework that is lightweight and battle tested.
Check out Adam Haile's S.js and Surplus if you want a better example of this approach (which came LONG before "hooks"). Surplus also tops performance charts consistently, and has done so for years. Really underrated framework that is lightweight and battle tested.
I've seen people cause all kinds of problems with hooks, but I don't believe I've ever seen deadlock. Can you elaborate?
Can you elaborate on the deadlock risk, or link to further reading?
Haile's work seems mostly to be stream-based like RXJS, is that right? They seem to be reactive components. Can you show me how I can compose pieces of life cycles together using Haile's libraries like I can with hooks?
>>Interesting that people are substituting the hard question (what has been hyped and has lived up to it)
I think it's the way you're reading the answers (and the question). If you look at it as "What was hyped to you and lived up to the hype when you finally experienced it", then the answers make sense and there's no confusion.
I think it's the way you're reading the answers (and the question). If you look at it as "What was hyped to you and lived up to the hype when you finally experienced it", then the answers make sense and there's no confusion.
Maybe. I'm not sure who's really hyping up ancient texts like the Bible these days, or some of the other answers as well.
I didn't see that post, but I'm sure the poster meant they had huge expectations based on it's reputation as 'the book' or it's place in popular culture and it lived up to that hype when they did read it. The original question is ambiguous and can be answered both ways.
Never understood why React hooks are such a big deal- I mean you’re just setting state. Or am I missing something?
It seems you are. I'd encourage you to read briefly through [1] that I linked above, it shows why hooks are needed rather than just functions. Basically you're passing state around in a Closure such that you can hook into life cycles from any part of the app. This means that I can create a self contained hook for something like making an animation for a component and making it usable for any component I want, rather than wrapping everything into an AnimationComponent just to get the lifecycle state. I can reuse this behavior anywhere else in the app.
I think the point is you don't have to deal with anything else. You only have to set state!
I would add also The Sopranos, Entourage and How I met your mother. Fantastic TVShows.
When the M1 chip was introduced I was a bit underwhelmed. Apple being so vague about their performance didn't exactly inspire confidence.
But as more information has come out it seems like the hype has actually increased.
But as more information has come out it seems like the hype has actually increased.
I'm still on the fence. I could use a new laptop but everything I've looked at doesn't live up to what I would hope for in terms of battery life and specs.
The M1 seems to fit the bill. But I'm hesitant to buy into something that I can't run linux on.
The M1 seems to fit the bill. But I'm hesitant to buy into something that I can't run linux on.
> The M1 seems to fit the bill. But I'm hesitant to buy into something that I can't run linux on.
Exactly. Apple is even introducing further restrictions on macOS, to turn it into a closed system like ios totally under Apple's control. (They've already crippled all application firewalls so that they cannot block any apple authorised software from accessing the internet, and they can even bypass VPNs, all in the marketing speak of "security" while the real reason is to better spy on its users).
Exactly. Apple is even introducing further restrictions on macOS, to turn it into a closed system like ios totally under Apple's control. (They've already crippled all application firewalls so that they cannot block any apple authorised software from accessing the internet, and they can even bypass VPNs, all in the marketing speak of "security" while the real reason is to better spy on its users).
> all in the marketing speak of "security" while the real reason is to better spy on its users
Not really. Apple's vice is the tendency to lock down their platforms too much and we're seeing this with the new laptops; their track record with regards to privacy is pretty good.
Not really. Apple's vice is the tendency to lock down their platforms too much and we're seeing this with the new laptops; their track record with regards to privacy is pretty good.
> their track record with regards to privacy is pretty good.
So was Google's. Till they decided to screw their users. Once bitten, twice shy.
If Apple was serious about user privacy, it wouldn't be crippling application firewall on the new macOS to allow Apple apps to bypass them, even if the user is explicitly blocking them. Nor would they be forcing us to create a unique id to track and record our every activity on their device (yes, they treat it as their device by giving you an illusion of ownership). Nor would they be crippling Safari to not allow you to block all coookies or cripple its extension apis that would have allowed better ad blockers and trackers to be developed. Nor would they be forcing us to use App stores, forcing themselves in between u users and developers to gauge us both of money, while also invading our privacy.
So was Google's. Till they decided to screw their users. Once bitten, twice shy.
If Apple was serious about user privacy, it wouldn't be crippling application firewall on the new macOS to allow Apple apps to bypass them, even if the user is explicitly blocking them. Nor would they be forcing us to create a unique id to track and record our every activity on their device (yes, they treat it as their device by giving you an illusion of ownership). Nor would they be crippling Safari to not allow you to block all coookies or cripple its extension apis that would have allowed better ad blockers and trackers to be developed. Nor would they be forcing us to use App stores, forcing themselves in between u users and developers to gauge us both of money, while also invading our privacy.
What are you referring to re: Google? Google has always been a data vacuum, but their privacy and transparency has been on a long upward trend and is currently the best it has ever been.
Do you have sources to back up your claims of spyware?
As I pointed out with the firewall / VPN changes, most of their recent actions are all directed at ensuring that only Apple gets to decide how you protect your data (and what you can protect). And these these major changes that take away control from the user also help Apple to harvest more and more user data. (Another similar change, that allowed Apple to spy on your internet browsing "anonymously", was made with Safari when it disabled the user options to control cookies and crippled ad and tracker blocker extensions.)
Yes this is a drawback for me as well. I have basically moved completely away from Windows toward Linux for my home media PC, and I have enjoyed it so much I would like to do the same on the laptop. I was seriously considering an XPS 13" before I bought an M1 air, but it just doesn't seem like any other laptops are quite there at the moment. It would be nice if AMD's next low-power line gets more adoption by laptop manufacturers.
Most of machines (a dozen or more) run gnu/linux for the longest time; not long ago the only deviations were lone openbsd box and the macbook pro I got issued at work (because of an ios apps development).
Apple Silicon was hyped and that hype was backed by some early benchmarks; I still was sceptical because it goes against all my Ryzen logic essentially :D
Got my hands on the Air M1 this week finally and this thing is absolutely impossible. Single-core math benchmarks (scimark4) are 10-15% faster than my trusty ryzen 3900X. Synthetic tests apart - C/C++ compilation is more than 2 (two!) times faster than macbook pro with 6core i7 CPU, that is a huge deal for me. All that with passive cooling!
On a different not another hyped thing that I really want (and waiting for) is a new Raspberry Pi 400 - it is a quite capable tiny computer embedded in a keyboard, those things are a piece of beauty I think :)
Apple Silicon was hyped and that hype was backed by some early benchmarks; I still was sceptical because it goes against all my Ryzen logic essentially :D
Got my hands on the Air M1 this week finally and this thing is absolutely impossible. Single-core math benchmarks (scimark4) are 10-15% faster than my trusty ryzen 3900X. Synthetic tests apart - C/C++ compilation is more than 2 (two!) times faster than macbook pro with 6core i7 CPU, that is a huge deal for me. All that with passive cooling!
On a different not another hyped thing that I really want (and waiting for) is a new Raspberry Pi 400 - it is a quite capable tiny computer embedded in a keyboard, those things are a piece of beauty I think :)
Yeah, it like someone went two years into the future and brought back this chip.
As a Chromebook fan (and I used one as my daily driver), it seems like Apple has out-Chromebooked all Chromebooks with the M1 MBA. Unless AMD or Qualcomm pulls a rabbit out of their collective hats in the next 6 months, the MBA will be my next laptop.
As a Chromebook fan (and I used one as my daily driver), it seems like Apple has out-Chromebooked all Chromebooks with the M1 MBA. Unless AMD or Qualcomm pulls a rabbit out of their collective hats in the next 6 months, the MBA will be my next laptop.
You can usually buy 2-3 Chromebooks for the same price point, how are those two even comparable?
> How are those two even comparable?
They're both locked down with fury and will eventually be rendered useless due to no software updates.
You can attempt to install Linux to those but... Will you succeed?
They're both locked down with fury and will eventually be rendered useless due to no software updates.
You can attempt to install Linux to those but... Will you succeed?
I have 3 chromebook bricked due to update issues. My 2009 imac is going strong and gut feeling says my 2020 MBA will definitely outlast 2023 chromebooks.
Sounds like a good excuse to pull out the ol' SOIC clip.
https://wiki.mrchromebox.tech/Unbricking
https://wiki.mrchromebox.tech/Unbricking
Haha. Excellent point indeed !
Definitely this. To me, it's the most revolutionary thing they've done since the iPad.
I think the ipad is meh, so better than that. iphone?
I’ve gone back and forth about the iPad, but now that I’m in a non-technical field, it’s on the tipping point of being my daily driver. When I’m with clients and can hold it in my hand to share info it feels like I’m living in the future.
Good point. As a technical professional I’ve always been on the fence about the iPad because of its limitations. I love the form factor and specs, but it just isn’t good enough for e.g. programming.
If I was mainly writing and doing some simple graphical work I’d ditch my other devices in a heartbeat.
If I was mainly writing and doing some simple graphical work I’d ditch my other devices in a heartbeat.
Same. I guess the iPad Pro is interesting for artists, but I have owned a couple of iPads and it turns out I would much rather have a laptop and an e-reader.
It's great as a "consumption" device to watch videos and read and play games.
Yeah it's actually pretty cool. I got an M1 air, even though I normally don't jump on 1st gen products, partly out of COVID boredom I suppose. I thought I would use it along side my 2017 15" MBP at least until things caught up on the software side, but I have barely touched the pro since I got it. The screen is smaller, and the speakers are not quite as good, but it's so snappy, light and quiet that it more than makes up for it.
There are still some rough edges: for serious development a lot of things are not quite there yet: e.g. last time I checked, there's no native release for NodeJS, and home-brew is still hit-or-miss. A lot of things work with Rosetta, but it surely takes more tweaking and trial and error to get things running than normal. But I've been programming mostly in Rust lately, and that works flawlessly on nightly, so I haven't really thought about compatibility since I was kicking the tires the second day I had it. YMMV depending on which tools you use.
All in all, I think this is the most I have really had fun using a laptop since I got my first MBA in 2012 or so. It was so light to travel with, and powerful enough for everything I needed, so it pretty quickly replaced my other laptop for pretty much everything.
There are still some rough edges: for serious development a lot of things are not quite there yet: e.g. last time I checked, there's no native release for NodeJS, and home-brew is still hit-or-miss. A lot of things work with Rosetta, but it surely takes more tweaking and trial and error to get things running than normal. But I've been programming mostly in Rust lately, and that works flawlessly on nightly, so I haven't really thought about compatibility since I was kicking the tires the second day I had it. YMMV depending on which tools you use.
All in all, I think this is the most I have really had fun using a laptop since I got my first MBA in 2012 or so. It was so light to travel with, and powerful enough for everything I needed, so it pretty quickly replaced my other laptop for pretty much everything.
> hype has actually increased.
Marketing can do that. And as Apple seems to be betting its future on ARM chips, you can bet that they will "market" the hell out of it.
Marketing can do that. And as Apple seems to be betting its future on ARM chips, you can bet that they will "market" the hell out of it.
- A lot of people watch it with no background knowledge and subsequently don’t quite understand the “best film ever” label, but Citizen Kane is indeed a fantastic film. Just read about Orson Welles first.
- Most religious books that have stood the test of time have lived up to the hype. The Bible (especially certain books like Ecclesiastes or Proverbs), The Quran, The Upanishads, to name a few. Again, don’t just go in blind, or you’ll walk away thinking none of it makes any sense.
- Lifting weights is indeed worth the hype, and its benefits are more diffuse than just “being able to lift heavy things.”
- In terms of old books that are made into modern sci-fi films, I’ve found Philip K. Dick to be absolutely worth the hype. Don’t think I’ve read a bad story by him.
- Most religious books that have stood the test of time have lived up to the hype. The Bible (especially certain books like Ecclesiastes or Proverbs), The Quran, The Upanishads, to name a few. Again, don’t just go in blind, or you’ll walk away thinking none of it makes any sense.
- Lifting weights is indeed worth the hype, and its benefits are more diffuse than just “being able to lift heavy things.”
- In terms of old books that are made into modern sci-fi films, I’ve found Philip K. Dick to be absolutely worth the hype. Don’t think I’ve read a bad story by him.
>A lot of people watch it with no background knowledge and subsequently don’t quite understand the “best film ever” label, but Citizen Kane is indeed a fantastic film. Just read about Orson Welles first.
Interesting. About 10 years ago I was tired of modern cinema and completely stopped watching new films. After some pause I decided to start watching classic cinema from 1930 onward in more or less chronological order (in the last year i've stopped at ~1800 movies, up to 1995).
In general, the quality of 1932-1942 american cinema (and, to a lesser degree, 1945-1950) far exceeded my expectations. And, while Citizen Kane is a very good film and deserves to be seen (it was actually one of the few "critically acclaimed" classic films that I've actually enjoyed), but when seen in context of what was filmed at the time, Citizen Kane doesn't really stand out among its contemporaries that much. A lot of technical details (but not all) that are praised by modern critics were more or less a common thing back at the time. I'd argue that Kane wasn't even the best film of the 1941 year (Sullivan's Travel was better and H.M. Pulham, Esq its equal) and definitely not the best film of the 1930-1950 "golden age" that ended at a very high point with Sunset Blvd. before plunging into the abyss in 1950s.
That's all of course only my opinion.
On a related note, if you enjoyed Citizen Kane, I'd highly recommend to see a soviet film from 1962 Nine Days in One Year. One of the most visually stunning b/w films in my experience. Thematically different, but stylistically very similar.
Interesting. About 10 years ago I was tired of modern cinema and completely stopped watching new films. After some pause I decided to start watching classic cinema from 1930 onward in more or less chronological order (in the last year i've stopped at ~1800 movies, up to 1995).
In general, the quality of 1932-1942 american cinema (and, to a lesser degree, 1945-1950) far exceeded my expectations. And, while Citizen Kane is a very good film and deserves to be seen (it was actually one of the few "critically acclaimed" classic films that I've actually enjoyed), but when seen in context of what was filmed at the time, Citizen Kane doesn't really stand out among its contemporaries that much. A lot of technical details (but not all) that are praised by modern critics were more or less a common thing back at the time. I'd argue that Kane wasn't even the best film of the 1941 year (Sullivan's Travel was better and H.M. Pulham, Esq its equal) and definitely not the best film of the 1930-1950 "golden age" that ended at a very high point with Sunset Blvd. before plunging into the abyss in 1950s.
That's all of course only my opinion.
On a related note, if you enjoyed Citizen Kane, I'd highly recommend to see a soviet film from 1962 Nine Days in One Year. One of the most visually stunning b/w films in my experience. Thematically different, but stylistically very similar.
Sure, I’m not sure I’d actually call it the Best Film Ever, but it is a great movie. Part of its importance, compared to some of the other movies you’ve mentioned, is the story of how it got made / that it got made at all. Welles had zero film experience, yet was fully funded, and the movie itself was a direct attack on one of the single most powerful men of the era. Welles himself was a larger-than-life character and that’s probably half the reason we are still talking about Kane. Art isn’t created in a vacuum, after all.
I’m not sure what a modern equivalent would look like, but imagine a $200 million studio film that eloquently attacks the heads of CNN, The NY Times, and another half-dozen top media firms. That sort of thing would never get made today.
Thanks for the other suggestion though, I’ll look into it for sure!
I’m not sure what a modern equivalent would look like, but imagine a $200 million studio film that eloquently attacks the heads of CNN, The NY Times, and another half-dozen top media firms. That sort of thing would never get made today.
Thanks for the other suggestion though, I’ll look into it for sure!
> I’m not sure I’d actually call it the Best Film Ever
Most critics would, though. And I've never heard that its importance is in any way tied to its production. Welles took film from "filmed stage plays" and literally opened up the genre. He ripped up floorboards to get the right perspective. He innovated direction right and left.
The only aspect of the film being about Hearst was that its debut was canned, distribution was shot, and he would never (really) be allowed to make another film again.
Most critics would, though. And I've never heard that its importance is in any way tied to its production. Welles took film from "filmed stage plays" and literally opened up the genre. He ripped up floorboards to get the right perspective. He innovated direction right and left.
The only aspect of the film being about Hearst was that its debut was canned, distribution was shot, and he would never (really) be allowed to make another film again.
I've started doing the same thing and recommend Witness for the Prosecution highly. Rear Window, Paths of Glory, and North by Northwest are others that have held up to modern eyes, IMHO.
I go back to watching North by Northwest every few months. The writing, the sets, the cinematography, the music and the acting all sublime. One of my favorite random facts is that Albert R Broccoli initially wanted to get Cary Grant for the first Bond film, but the producers ended up deciding to get a younger actor.
> In general, the quality of 1932-1942 american cinema (and, to a lesser degree, 1945-1950) far exceeded my expectations.
Survivorship bias? I'm sure there was as much schlock produced back then as there is now, it's just we elevated the best and have forgotten the rest.
Revisiting the bad stuff is the entire premise of MST3K:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystery_Science_Theater_3000
Survivorship bias? I'm sure there was as much schlock produced back then as there is now, it's just we elevated the best and have forgotten the rest.
Revisiting the bad stuff is the entire premise of MST3K:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystery_Science_Theater_3000
People often claim survivorship bias for such things, and it may sometimes be true, but I think it often misses the point. It may be true that overall, the landscape of an art form wasn't much different than today. However, it is obviously plausible that the "highest highs" would be higher in some period X than some period Y - it would be actually much more surprising if an art form were of uniform quality across many decades.
I don't have enough cinema culture to comment on cinema specifically, but I believe this is pretty obvious in music. Comparing things like Beethoven's 5th and 9th symphonies to any modern music (especially if comparing only the main themes, given today's preference for very short form music), it's obvious that there is nothing similar, and even modern audiences generally recognize the superiority of the older one.
As a more focused comparison, it's also obvious and largely uncontroversial that the amount of good rock music being produced has plummeted since at least the 1970s-1980s. There are still a few good bands (Rammstein has been an unexpected highlight for me), but compared to a period when you had Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, David Bowie, Black Sabbath, Queen, Deep Purple, Metallica, The Rolling Stones and a good many others, it's obvious that something has gone down in the highest highs of music.
I don't have enough cinema culture to comment on cinema specifically, but I believe this is pretty obvious in music. Comparing things like Beethoven's 5th and 9th symphonies to any modern music (especially if comparing only the main themes, given today's preference for very short form music), it's obvious that there is nothing similar, and even modern audiences generally recognize the superiority of the older one.
As a more focused comparison, it's also obvious and largely uncontroversial that the amount of good rock music being produced has plummeted since at least the 1970s-1980s. There are still a few good bands (Rammstein has been an unexpected highlight for me), but compared to a period when you had Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, David Bowie, Black Sabbath, Queen, Deep Purple, Metallica, The Rolling Stones and a good many others, it's obvious that something has gone down in the highest highs of music.
Well, I myself is an avid concert goer (before Covid at least) and I probably know more about classical music than I do about classical cinema :-) Although I mostly prefer music written c. 1900-1950 rather than Beethoven or his contemporaries (what a lot of people don't realise is that there were a lot of changes in classical orchestral music over time; the difference between, say, Mozart and William Walton is no less than the difference between Beatles and Metallica, probably even more so).
And indeed, the large & majestic sound of a symphonic orchestra has no parallels with the modern music. But on the other hand I think we can easily compare classical chamber music with jazz/tango/rock. And in this field I'd rather listen something like [1] than any classical quartet/quinter regardless whether it was written by Beethoven or by Shostakovich.
[1]https://youtu.be/XGeLtdmviGM
And indeed, the large & majestic sound of a symphonic orchestra has no parallels with the modern music. But on the other hand I think we can easily compare classical chamber music with jazz/tango/rock. And in this field I'd rather listen something like [1] than any classical quartet/quinter regardless whether it was written by Beethoven or by Shostakovich.
[1]https://youtu.be/XGeLtdmviGM
No, obviously out of ~300 films produced in 30s and 40s each year, 90% or more were dross. What I've meant is:
1. The best films of this period far surpassed my expectations from the technical point of view. And there were a lot of decent-to-exceptional films produced at the time; I could name at least 50 american films worth watching from 1930 to 1950. In comparison, I could hardly name 10 films from 1951 to 1960 that are at least decent (and yes, Paths of Glory, named below, is the best).
I think it was mostly due to the fact that all personnel, connected with the creation of a film at the time were still largely pioneers at the field and they had all possible expertiese in it (films in the 60s and especially in the 70s became noticeably more amateur; 50s suffered due to McCarthy). Movies were still relatively new and there were a lot of innovation in it each year. On top of that, it was a time of the Great Depression and high unemploymend. Hollywood were one of the better off industries and so were able to easlily atrract best of the best.
2. Even B-movies from rich studios had high production values. From the same 1941 I could easily recommend for example The Gay Falcon - Irving Reis - RKO/Nothing But the Truth - Elliott Nugent - Paramount/Charley's Aunt - Archie Mayo - 20 Fox. All are relatively simple, but well worth the watch.
3. What's more important, the 30s and 40s cinema had its own unique style and dynamic, very different from later decades. I'd say it was closer to Imre Kalman and Franz Lehar operettas, rather than more convential movies we are used today. It was, if I may say so, a thing-in-itself, hardly comparable with what came later.
1. The best films of this period far surpassed my expectations from the technical point of view. And there were a lot of decent-to-exceptional films produced at the time; I could name at least 50 american films worth watching from 1930 to 1950. In comparison, I could hardly name 10 films from 1951 to 1960 that are at least decent (and yes, Paths of Glory, named below, is the best).
I think it was mostly due to the fact that all personnel, connected with the creation of a film at the time were still largely pioneers at the field and they had all possible expertiese in it (films in the 60s and especially in the 70s became noticeably more amateur; 50s suffered due to McCarthy). Movies were still relatively new and there were a lot of innovation in it each year. On top of that, it was a time of the Great Depression and high unemploymend. Hollywood were one of the better off industries and so were able to easlily atrract best of the best.
2. Even B-movies from rich studios had high production values. From the same 1941 I could easily recommend for example The Gay Falcon - Irving Reis - RKO/Nothing But the Truth - Elliott Nugent - Paramount/Charley's Aunt - Archie Mayo - 20 Fox. All are relatively simple, but well worth the watch.
3. What's more important, the 30s and 40s cinema had its own unique style and dynamic, very different from later decades. I'd say it was closer to Imre Kalman and Franz Lehar operettas, rather than more convential movies we are used today. It was, if I may say so, a thing-in-itself, hardly comparable with what came later.
After watching all those movies, please would you share some of your favourites, especially lesser known titles.
I can give you my list as I've also been watching lots of "old" movies. Though "old" can mean almost anything depending on who you ask. Note: I'm picky so while I love movies if I check my ratings (I take notes because I forget what I watched), it turns out I only like about one out of 10 movies. Or maybe to put it in a slightly better light, only 1 of 10 or so is worth recommending. Some might be okay but not okay enough to tell someone "you should seek out this movie"
Anyway, here's some from my list from the last year (the list of ones I didn't like is MUCH longer and includes many that are highly rated on IMDB)
"Now, Voyager" (1942)
"Boom Town" (1940)
"The Best Years of Our Lives" (1947)
"The Little Princess" (1939)
"Destry Rides Again" (1939)
"Baby Face" (1933)
"Adam's Rib" (1949)
"In a Lonely Place" (1950)
"It Happened One Night" (1934)
"The Woman of the Year" (1942)
"The Awful Truth" (1937)
"Broken Arrow" (1950)
"The Lady Eve" (1941)
"His Girl Friday" (1940)
"12 O'Clock High" (1949)
"You Can't Take It With You" (1938)
"The Far County" (1954)
"Random Harvest" (1942)
"The Bad and the Beautiful" (1952)
"The Philadelphia Story" (1940)
"Cry Danger" (1951)
"This Gun For Hire" (1942)
"Casablanca" (1942). I didn't get it at 23 where as I shook from crying at 50. Basically I needed to truly feel Rick's loss and what he was going through (Bogart's character). At 23 I didn't. At 50 I did. I suppose you could have similar experiences to Rick at a younger age or you could never have them and then not have it do anything for you.
I don't think any of them are "lesser known". Basically I just look up IMDB. If it's rated > 7 and sounds mildly interesting I'll take a look. Tons of them don't work for me. Those above did. As recent examples of ones that didn't "The Strange Love of Martha Ivers" (1946), "Dark Passage" (1947), "Waterloo Bridge" (1940), "The Bishop's Wife" (1947), "Spellbound" (1945), "Fort Apache" (1948). Those are just from the last 2 weeks (^^;)
Anyway, here's some from my list from the last year (the list of ones I didn't like is MUCH longer and includes many that are highly rated on IMDB)
"Now, Voyager" (1942)
"Boom Town" (1940)
"The Best Years of Our Lives" (1947)
"The Little Princess" (1939)
"Destry Rides Again" (1939)
"Baby Face" (1933)
"Adam's Rib" (1949)
"In a Lonely Place" (1950)
"It Happened One Night" (1934)
"The Woman of the Year" (1942)
"The Awful Truth" (1937)
"Broken Arrow" (1950)
"The Lady Eve" (1941)
"His Girl Friday" (1940)
"12 O'Clock High" (1949)
"You Can't Take It With You" (1938)
"The Far County" (1954)
"Random Harvest" (1942)
"The Bad and the Beautiful" (1952)
"The Philadelphia Story" (1940)
"Cry Danger" (1951)
"This Gun For Hire" (1942)
"Casablanca" (1942). I didn't get it at 23 where as I shook from crying at 50. Basically I needed to truly feel Rick's loss and what he was going through (Bogart's character). At 23 I didn't. At 50 I did. I suppose you could have similar experiences to Rick at a younger age or you could never have them and then not have it do anything for you.
I don't think any of them are "lesser known". Basically I just look up IMDB. If it's rated > 7 and sounds mildly interesting I'll take a look. Tons of them don't work for me. Those above did. As recent examples of ones that didn't "The Strange Love of Martha Ivers" (1946), "Dark Passage" (1947), "Waterloo Bridge" (1940), "The Bishop's Wife" (1947), "Spellbound" (1945), "Fort Apache" (1948). Those are just from the last 2 weeks (^^;)
Ok, I'll try, but keep in mind, that there were a lot of well known films that I didn't lile (for example, I didn't like any film with Katharine Hepburn in it; although i've tried it three times, I've never finished Casablanca).
Anyway, If you are interested in classic movies I think the best way to start is with Frank Capra (1932 - American Madness, 1933 - Lady for a Day, 1934 - It Happened One Night, 1936 - Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, 1938 - You Can't Take It with You, 1939 - Mr. Smith Goes to Washington), Preston Sturges (1940 - The Great McGinty, 1940 - Christmas in July, 1941 - Sullivan's Travels), some of Myrna Loy & William Powell films (1934 - Thin Man, 1936 - After the Thin Man, 1936 - Libeled Lady) and possibly Charlie Chaplin later films (1931 - City Lights, 1952 - Limelight). Continue to
Dramas: 1957 - Le notti di Cabiria - Federico Fellini; 1957 - Il Grido - Michelangelo Antonioni; 1957 - Paths of Glory - Stanley Kubrick; 1952 - Ikiru - Akira Kurosawa; 1954 - A Big Family - Iosif Kheifits; 1951 - The Browning Version - Anthony Asquith; 1959 - Les quatre cents coups - Francois Truffaut; 1959 - Room At The Top - Jack Clayton; 1962 - The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner - Tony Richardson; 1962 - Nine Days in a Year - Mikhail Romm; 1960 - The Lady with the Dog - Iosif Kheifits; 1962 - Il Sorpasso - Dino Risi; 1961 - La Ragazza con la valigia - Valerio Zurlini; 1948 - Ladri di biciclette - Vittorio De Sica; 1945 - Les Dames du Bois de Boulogne - Robert Bresson; 1936 - Dodsworth - William Wyler; 1937 - La Grande Illusion - Jean Renoir; 1940 - City for Conquest - Anatole Litvak; 1941 - Citizen Kane - Orson Welles; 1941 - H.M. Pulham, Esq - King Vidor; 1946 - The Best Years of Our Lives - William Wyler; 1942 - Now, Voyager - Irving Rapper; 1942 - Random Harvest - Mervyn LeRoy; 1960 - The Apartment - Billy Wilder; 1950 - Sunset Blvd. - Billy Wilder; 1962 - Lonely Are the Brave - David Miller; 1964 - The Americanization of Emily; 1965 - The Hill - Sidney Lumet; 1966 - A Man for All Seasons - Fred Zinnemann; 1966 - Nayak - Satyajit Ray; 1968 - The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter - Robert Ellis Miller; 1971 - The Hospital - Arthur Hiller; 1975 - Barry Lyndon - Stanley Kubrick; 1975 - One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest - Milos Forman; 1977 - Saturday Night Fever - John Badham; 1979 - ...And Justice for All - Norman Jewison.
Comedies: 1940 - The Shop Around The Corner - Ernst Lubitsch; 1939 - Destry Rides Again - George Marshall; 1950 - Father of the Bride - Vincente Minnelli; 1940 - Pride and Prejudice - Robert Z. Leonard; 1939 - Day-Time Wife - Gregory Ratoff; 1934 - Little Miss Marker - Alexander Hall; 1935 - The Gilded Lily - Wesley Ruggles; 1935 - If You Could Only Cook - William A. Seiter; 1935 - Ruggles of Red Gap - Leo McCarey; 1936 - My Man Godfrey - Gregory La Cava; 1937 - Easy Living - Mitchel Liesen; 1937 - Topper - Norman Z. McLeod; 1938 - Merrily We Live - Norman Z. McLeod; 1940 - My Favorite Wife - Garson Kanin; 1941 - Ball of Fire - Howard Hawks; 1941 - It Started with Eve - Henry Koster; 1941 - Charley's Aunt - Archie Mayo; 1942 - Larceny, Inc. - Lloyd Bacon; 1942 - The Big Street - Irving Reis; 1942 - The Major and the Minor - Billy Wilder; 1943 - The More the Merrier - George Stevens; 1948 - Sitting Pretty - Walter Lang; 1947 - Miracle on 34th Street - George Seaton; 1947 - Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House - H.C. Potter; 1949 - Little Women - Mervyn LeRoy; 1955 - Marty - Delbert Mann; 1956 - Spring on Zarechnaya Street - Marlen Khutsiev; 1957 - Porte Des Lilas - Rene Clair; 1958 - Mon Oncle - Jascques Tati; 1959 - Some Like It Hot - Billy Wilder; 1960 - Make Mine Mink - Robert Asher; 1963 - Sunday in New York - Peter Tewksbury; 1963 - Il Giovedi - Dino Risi; 1963 - Three Plus Two - Genrikh Oganisyan; 1964 - Walking the Streets of Moscow - Georgiy Daneliya; 1964 - A Hard Day's Night - Richard Lester; 1968 - The Odd Couple - Gene Saks; 1977 - The Goodbye Girl - Herbert Ross; 1978 - Same Time Next Year - Robert Mulligan
Crime/Action: 1969 - The Italian Job - Peter Collinson; 1974 - The Taking of Pelham One Two Three - Joseph Sargent; 1967 - Le Samurai - Jean-Pierre Melville; 1960 - Le Trou - Jacques Becker; 1960 - Un taxi pour Tobrouk - Denys de La Patelliere; 1970 - They Call Me Trinity - Enzo Barboni; 1973 - Papillon - Franklin J. Schaffner; 1973 - The Sting - George Roy Hill; 1973 - The Last Detail - Hal Ashby; 1975 - The Great Waldo Pepper - George Roy Hill; 1975 - Three Days of the Condor - Sydney Pollack; 1976 - The Seven-Per-Cent Solution - Herbert Ross; 1977 - Capricorn One - Peter Hyams; 1977 - Smokey and the Bandit - Hal Needham; 1939 - The Roaring Twenties - Raoul Walsh; 1939 - Beau Geste - William A. Wellman; 1939 - Stagecoach - John Ford; 1941 - The Gay Falcon - Irving Reis; 1941 - I Wake Up Screaming - Bruce Humberstone; 1941 - Johnny Eager - Mervyn LeRoy
I didn't like any film noir but three: 1946 - Nobody Lives Forever - Jean Negulesco; 1946 - The Killers - Robert Siodmak; 1956 - The Killing - Stanley Kubrick. There also were two great spoofs 1947 - My Favorite Brunette - Elliott Nugent and 1971 - Gumshoe - Stephen Frears.
I don't enjoy musicals, westerns and 'epic' historical films, so I can't recommend anything.
Anyway, If you are interested in classic movies I think the best way to start is with Frank Capra (1932 - American Madness, 1933 - Lady for a Day, 1934 - It Happened One Night, 1936 - Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, 1938 - You Can't Take It with You, 1939 - Mr. Smith Goes to Washington), Preston Sturges (1940 - The Great McGinty, 1940 - Christmas in July, 1941 - Sullivan's Travels), some of Myrna Loy & William Powell films (1934 - Thin Man, 1936 - After the Thin Man, 1936 - Libeled Lady) and possibly Charlie Chaplin later films (1931 - City Lights, 1952 - Limelight). Continue to
Dramas: 1957 - Le notti di Cabiria - Federico Fellini; 1957 - Il Grido - Michelangelo Antonioni; 1957 - Paths of Glory - Stanley Kubrick; 1952 - Ikiru - Akira Kurosawa; 1954 - A Big Family - Iosif Kheifits; 1951 - The Browning Version - Anthony Asquith; 1959 - Les quatre cents coups - Francois Truffaut; 1959 - Room At The Top - Jack Clayton; 1962 - The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner - Tony Richardson; 1962 - Nine Days in a Year - Mikhail Romm; 1960 - The Lady with the Dog - Iosif Kheifits; 1962 - Il Sorpasso - Dino Risi; 1961 - La Ragazza con la valigia - Valerio Zurlini; 1948 - Ladri di biciclette - Vittorio De Sica; 1945 - Les Dames du Bois de Boulogne - Robert Bresson; 1936 - Dodsworth - William Wyler; 1937 - La Grande Illusion - Jean Renoir; 1940 - City for Conquest - Anatole Litvak; 1941 - Citizen Kane - Orson Welles; 1941 - H.M. Pulham, Esq - King Vidor; 1946 - The Best Years of Our Lives - William Wyler; 1942 - Now, Voyager - Irving Rapper; 1942 - Random Harvest - Mervyn LeRoy; 1960 - The Apartment - Billy Wilder; 1950 - Sunset Blvd. - Billy Wilder; 1962 - Lonely Are the Brave - David Miller; 1964 - The Americanization of Emily; 1965 - The Hill - Sidney Lumet; 1966 - A Man for All Seasons - Fred Zinnemann; 1966 - Nayak - Satyajit Ray; 1968 - The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter - Robert Ellis Miller; 1971 - The Hospital - Arthur Hiller; 1975 - Barry Lyndon - Stanley Kubrick; 1975 - One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest - Milos Forman; 1977 - Saturday Night Fever - John Badham; 1979 - ...And Justice for All - Norman Jewison.
Comedies: 1940 - The Shop Around The Corner - Ernst Lubitsch; 1939 - Destry Rides Again - George Marshall; 1950 - Father of the Bride - Vincente Minnelli; 1940 - Pride and Prejudice - Robert Z. Leonard; 1939 - Day-Time Wife - Gregory Ratoff; 1934 - Little Miss Marker - Alexander Hall; 1935 - The Gilded Lily - Wesley Ruggles; 1935 - If You Could Only Cook - William A. Seiter; 1935 - Ruggles of Red Gap - Leo McCarey; 1936 - My Man Godfrey - Gregory La Cava; 1937 - Easy Living - Mitchel Liesen; 1937 - Topper - Norman Z. McLeod; 1938 - Merrily We Live - Norman Z. McLeod; 1940 - My Favorite Wife - Garson Kanin; 1941 - Ball of Fire - Howard Hawks; 1941 - It Started with Eve - Henry Koster; 1941 - Charley's Aunt - Archie Mayo; 1942 - Larceny, Inc. - Lloyd Bacon; 1942 - The Big Street - Irving Reis; 1942 - The Major and the Minor - Billy Wilder; 1943 - The More the Merrier - George Stevens; 1948 - Sitting Pretty - Walter Lang; 1947 - Miracle on 34th Street - George Seaton; 1947 - Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House - H.C. Potter; 1949 - Little Women - Mervyn LeRoy; 1955 - Marty - Delbert Mann; 1956 - Spring on Zarechnaya Street - Marlen Khutsiev; 1957 - Porte Des Lilas - Rene Clair; 1958 - Mon Oncle - Jascques Tati; 1959 - Some Like It Hot - Billy Wilder; 1960 - Make Mine Mink - Robert Asher; 1963 - Sunday in New York - Peter Tewksbury; 1963 - Il Giovedi - Dino Risi; 1963 - Three Plus Two - Genrikh Oganisyan; 1964 - Walking the Streets of Moscow - Georgiy Daneliya; 1964 - A Hard Day's Night - Richard Lester; 1968 - The Odd Couple - Gene Saks; 1977 - The Goodbye Girl - Herbert Ross; 1978 - Same Time Next Year - Robert Mulligan
Crime/Action: 1969 - The Italian Job - Peter Collinson; 1974 - The Taking of Pelham One Two Three - Joseph Sargent; 1967 - Le Samurai - Jean-Pierre Melville; 1960 - Le Trou - Jacques Becker; 1960 - Un taxi pour Tobrouk - Denys de La Patelliere; 1970 - They Call Me Trinity - Enzo Barboni; 1973 - Papillon - Franklin J. Schaffner; 1973 - The Sting - George Roy Hill; 1973 - The Last Detail - Hal Ashby; 1975 - The Great Waldo Pepper - George Roy Hill; 1975 - Three Days of the Condor - Sydney Pollack; 1976 - The Seven-Per-Cent Solution - Herbert Ross; 1977 - Capricorn One - Peter Hyams; 1977 - Smokey and the Bandit - Hal Needham; 1939 - The Roaring Twenties - Raoul Walsh; 1939 - Beau Geste - William A. Wellman; 1939 - Stagecoach - John Ford; 1941 - The Gay Falcon - Irving Reis; 1941 - I Wake Up Screaming - Bruce Humberstone; 1941 - Johnny Eager - Mervyn LeRoy
I didn't like any film noir but three: 1946 - Nobody Lives Forever - Jean Negulesco; 1946 - The Killers - Robert Siodmak; 1956 - The Killing - Stanley Kubrick. There also were two great spoofs 1947 - My Favorite Brunette - Elliott Nugent and 1971 - Gumshoe - Stephen Frears.
I don't enjoy musicals, westerns and 'epic' historical films, so I can't recommend anything.
Thanks for that! I count only about seventeen of those that I've seen, despite having seen old movies in the hundreds.
Funnily enough, my favourite old Hollywood genres are musicals and westerns.
I grew up only really being exposed to post 1960 movie musicals which I never really liked. About seven years ago I thought, "I've never really watched any old movie musicals", and just started watching them. It was a revelation to discover the (to me) amazing stuff from the 30s, 40s and 50s. My ideal movie musical was made in the 1930s, stars Fred Astaire, and has songs by the Gershwins, Cole Porter or Irving Berlin.
Some highlights for me would be:
42nd Street (1933) Not the first `backstage musical' but sets the template. One of the things I love about old movie musicals is that people don't randomly start singing and dancing: they sing and/or dance because they are singers or songwriters or dancers or choreographers creating or rehearsing or performing.
Gold Diggers of 1933 (1933) More Busby Berkeley.
Footlight Parade (1933) More Busby Berkeley. James Cagney stars.
On the Avenue (1937)
Shall we Dance (1937)
Lady be Good (1941)
You Were Never Lovelier (1942)
The Gang's All Here (1943)
Anchors Aweigh (1945)
The Pirate (1948) Don't listen to the naysayers, this film to me is pretty much perfect.
An American in Paris (1951) Contains the amazing sequence in which Oscar Levant is portrayed conducting, playing every instrument, and being the audience of Gershwin's Concerto in F for Piano and Orchestra (which I think is much better than the more famous Rhapsody in Blue).
The Band Wagon (1953)
Daddy Long Legs (1955)
High Society (1956)
Funny Face (1957)
Gypsy (1962)
And then a couple of years ago, I asked myself: which film genres have I never really watched? Westerns (and Horror, still haven't gone there) being my answer. Turns out I really love westerns.
Some favourites:
Destry Rides Again (1939)
Stagecoach (1939)
Fort Apache (1948) To me, this is the best of John Ford's `cavalry trilogy'
Red River (1948)
Winchester '73 (1950) My favourite of the Anthony Mann / James Stewart westerns.
Vera Cruz (1954) Action movies weren't invented in the 1980s.
The Man from Laramie (1955)
Seven Men from Now (1956) The best of the Budd Boetticher / Randolph Scott westerns.
Man of the West (1958)
The Horse Soldiers (1959)
Last Train from Gun Hill (1959)
Two Rode Together (1961)
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)
El Dorado (1966) Rio Bravo gets all the love, but this is the more satisfying result for me.
Funnily enough, my favourite old Hollywood genres are musicals and westerns.
I grew up only really being exposed to post 1960 movie musicals which I never really liked. About seven years ago I thought, "I've never really watched any old movie musicals", and just started watching them. It was a revelation to discover the (to me) amazing stuff from the 30s, 40s and 50s. My ideal movie musical was made in the 1930s, stars Fred Astaire, and has songs by the Gershwins, Cole Porter or Irving Berlin.
Some highlights for me would be:
42nd Street (1933) Not the first `backstage musical' but sets the template. One of the things I love about old movie musicals is that people don't randomly start singing and dancing: they sing and/or dance because they are singers or songwriters or dancers or choreographers creating or rehearsing or performing.
Gold Diggers of 1933 (1933) More Busby Berkeley.
Footlight Parade (1933) More Busby Berkeley. James Cagney stars.
On the Avenue (1937)
Shall we Dance (1937)
Lady be Good (1941)
You Were Never Lovelier (1942)
The Gang's All Here (1943)
Anchors Aweigh (1945)
The Pirate (1948) Don't listen to the naysayers, this film to me is pretty much perfect.
An American in Paris (1951) Contains the amazing sequence in which Oscar Levant is portrayed conducting, playing every instrument, and being the audience of Gershwin's Concerto in F for Piano and Orchestra (which I think is much better than the more famous Rhapsody in Blue).
The Band Wagon (1953)
Daddy Long Legs (1955)
High Society (1956)
Funny Face (1957)
Gypsy (1962)
And then a couple of years ago, I asked myself: which film genres have I never really watched? Westerns (and Horror, still haven't gone there) being my answer. Turns out I really love westerns.
Some favourites:
Destry Rides Again (1939)
Stagecoach (1939)
Fort Apache (1948) To me, this is the best of John Ford's `cavalry trilogy'
Red River (1948)
Winchester '73 (1950) My favourite of the Anthony Mann / James Stewart westerns.
Vera Cruz (1954) Action movies weren't invented in the 1980s.
The Man from Laramie (1955)
Seven Men from Now (1956) The best of the Budd Boetticher / Randolph Scott westerns.
Man of the West (1958)
The Horse Soldiers (1959)
Last Train from Gun Hill (1959)
Two Rode Together (1961)
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)
El Dorado (1966) Rio Bravo gets all the love, but this is the more satisfying result for me.
Well, to the best of my knowledge, these are nice additions to my list of recommendations :-)
1. I agree, that final scene in An American in Paris is just mindblowing (for the lack of a better word). I've seen it at least 20 times and it still amazes me. Vincente Minnelli was a one of a kind genius. Another highlight for me was Astair's Puttin' on the Ritz from Blue Skies. And as for Gershwin - I myself prefer his Piano concerto.
2. As far as I know, musicals were the most popular genre in 1930s-40s and a lot of talent was put in their creation (and it shows). That said, I just don't like the genre for two reasons:
- Astair/Rogers-style, where actors suddenly transition from dialog to dancing, just seem too weird and far fetched to me;
- Busby Berkeley-style extravaganzas are, indeed, better and, as a rule, visually stunning. But for me they fail as films simply because there is usually not enough plot/dialogues (that is, the whole plot is just a vehicle to show dancing sequences). These type of films are better enjoyed as short clips on youtube :-) Uncharacteristically, I've enjoyed much later Saturday Night Fever and Dirty Dancing, both made in this style. Although I think these two films could have been even better if their creators were more ambitious. There were a lot of unused potential in them.
3. I have no objections to the westerns as a genre. I've included both Destry Rides Again and Stagecoach. It's just that I've seen ~10 westerns from 50s and 60s, didn't like any of them and decided to skip the genre altogether. I might return to them some time in the future.
1. I agree, that final scene in An American in Paris is just mindblowing (for the lack of a better word). I've seen it at least 20 times and it still amazes me. Vincente Minnelli was a one of a kind genius. Another highlight for me was Astair's Puttin' on the Ritz from Blue Skies. And as for Gershwin - I myself prefer his Piano concerto.
2. As far as I know, musicals were the most popular genre in 1930s-40s and a lot of talent was put in their creation (and it shows). That said, I just don't like the genre for two reasons:
- Astair/Rogers-style, where actors suddenly transition from dialog to dancing, just seem too weird and far fetched to me;
- Busby Berkeley-style extravaganzas are, indeed, better and, as a rule, visually stunning. But for me they fail as films simply because there is usually not enough plot/dialogues (that is, the whole plot is just a vehicle to show dancing sequences). These type of films are better enjoyed as short clips on youtube :-) Uncharacteristically, I've enjoyed much later Saturday Night Fever and Dirty Dancing, both made in this style. Although I think these two films could have been even better if their creators were more ambitious. There were a lot of unused potential in them.
3. I have no objections to the westerns as a genre. I've included both Destry Rides Again and Stagecoach. It's just that I've seen ~10 westerns from 50s and 60s, didn't like any of them and decided to skip the genre altogether. I might return to them some time in the future.
> - Lifting weights is indeed worth the hype, and its benefits are more diffuse than just “being able to lift heavy things.”
This was unexpected, but true. I started a few month ago, because I moved and noticed that carrying the goceries in the 4th floor interrupted my whole day...
Every movement includes moving weight. It basically makes the whole life easier
This was unexpected, but true. I started a few month ago, because I moved and noticed that carrying the goceries in the 4th floor interrupted my whole day...
Every movement includes moving weight. It basically makes the whole life easier
As Mark Rippetoe says, “Strong people are harder to kill than weak people and more useful in general.” Harder to kill doesn’t just mean combat either. Real life isn’t like video games either, you can get a great return on strength training time. So good in fact that gaining strength won’t impair your other abilities at all unless you’re planning to compete at the highest levels.
If you want to maintain a high quality of life and an active life into old age, you are going to need to lift weights. Or a similar equivalent exercise that provides impact to preserve strength and bone density.
The sooner one starts the better.
The sooner one starts the better.
For me i was grabbing something not heavy and instinctly went like a deadlift. And i was impressed i am now instinctly grabbing even easy things with correct posture.
Casablanca for me. Oddly I can't think of many stand-out moments in it. If you asked me why you would enjoy it, I couldn't say. But you would.
I watched this for the first time last week and I was surprised that the plot has remained pretty novel. It's one thing to watch an old movie and recognize it for first producing a certain story (or at least capturing it on film) but I can't think of a similar story to Casablanca and that impressed me.
It was also neat to see the film shot just like a play where there are very particular sets each scene. I wish I could have the scene the original play once.
A few things I didn't like though was the flashback. There was no subtlety and poor writing. They could have started the film with their time in France. The real plot point wasn't that the two characters knew each other but _why_ she left him.
And it was also odd to me that the general was in his headquarters when he learned about the escape attempt but then showed up at the airport... without any men.
Anyway, I did enjoy the movie and am grateful to it for introducing As Time Goes By.
It was also neat to see the film shot just like a play where there are very particular sets each scene. I wish I could have the scene the original play once.
A few things I didn't like though was the flashback. There was no subtlety and poor writing. They could have started the film with their time in France. The real plot point wasn't that the two characters knew each other but _why_ she left him.
And it was also odd to me that the general was in his headquarters when he learned about the escape attempt but then showed up at the airport... without any men.
Anyway, I did enjoy the movie and am grateful to it for introducing As Time Goes By.
I had a film professor who always thought that Casablanca should be number 1 on AFIs Top 100. I tend to agree with him. I think Citizen Kane is a cinematic masterpiece, but Casablanca has a much better and more coherent story.
I've always said Citizen Kane is the best film but Casablanca is the best screenplay.
> I can't think of many stand-out moments in it
To me, the `La Marseillaise` scene[1] is incredibly powerful. The crowd trying to out-sing the German soldiers with the French national anthem, and the sheer raw emotion of the scene. Amazing character moments from Ricky, Victor, and Illsa.
I haven't looked into the veracity, but the legend around the scene is that most of the extras in the bar were French refuges - and the emotion of the scene was very much present on set. Casablanca was filmed during the height of WW2, and came out in 1942, so it does seem plausible.
Louis's brief "I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!" - Handed a pile of his winnings by the croupier - "Oh, thank you very much." exchange [2] is also a fantastically memorable comedic exchange.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOeFhSzoTuc
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME
To me, the `La Marseillaise` scene[1] is incredibly powerful. The crowd trying to out-sing the German soldiers with the French national anthem, and the sheer raw emotion of the scene. Amazing character moments from Ricky, Victor, and Illsa.
I haven't looked into the veracity, but the legend around the scene is that most of the extras in the bar were French refuges - and the emotion of the scene was very much present on set. Casablanca was filmed during the height of WW2, and came out in 1942, so it does seem plausible.
Louis's brief "I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!" - Handed a pile of his winnings by the croupier - "Oh, thank you very much." exchange [2] is also a fantastically memorable comedic exchange.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOeFhSzoTuc
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME
Apart from anything else, it's rammed with highly quotable and widely quoted dialogue. Anybody watching it for the first time will probably find themselves thinking "Ah - so that's where that comes from" at least a few times.
The stand-out moment for me is when somebody shows Rick his ID (a passport?) and his reaction is just "are my eyes really brown?". I can't explain why I like that bit of characterization so much.
> Most religious books that have stood the test of time have lived up to the hype. The Bible (especially certain books like Ecclesiastes or Proverbs), The Quran, The Upanishads, to name a few. Again, don’t just go in blind, or you’ll walk away thinking none of it makes any sense.
Seeing as how the Quran was "written" over decades and the Bible over millennia, they DON'T make sense. They're both self-contradictory, with various authors pushing various purposes depending on what they wrote and when. There's value in each, but let's not pretend they're towering forks of art with a singular purpose and vision.
Seeing as how the Quran was "written" over decades and the Bible over millennia, they DON'T make sense. They're both self-contradictory, with various authors pushing various purposes depending on what they wrote and when. There's value in each, but let's not pretend they're towering forks of art with a singular purpose and vision.
Yep, they should be seen more as anthologies rather than a single work.
Seconding Ecclesiastes. I'm an atheist and I have never read a more eloquent affirmation of nihilism. It's fascinating knowing someone had these same thoughts 2500 years ago.
> "Religious books standing the test of the time.."
Humans started to stay in one location after the invention of agriculture which is quite recent about 10000 years. The mass gathering and agriculture Only after the invention of agriculture some people were able to have leisure time and mass organization became necessary. Bible is roughly 2000 years old. Islam is probably 800 years old. The vedic caste Hinduism is about probably 600 to 800 years old.
Humans started to stay in one location after the invention of agriculture which is quite recent about 10000 years. The mass gathering and agriculture Only after the invention of agriculture some people were able to have leisure time and mass organization became necessary. Bible is roughly 2000 years old. Islam is probably 800 years old. The vedic caste Hinduism is about probably 600 to 800 years old.
Religion is blip within a blip.Many secular books have stood the test of time as well, I would place Plutarch lives and Montaigne's essays on par with the Bible/other ancient religious texts.
How can a movie be a fantastic movie if it requires background reading? That's a failure of storytelling.
I think Citizen Kane stands alone. It can be understood as an architypal "power and wealth corrupts" narrative. But our appreciation of art benefits from an understanding of its context and the history of the genre/medium. Citizen Kane may be more meaningful to you if you are aware of Hearst and the related social history in the same way that Wagner's music is wonderful in its own terms, but possibly richer and more meaningful when you understand the philosophy, social context, theology, and mythology he was engaging with as well as the composers he was influenced by and their thinking.
All art is produced in a specific historical moment.
All art is produced in a specific historical moment.
[deleted]
It doesn't require background reading at all.
But like many great works of art context can add even more to their enjoyment and impact.
But like many great works of art context can add even more to their enjoyment and impact.
> Most religious books that have stood the test of time have lived up to the hype.
They really haven't. Not a single one of them. There is, however, organized religion around them that has twisted those book to mean whatever it is that brings the flock.
Are they influential? Yes. Have they stood the test of time? Hell, no
They really haven't. Not a single one of them. There is, however, organized religion around them that has twisted those book to mean whatever it is that brings the flock.
Are they influential? Yes. Have they stood the test of time? Hell, no
Yes pure garbage, the book of Job, the Psalms, the Ecclesiastes, the sermon of the mountain, the Sefer Yetzirah, the Popol Vuh, the Upanishads, the Tao Te Ching...garbage,garbage, garbage.
For more garbage please visit https://www.sacred-texts.com/
For more garbage please visit https://www.sacred-texts.com/
See what you did? You called it garbage, and then started vehemently disagreeing with yourself.
Listing parts of those books and linking to their texts proves nothing about them standing the test of time.
Listing parts of those books and linking to their texts proves nothing about them standing the test of time.
You’re talking about the best selling book of all time (by far). Its more likely that you misunderstand it than all the readers misunderstand it.
Its just one of those things that is so popular that people find any way possible to criticize.
Its just one of those things that is so popular that people find any way possible to criticize.
For a good chunk of history, wasn't the bible about the only book you could buy in Europe?
Separating the social structures around the bible from the book and trying to talk about it as if it is a product following the same rules as Tom Clancy's next novel is gross and laughable.
Separating the social structures around the bible from the book and trying to talk about it as if it is a product following the same rules as Tom Clancy's next novel is gross and laughable.
This is quite a funny conversation to be having on Christmas Eve :)
There’s probably a reason the Bible was the only available book instead of no books being available in Europe.
There’s probably a reason the Bible was the only available book instead of no books being available in Europe.
It is estimated that around 5 billion copies of the Bible were sold and distributed throughout history. [1] This has happened over the course of over two thousand years. Which makes it less popular than Harry Potter (120 million copies of the first book in 20 years) or Twilight.
And that 5 billion number includes a very significant chunk of bibles which are just distributed through various religious centers (same goes for all other religious texts).
And, of course, the number of books sold says literally nothing about whether a book has stood the test of time.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_books?wpr...
And that 5 billion number includes a very significant chunk of bibles which are just distributed through various religious centers (same goes for all other religious texts).
And, of course, the number of books sold says literally nothing about whether a book has stood the test of time.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_books?wpr...
That’s not really a great comparison, considering that the printing press didn’t exist for ~1,500 of those years and a mass market didn’t exist for ~1700 of them.
Even that makes the Bible less popular than Harry Potter.
We'll see how many Harry Potters vs the Bible will be printed in total say in 2300 or 2500 AD. Somehow I'm betting on the Bible.
There's no organised institution around Harry Potter. For most part the past 2000 years the Bible was probably the only book most people in the Western World saw or had. It was a required attribute of school curriculum. It was a required book to have at home etc.
None of that makes the Bible "stand the test of time" or make it popular in the same sense as Harry Potter is popular. Compare Bible's "popularity" to Quotations from the Works of Mao Zedong (emphasis mine) [1]:
--- start quote ---
It has been reported that 800 million copies of the red-covered booklet Quotations from the Works of Mao Zedong (Tse-tung) were sold or distributed between June 1966, when possession became virtually mandatory in China, and September 1971, when its promoter Marshal Lin Biao died in an air crash.
--- end quote ---
I doubt any significant number of Bibles are actually sold anymore (especially in what's called "developed world"), but are distributed via churches or other religious organisations. Gideon distributes 50 million bibles per year [2]. Most available statistics talk about "printed" or "distributed" when talking about number of bibles sold which is definitely not the same.
For example [3] (emphasis mine):
--- start quote ---
The Bible is by far the worlds best-selling book of all time. No other book, fact or fiction, even comes close. Most estimates place the number of Bibles printed each year at over 100 million. 20 million Bibles are sold each year in the United States alone.
--- end quote ---
The United States is quite religious, and it still only manages ~20 million books per year for a population of ~400 million people. This number will be significantly smaller in less religious countries, and higher in more religious countries. But once again it hardly makes it popular in the same sense as Harry Potter is popular.
And, of course, once you make more and more books available to people, you will inevitably have smaller numbers of those books sold, but a greater number of them in total. There are 650 million books sold in the US each year. [4] There are 300 thousand new titles each year [5]
But yeah, the Bible is "popular" because it's pushed through an organised religion and has for centuries been a required reading for everyone (for everyone who could read that is, as literacy was scarce at best). And even today it's possible that most bibles go to the same people ("The average American Christian owns 9 Bibles and wants to purchase more" [2])
[1] https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/best-sell...
[2] https://brandongaille.com/27-good-bible-sales-statistics/
[3] https://thebibleanswer.org/bibles-sold-each-year/
[4] https://www.statista.com/topics/1177/book-market/
[5] https://www.theifod.com/how-many-new-books-are-published-eac...
None of that makes the Bible "stand the test of time" or make it popular in the same sense as Harry Potter is popular. Compare Bible's "popularity" to Quotations from the Works of Mao Zedong (emphasis mine) [1]:
--- start quote ---
It has been reported that 800 million copies of the red-covered booklet Quotations from the Works of Mao Zedong (Tse-tung) were sold or distributed between June 1966, when possession became virtually mandatory in China, and September 1971, when its promoter Marshal Lin Biao died in an air crash.
--- end quote ---
I doubt any significant number of Bibles are actually sold anymore (especially in what's called "developed world"), but are distributed via churches or other religious organisations. Gideon distributes 50 million bibles per year [2]. Most available statistics talk about "printed" or "distributed" when talking about number of bibles sold which is definitely not the same.
For example [3] (emphasis mine):
--- start quote ---
The Bible is by far the worlds best-selling book of all time. No other book, fact or fiction, even comes close. Most estimates place the number of Bibles printed each year at over 100 million. 20 million Bibles are sold each year in the United States alone.
--- end quote ---
The United States is quite religious, and it still only manages ~20 million books per year for a population of ~400 million people. This number will be significantly smaller in less religious countries, and higher in more religious countries. But once again it hardly makes it popular in the same sense as Harry Potter is popular.
And, of course, once you make more and more books available to people, you will inevitably have smaller numbers of those books sold, but a greater number of them in total. There are 650 million books sold in the US each year. [4] There are 300 thousand new titles each year [5]
But yeah, the Bible is "popular" because it's pushed through an organised religion and has for centuries been a required reading for everyone (for everyone who could read that is, as literacy was scarce at best). And even today it's possible that most bibles go to the same people ("The average American Christian owns 9 Bibles and wants to purchase more" [2])
[1] https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/best-sell...
[2] https://brandongaille.com/27-good-bible-sales-statistics/
[3] https://thebibleanswer.org/bibles-sold-each-year/
[4] https://www.statista.com/topics/1177/book-market/
[5] https://www.theifod.com/how-many-new-books-are-published-eac...
How many of those Bible copies were actually read?
- A Gallup survey found that less than 50% of Americans can name the first book of the Bible.
- Only 1 in 3 Bible owners know that Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount. Billy Graham is a more popular answer than the correct answer.
- 12%. That’s the percentage of Christians who believed that Noah was married to Joan of Arc.
https://brandongaille.com/27-good-bible-sales-statistics/
:)
- Only 1 in 3 Bible owners know that Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount. Billy Graham is a more popular answer than the correct answer.
- 12%. That’s the percentage of Christians who believed that Noah was married to Joan of Arc.
https://brandongaille.com/27-good-bible-sales-statistics/
:)
There are two types of religious texts: those that people like to criticise, and those that nobody reads.
Among Christians hardly anyone reads the Bible except for a number easy passages. And those passages are invariably in the New Testament. The Old Testament is an unknown quantity to the vast number of Christians. I doubt anyone knows the story of Job or Noah except through what preachers tell them.
The Bible a huge book of ancient texts with little structure and inscrutable context that is as alien to a modern person as Mesopotamic cuneiform. Ah, yes, inhabitants of Maktesh, and son of Pethuel, and Cyrus king of Persia, and Sheshbazzar, and... what's for dinner?
The Bible a huge book of ancient texts with little structure and inscrutable context that is as alien to a modern person as Mesopotamic cuneiform. Ah, yes, inhabitants of Maktesh, and son of Pethuel, and Cyrus king of Persia, and Sheshbazzar, and... what's for dinner?
[deleted]
LeBron James was touted as the Next Great Hope for basketball, was on the cover of Sports Illustrated at age 17, and his high school games were televised on ESPN.
Since then he's won 4 NBA championships, opened a school in his hometown, and become arguably the greatest basketball player of all time.
Since then he's won 4 NBA championships, opened a school in his hometown, and become arguably the greatest basketball player of all time.
> and become arguably the greatest basketball player of all time.
LeBron is definitely the best of his era but he's not touching Jordan in terms of greatest player of all time, even if he does pull off two more championships. During the 90s, Jordan was as close to a demi-god in the sports world as you could get.
LeBron is definitely the best of his era but he's not touching Jordan in terms of greatest player of all time, even if he does pull off two more championships. During the 90s, Jordan was as close to a demi-god in the sports world as you could get.
> demi-god
I agree that Jordan was an amazing player, and I think he narrowly tops Lebron as the best of all time, but I also think Jordan benefited from a very precise moment in NBA history: the league's media reach became truly global and the established media was still pretty much the only source of information about NBA players. No TMZ, no random phone videos from clubs, no social media. It was the perfect setup to convince a huge number of people that this dude was a demi-god. If Jordan played today, I think he'd face way more scrutiny of the gambler/"apolitical"/bully parts of his personality, and while he'd probably win plenty of MVPs, I don't think he'd achieve the same iconic status.
I agree that Jordan was an amazing player, and I think he narrowly tops Lebron as the best of all time, but I also think Jordan benefited from a very precise moment in NBA history: the league's media reach became truly global and the established media was still pretty much the only source of information about NBA players. No TMZ, no random phone videos from clubs, no social media. It was the perfect setup to convince a huge number of people that this dude was a demi-god. If Jordan played today, I think he'd face way more scrutiny of the gambler/"apolitical"/bully parts of his personality, and while he'd probably win plenty of MVPs, I don't think he'd achieve the same iconic status.
On the flip side Lebron benefits from dramatic rule changes in how physical the NBA isn't today. Both in his stats and longevity.
All you have to do is go on YouTube and watch the fights from the 1980s. And of course everyone is familiar with how Jordan was brutalized in the 1987-1993 era, playing teams like the Knicks and Pistons. Today's NBA is soft, fragile, weak, and little more than a three point shooting exercise. It's mediocre basketball. Do a comparison on steal figures now vs then; during his prime it was normal for Jordan to have 2.8 to 3.2 steals per game in a season, today the NBA leader will be closer to 2 to 2.2 per game.
Now you can barely sneeze on the offensive player with the ball or it's a foul. Combined with 3-point chucking and zero defense, it fully explains why scores are so comically high now versus the 1990s and so many players average over 20-25 points per game. It's the equivalent to the NFL becoming soft, watering down passing defense, so they can run up scores and turn the league into a 90% passing game so they can pump up ratings for the $$$ (same fraud MLB pulled jacking up homerun figures).
All you have to do is go on YouTube and watch the fights from the 1980s. And of course everyone is familiar with how Jordan was brutalized in the 1987-1993 era, playing teams like the Knicks and Pistons. Today's NBA is soft, fragile, weak, and little more than a three point shooting exercise. It's mediocre basketball. Do a comparison on steal figures now vs then; during his prime it was normal for Jordan to have 2.8 to 3.2 steals per game in a season, today the NBA leader will be closer to 2 to 2.2 per game.
Now you can barely sneeze on the offensive player with the ball or it's a foul. Combined with 3-point chucking and zero defense, it fully explains why scores are so comically high now versus the 1990s and so many players average over 20-25 points per game. It's the equivalent to the NFL becoming soft, watering down passing defense, so they can run up scores and turn the league into a 90% passing game so they can pump up ratings for the $$$ (same fraud MLB pulled jacking up homerun figures).
I've had this argument before, and this is very off-topic, but that seems to be the nature of sports arguments :).
I agree that the NBA was far more physical in Jordan's era and that LeBron has never had to go through that. But the style of play cuts both ways! The biggest difference, I think, is that zone defense was illegal for (almost) Jordan's whole career. This allowed Jordan to showcase his isolation scoring, and I think Jordan was clearly the best isolation scorer ever.
This argument is more or less convincing depending on how you factor in the greater physicality (e.g. handchecking). My hypothesis is that LeBron would have been extremely hard to guard alone even with the relaxed rules. IIRC, Miami Lebron weighed 260+ and was still faster than most wings; Jordan topped out around 220 in the 2nd 3-peat. The available evidence suggests that LeBron is pretty hard to hurt -- unless you think all NBA players have somehow become more injury-prone, his almost spotless injury record relative to his peers is remarkable.
We seem to have different aesthetic preferences for basketball. I think late 90s basketball is ugly as hell! But I'll argue that the cross-era comparisons are not that easy, and both players are hard to extricate from the style of their eras anyway.
I agree that the NBA was far more physical in Jordan's era and that LeBron has never had to go through that. But the style of play cuts both ways! The biggest difference, I think, is that zone defense was illegal for (almost) Jordan's whole career. This allowed Jordan to showcase his isolation scoring, and I think Jordan was clearly the best isolation scorer ever.
This argument is more or less convincing depending on how you factor in the greater physicality (e.g. handchecking). My hypothesis is that LeBron would have been extremely hard to guard alone even with the relaxed rules. IIRC, Miami Lebron weighed 260+ and was still faster than most wings; Jordan topped out around 220 in the 2nd 3-peat. The available evidence suggests that LeBron is pretty hard to hurt -- unless you think all NBA players have somehow become more injury-prone, his almost spotless injury record relative to his peers is remarkable.
We seem to have different aesthetic preferences for basketball. I think late 90s basketball is ugly as hell! But I'll argue that the cross-era comparisons are not that easy, and both players are hard to extricate from the style of their eras anyway.
I think another factor is that LeBron has a history of flopping and complaining about non-calls. People imagine that LeBron in the 90s and see him getting crushed. But of course perhaps he flops because it is sadly part of that game today and had he joined in the late 80s he probably would have played differently.
It is really hard to speculate on these things.
It is really hard to speculate on these things.
You can't compare the two. Look at each as individuals. They have each changed the game of basketball in their own way. There will never be a single "GOAT". Every generation builds on what the generation prior created. Dr. J -> MJ -> Lebron. All dominate players in their own era that made everyone around them, and after, better players.
Could You please elaborate on how LBJ changed the game? I think, currently Curry did with his shooting skills, and somewhat Harden too - tho I hate the step-back threes due to it should be called travelling at least one out of three times. LBJ: great skill-set, great athlete but changing the game?
James Harden doesn’t travel, he simply knows the rule book better than non-experts. Specifically, he knows the gather step better than most anyone: https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2020/2/23/21149538/james-harden...
I think many, like myself, will concede this point. Harden is a genius at "hacking" basketball. I don't really complain that what Harden does is traveling as much as the traveling rule needs updating so that it is.
If you go to YouTube and type in “FIBA gather step”, you’ll see a video released by the rules body showing legal 0 steps, the rule is being used exactly as intended, to the point where they want people to know it’s explicitly legal.
What you don’t notice is that the gather step is used for many more movements other than a euro step, but the euro step also has a change of direction and change of acceleration that combine to make the movement look illegal to someone who doesn’t understand the rules.
What you don’t notice is that the gather step is used for many more movements other than a euro step, but the euro step also has a change of direction and change of acceleration that combine to make the movement look illegal to someone who doesn’t understand the rules.
It’s still makes for boring basketball with all the stops and starts.
Great link. Solidly refutes a common misconception by teaching a subtle but crucial nuance.
changed the game by jumping teams to play with other superstars so that he could win. Definitely started the big three era until the warriors dynasty ended. Back to big twos and it's so much more interesting when 6-8 teams can win.
He exceeds Jordan in nearly all individual metrics:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-makes-lebron-james...
Would I bet on Jordan or Lebron in 7 game playoff series (both players having the same teams)? Jordan.
But overall I would draft Lebron as a franchise player.
You don't want to draft Lebron, he has zero loyalty to a team. You wouldn't be able to keep him after your first rebuild phase, which would be inevitable at some point. Maybe you'd get four or five years out of a freshly drafted Lebron before he bolted to one of the elite media markets that was better positioned to get him rings.
It's a lot easier to have loyalty to Chicago than Cleveland. MJ and Kobe would have done the same if they were drafted to a small market team (in fact Kobe made sure he wasn't drafted to a small market).
Lebron put in a long shift and went back to give them a title.
Lebron put in a long shift and went back to give them a title.
Nick Wright has counter-argument to this:
* https://twitter.com/getnickwright/status/1316013808469463041
* https://twitter.com/getnickwright/status/1316013808469463041
I'm not a basketball fan but if LeBron only turns out to be the 2nd or 3rd greatest I'd assert he still lived up to the hype.
The Greatest Of All Time isn't Jordan; it's Bill Russell. 11 championships - nearly twice what Jordan has.
I knew someone would know the real answer!
As a frequenter of various nba forums and subreddits, I cannot believe you have invaded my safe space with this argument ;)
you wanna have a goat debate on hn
I scrolled down the thread wondering if someone would mention him and if nobody did I was going to.
It's insane how much hype he had at a young age and how he's delivered again and again. The only players with similar [amount delivered] * [hype] values are peyton manning and tim duncan, but lebron's is way bigger.
Also worth mentioning in his accolades: brought a championship to his hometown, has never had any PR disasters (except for "the decision"), has many charities (scholarships, gives out bikes, etc), and elevated his friends and family to make them successful as well. He's basically done everything right.
And I say this as a long time celtics fan and lebron hater.
It's insane how much hype he had at a young age and how he's delivered again and again. The only players with similar [amount delivered] * [hype] values are peyton manning and tim duncan, but lebron's is way bigger.
Also worth mentioning in his accolades: brought a championship to his hometown, has never had any PR disasters (except for "the decision"), has many charities (scholarships, gives out bikes, etc), and elevated his friends and family to make them successful as well. He's basically done everything right.
And I say this as a long time celtics fan and lebron hater.
Looking forward to the next two seasons to see if he catches MJ. The Lakers have a scary team again this season.
I agree, but I do think its more nuanced. Both LeBron & Tiger Woods are examples of sportsman living up to the early hype but ultimately falling short of eclipsing some records people thought they could.
Lebron likely won't win as many rings as Jordan and Tiger won't win as many majors as Jack.
Lebron likely won't win as many rings as Jordan and Tiger won't win as many majors as Jack.
[deleted]
But as a man LeBron is weak:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50054195
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50054195
Not even close to Bill Russell.
I'm pretty sure LeBron could beat Bill Russell, esp. given how old Russell is now.
Hype depends on who you interact with, but a few impressions:
I was really impressed with Jonathan Blow's The Witness. Exquisitely designed and thought out.
The animated series Primal by Genndy Tartakovsky. A pulpy cartoon without dialogue unlike anything else animated from the US.
The tv series Doom Patrol. Clever, revels in the absurd but still manages serious drama on what it means to not be completely human any more.
Philosophy in general. I've always seen it as academic wank, but i couldn't have been more wrong. It gives you the ability to step back in a way that pure science cannot. Excellent tool to learn about yourself too.
On a more controversial note, I was initially put off by critical race theory (talking explicitly about race in academia? Putting blame on the prosperous west?), but I must say it makes a lot of sense.
I was really impressed with Jonathan Blow's The Witness. Exquisitely designed and thought out.
The animated series Primal by Genndy Tartakovsky. A pulpy cartoon without dialogue unlike anything else animated from the US.
The tv series Doom Patrol. Clever, revels in the absurd but still manages serious drama on what it means to not be completely human any more.
Philosophy in general. I've always seen it as academic wank, but i couldn't have been more wrong. It gives you the ability to step back in a way that pure science cannot. Excellent tool to learn about yourself too.
On a more controversial note, I was initially put off by critical race theory (talking explicitly about race in academia? Putting blame on the prosperous west?), but I must say it makes a lot of sense.
+1 on Primal.
The animation and storytelling are masterful. I really enjoyed the second half of the first season in particular the episodes "Plague of Madness", "Coven of the Damned", and "Slave of the Scorpion".
The animation and storytelling are masterful. I really enjoyed the second half of the first season in particular the episodes "Plague of Madness", "Coven of the Damned", and "Slave of the Scorpion".
Oh I really liked the Witness as well! I got it in a Humble Bundle and I had never heard of it. It’s one of the most beautiful and well-crafted games I’ve ever played.
Blade Runner: 2049. Considering how highly regarded the original 1984 movie is it didn't seem possible for the sequel to nail it. Not only that but it managed to improve Blade Runner's (original) films story along the way.
The original was 1982, not 1984. [1]
I mention this mainly because I doubted my memories when I saw the date 1984, which would have put me in uni rather than as still at school.
At that time, I was probably more of an arsehole than I am now, but I credit the film for making me rethink some really important things, mainly to do with rights/respect for others. I would like to think that its effect on me was positive.
At the time of watching it in the cinema (1982, with the explanatory voiceover "I knew the lingo, every good cop did" etc), I remember being uneasy with Deckhard's pressuring of Rachael to kiss him etc. But it didn't spoil the film for me.
Years later, I got a DVD collection with various cinematic releases and director's cut (without the voiceover narrative and with previously cut scenes) etc. I was surprised that the Deckhard/Rachael stuff hadn't been revisited; years after having watched it in the cinema, it looked to me to be even more like an abuse thing. However, I still rate the film for providing a slap in the face about discrimination etc.
I'd like to see another cut - with the voiceover, which helped me and I like it - but with revisions to the Rachael/Deckhard pressured relationship thing.
It isn't as though Harrison Ford hasn't had revisionists messing with his work, after all. We all know that Han shot first. ;-)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner#Release
I mention this mainly because I doubted my memories when I saw the date 1984, which would have put me in uni rather than as still at school.
At that time, I was probably more of an arsehole than I am now, but I credit the film for making me rethink some really important things, mainly to do with rights/respect for others. I would like to think that its effect on me was positive.
At the time of watching it in the cinema (1982, with the explanatory voiceover "I knew the lingo, every good cop did" etc), I remember being uneasy with Deckhard's pressuring of Rachael to kiss him etc. But it didn't spoil the film for me.
Years later, I got a DVD collection with various cinematic releases and director's cut (without the voiceover narrative and with previously cut scenes) etc. I was surprised that the Deckhard/Rachael stuff hadn't been revisited; years after having watched it in the cinema, it looked to me to be even more like an abuse thing. However, I still rate the film for providing a slap in the face about discrimination etc.
I'd like to see another cut - with the voiceover, which helped me and I like it - but with revisions to the Rachael/Deckhard pressured relationship thing.
It isn't as though Harrison Ford hasn't had revisionists messing with his work, after all. We all know that Han shot first. ;-)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner#Release
> I credit the film for making me rethink some really important things
I recommend reading some of Philip K. Dick's works for more of that, which I would summarize as "what it is to be human".
I recommend reading some of Philip K. Dick's works for more of that, which I would summarize as "what it is to be human".
Thank you. Anything in particular? I did read some of his books when I was a kid, but would be happy to re-read any revlevant to the ideas/sentiment I was trying to express; recommendations would be appreciated.
I agree with you, Blade Runner 2049 explored more in depth the philosophical the older movie brought up. I was very hyped for the movie, and was really satisfied with the result. Same director is doing Dune, are you looking forward to that as well?
I’m one of the few people who actually watched the remake before the original. It was a great movie and blew my mind. But it can’t compare to the original. There’s something
operatic and timeless about the original that the remake doesn’t have. It’s much less polished but rawer in a sense. I think it will still be a classic 50 years from now and eminently watchable but I can’t say the same about 2049 as great as it was. The remake is a great movie but just a movie if you understand my meaning.
Hmm, I liked BR 2049 as a film; but it didn't really do it for me as any relation to the original.
It immediately moved onto my all-time favorite list. Once I realized the main theme, I had to watch it again and loved the details and clues that were presented along the way.
In terms of visual spectacle, it may be tops. The detail and research highlighted by this 'coincidence':
https://images.news18.com/ibnlive/uploads/2020/09/1599807108...
I hadn't thought about it until now, but these days, science fiction and fantasy movies that end without everything exploding should get bonus points.
In terms of visual spectacle, it may be tops. The detail and research highlighted by this 'coincidence':
https://images.news18.com/ibnlive/uploads/2020/09/1599807108...
I hadn't thought about it until now, but these days, science fiction and fantasy movies that end without everything exploding should get bonus points.
Damn good example, I loved 2049!
The main From Software games (Demon Souls, DS, DS3, BB, and Sekiro). They really are special, and a cut above games like Witcher 3 or BoTW imo. I don't think I have ever played a game where nearly every element was best in class and worked so well together.
The "stories" are brilliant, and the way they are told is perfect for the medium. There is an incredible world, that is awe inspiring and fascinating, with deep and expansive lore, and yet it never gets in the way, or suffers from a disconnect with the player. In BoTW the vast majority of my actions make no sense in the context of the plot. In the DS games or BB the world doesn't revolve around my character, so my actions are those of an inhabitant rather than the driver of the plot, and thus my actions don't destroy my suspension of disbelief, despite the freedom given to me, the same way they do in a game like Cyberpunk where my player clearly exists in the separate plane from the one the the world is in.
The music matches the atmosphere and gameplay seamlessly, with very few disconnects. Especially Sekiro, which links its music to the gameplay nearly flawlessly. I won't claim it superior to Undertale, but it still lives in the very upper echelons.
The gameplay is genre defining. I don't think much more needs to be said of it, other than that the difficulty has been grossly misrepresented. My former roommate, who struggled with the tutorial levels of fallout 4 beat Sekiro. These games aren't easy, but they also probably aren't "too hard" for your average player.
And the level design is brilliant, intricate and varied, awe inspiring, and encouraging/requiring exploration without it feeling like a chore (swamps excepted).
Go play these games, jeez.
The "stories" are brilliant, and the way they are told is perfect for the medium. There is an incredible world, that is awe inspiring and fascinating, with deep and expansive lore, and yet it never gets in the way, or suffers from a disconnect with the player. In BoTW the vast majority of my actions make no sense in the context of the plot. In the DS games or BB the world doesn't revolve around my character, so my actions are those of an inhabitant rather than the driver of the plot, and thus my actions don't destroy my suspension of disbelief, despite the freedom given to me, the same way they do in a game like Cyberpunk where my player clearly exists in the separate plane from the one the the world is in.
The music matches the atmosphere and gameplay seamlessly, with very few disconnects. Especially Sekiro, which links its music to the gameplay nearly flawlessly. I won't claim it superior to Undertale, but it still lives in the very upper echelons.
The gameplay is genre defining. I don't think much more needs to be said of it, other than that the difficulty has been grossly misrepresented. My former roommate, who struggled with the tutorial levels of fallout 4 beat Sekiro. These games aren't easy, but they also probably aren't "too hard" for your average player.
And the level design is brilliant, intricate and varied, awe inspiring, and encouraging/requiring exploration without it feeling like a chore (swamps excepted).
Go play these games, jeez.
I've been replaying the first Dark Souls in co-op with a friend over the past few months. As long as you stay out of the shield-turtle playstyle trap (something that took convincing for my friend) it's a lot of fun. I will say there's a steep quality drop in the back half of the game (post Anor Londo). The Artorias DLC matches the best of it, though.
Only advice I'd pay to newbies is to get good at dodgerolling instead of using a shield. Turtling behind a shield is very effective in Dark Souls 1 (fixed in later installments) but becomes dreadfully boring after a while. The game has a reputation as being difficult but if you summon NPCs or other players for boss fights they are quite easy (purists might say this defeats the entire point).
Only advice I'd pay to newbies is to get good at dodgerolling instead of using a shield. Turtling behind a shield is very effective in Dark Souls 1 (fixed in later installments) but becomes dreadfully boring after a while. The game has a reputation as being difficult but if you summon NPCs or other players for boss fights they are quite easy (purists might say this defeats the entire point).
I will add that a marvelous thing in all of From's games is that there is essentially no filler content. Every enemy (encounter) you meet is different in some way from every other, it's always challenging you in a slightly different way. There may be reused ideas between the games, but within a single game, you're never on clear a path of just doing more of the same. This is something almost no other company even seems to be trying, while From is constantly succeeding at it.
I agree, but that's also probably why the OP left out Dark Souls 2 from their list :)
I left that one out of my memory when I said "all their games"...
+1 to this. I was a very selective gamer and the only games I played more than once recently were Dark Souls 2 and 3. Heck, I'd pick them up again given the time.
Very special and challenging gameplay that is done right. There are no advantages to you as a player, and you need to watch your every step. I am on the same page regarding storytelling - it is a masterpiece. Couple that with the great artwork they've done, and you're put right in the middle of some fantasy land.
Very special and challenging gameplay that is done right. There are no advantages to you as a player, and you need to watch your every step. I am on the same page regarding storytelling - it is a masterpiece. Couple that with the great artwork they've done, and you're put right in the middle of some fantasy land.
The Demon’s Souls PS5 release is also just phenomenal.
Umbasa!
Umbasa!
Zelda Breath of the Wild exceeded my expectations completely. I played it years after it came out and was gobsmacked by how good it was.
A strange mixture of pleasant, mildly challenging, big and awe inspiring world.
A strange mixture of pleasant, mildly challenging, big and awe inspiring world.
Ok, I guess I'll bite. To me, BotW feels more like a game engine and less like a game. My biggest issues:
> Content sparsity. Like many open world games, most of Hyrule just feels dead to me. Towns aren't as populated and lively as OoT / WW / MM, the main reason being that there aren't as many overlapping storylines that have you return to the same location as you progress through the game. The game basically encourages you to clear a region and never return. The random encounters are repetitive.
> The shrines, what the heck were they thinking?! It feels like Nintendo hired a bunch of interns that year and needed to give them something to do. All the shrines were clearly made in a generic level editor. Felt really out of place to me.
> Most of the music in BoTW is quiet and subdued, unlike previous entries in the series. This is good for setting a certain tone, but it's less effective unless there's some flashier music to contrast with. To me, the lack of music made the game feel even emptier.
> Shallow combat mechanics, even compared to other entries in the series like OoT. Just mash buttons until enemy dead. Armor / weapons don't really matter beyond the stat boosts and occasionally some elemental matching. Guardians / Lynels require some strategy, but once you figure out the tricks it's not hard to brute force those too.
I had fun playing, for sure. It just doesn't rank very highly on my list. I'm looking forward to BotW 2, where hopefully they'll use their game engine to make a great game!
> Content sparsity. Like many open world games, most of Hyrule just feels dead to me. Towns aren't as populated and lively as OoT / WW / MM, the main reason being that there aren't as many overlapping storylines that have you return to the same location as you progress through the game. The game basically encourages you to clear a region and never return. The random encounters are repetitive.
> The shrines, what the heck were they thinking?! It feels like Nintendo hired a bunch of interns that year and needed to give them something to do. All the shrines were clearly made in a generic level editor. Felt really out of place to me.
> Most of the music in BoTW is quiet and subdued, unlike previous entries in the series. This is good for setting a certain tone, but it's less effective unless there's some flashier music to contrast with. To me, the lack of music made the game feel even emptier.
> Shallow combat mechanics, even compared to other entries in the series like OoT. Just mash buttons until enemy dead. Armor / weapons don't really matter beyond the stat boosts and occasionally some elemental matching. Guardians / Lynels require some strategy, but once you figure out the tricks it's not hard to brute force those too.
I had fun playing, for sure. It just doesn't rank very highly on my list. I'm looking forward to BotW 2, where hopefully they'll use their game engine to make a great game!
I had the opposite experience running around though, it felt very satisfying to just go "what's that over there" and run into totally skippable content like dragons, simple korok seed puzles, tracking down shooting stars landing in enemy territory, finding and riding the lord of the mountain, watching enemy bokoblins try to hunt a wild boar, solving the puzzle of how to get a shrine to appear, snowboarding, landing on a far away island and taking down the slumbering cyclops that rules it, goron golfing with giant rocks, etc etc. It's like a big yard where you can go anywhere and there is something delightful tucked in everywhere.
I think the sparsity of people is deliberate, it's post apocalyptic where most travelers you encounter are probably assassins from an enemy cult.
In general I felt like it was the result of a very different game approach than something like cyberpunk, where they added small things to the game one by one while making sure they meshed and were polished to a mirror finish.
I think the sparsity of people is deliberate, it's post apocalyptic where most travelers you encounter are probably assassins from an enemy cult.
In general I felt like it was the result of a very different game approach than something like cyberpunk, where they added small things to the game one by one while making sure they meshed and were polished to a mirror finish.
The shrine decorations are monotonous but some of the puzzles are absolutely fantastic.
The one in the Korok forest where you have to figure out the relationship between the star map and the stones took me a long time and felt so satisfying to complete.
The game is polarising because it works only for a certain kind of player. I love just jumping in a random point of the map to chill and explore and suddenly find some surprise in the middle of nowhere, but if you prefer some linear and story-driven game I don't think BOTW is for you.
The one in the Korok forest where you have to figure out the relationship between the star map and the stones took me a long time and felt so satisfying to complete.
The game is polarising because it works only for a certain kind of player. I love just jumping in a random point of the map to chill and explore and suddenly find some surprise in the middle of nowhere, but if you prefer some linear and story-driven game I don't think BOTW is for you.
I enjoyed the shrines, but not many of them were hard once you realized that they all follow a Chekhov's gun pattern. Anything given must be used in the solution, anything that reacts to one of your skills (magnet, etc) must be important.
The main problem I had with BotW is that it doesn't have proper dungeons, it just isn't a Legend of Zelda game to me if it doesn't have dungeons. The divine beasts are the closest thing to it, but having them as optional and not driving the story forward just doesn't scratch the itch.
> Most of the music in BoTW is quiet and subdued, unlike previous entries in the series. This is good for setting a certain tone, but it's less effective unless there's some flashier music to contrast with. To me, the lack of music made the game feel even emptier.
Hilariously, I had the opposite experience. BotW was the first Zelda game I played extensively (I have some memories from OoT and MM because a friend had an N64 back in the day, but never played it myself for anything more than 10 minutes).
After finishing BotW, I wanted to play the Link's Awakening remake. But I had to walk away from it after about an hour because the endless barrage of music was annoying me to no end. (I have since adjusted to it.) I'm currently playing Age of Calamity, where the soundtrack does not feel as obnoxious because there's actual action going on all the time. After that, I might be able to go back to Link's Awakening.
Also:
> it's less effective unless there's some flashier music to contrast with
IMO there is tons of flashy music in this game. The cities' motifs, the champion's motifs, the castle music, the Divine Beast tracks, the fight tracks in general. I have hours-long playlists of all of that as my go-to background music for work.
Hilariously, I had the opposite experience. BotW was the first Zelda game I played extensively (I have some memories from OoT and MM because a friend had an N64 back in the day, but never played it myself for anything more than 10 minutes).
After finishing BotW, I wanted to play the Link's Awakening remake. But I had to walk away from it after about an hour because the endless barrage of music was annoying me to no end. (I have since adjusted to it.) I'm currently playing Age of Calamity, where the soundtrack does not feel as obnoxious because there's actual action going on all the time. After that, I might be able to go back to Link's Awakening.
Also:
> it's less effective unless there's some flashier music to contrast with
IMO there is tons of flashy music in this game. The cities' motifs, the champion's motifs, the castle music, the Divine Beast tracks, the fight tracks in general. I have hours-long playlists of all of that as my go-to background music for work.
I picked up a switch exclusively for this game, I only just got off the first little island, so far it's very much living upto the hype. I'll find myself slow walking the area and just exploring more than anything else. Considering all of the games one could play during a pandemic, this was a perfect fit for me.
Same, but a couple of years ago to pass time after a pretty harsh dirt bike accident. My adult gamer daughter thought it was hilarious when I'd get excited about milestones like pulling the master sword.
This one. Zelda Breath of the Wild has the best meta review ever given to game.
It's worth buying a Nintendo switch for this game alone.
I've deleted my save on it two times now. Each subsequent play through was about 100 hours and I discovered new stuff each time. Truly one of the greatest games ever made.
I'd agree with that. I first played it on an emulator to see what the fuss was about... for long enough to beat it, the DLC, and all the quests. I kept telling myself I'd buy it and a Switch if only there were a way to transfer my save.
Then I got a Switch for Christmas last year (I didn't ask for one, they just sprung it on me), and proceeded to buy and play through the game in its entirety again.
Then I got a Switch for Christmas last year (I didn't ask for one, they just sprung it on me), and proceeded to buy and play through the game in its entirety again.
iPhone (2007)
Ok, maybe not so much the original 2007 model, arguably it wasn't until the iPhone 4 (2010) until it really came into its own. But few products released in my lifetime changed modern life as the iPhone did. And unlike most other seismic tech products (world-wide-web, linux) that took years to build momentum, it had lots of pre-release hype.
Ok, maybe not so much the original 2007 model, arguably it wasn't until the iPhone 4 (2010) until it really came into its own. But few products released in my lifetime changed modern life as the iPhone did. And unlike most other seismic tech products (world-wide-web, linux) that took years to build momentum, it had lots of pre-release hype.
This should be at the top.
Until that iPhone unveil, no-one had ever seen swipe-to-scroll, now its second nature to at least half the planet.
Video of the 2007 unveil: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN4U5FqrOdQ
Until that iPhone unveil, no-one had ever seen swipe-to-scroll, now its second nature to at least half the planet.
Video of the 2007 unveil: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN4U5FqrOdQ
My favorite thing about the iPhone announcement is when Steve shows Cover Flow of album art (at about 18 minutes in your link), which spins around to show a track listing. It was a slick 3D animation on a phone, when most of us were carrying bar or flip phones navigated with stiff arrow keys. Yet the audience reaction is pretty tepid. Already the future seemed ordinary just a few minutes into the announcement!
The original iPhone nailed so much on the first time. The UX was truly ahead of its time: intuitive touchscreen gestures, portrait and landscape modes, a surprisingly usable touchscreen keyboard, and proximity sensor to prevent accidental touches.
Before the iPhone became popular, there was so much variety in phone design like the Juke or Nokia Ngage. Today billions of people use a phone that resembles an iPhone.
Before the iPhone became popular, there was so much variety in phone design like the Juke or Nokia Ngage. Today billions of people use a phone that resembles an iPhone.
I remember thinking that the iPhone wasn’t a big deal and I didn’t really care until I walked into an Apple store and used one. I was blown away. I think we really forget how many things the introduction of the iPhone brought about.
Not even sure why this isn't the top comment.
>Ok, maybe not so much the original 2007 model
It was. Original iPhone was extremely hyped before it was announced in the tech / Apple circles. In case anyone arguing that is a small niche, the same argument could be used for Games as the OP used in examples. It is very rare to see Technology Announcement being used on Front Page newspaper.( Remember that thing we used to buy every day?) And this wasn't just in US alone.
Original iPhone ( 2007 ) was only available in US, and it was very expensive at the time, $499 with contract. And Apple was selling every iPhone as fast as they could make it. And around the world iPhone continue the same strategy of only contract with iPhone. Arguably it wasn't until iPhone 5 before it was readily available , I guess Steve Jobs relented on making iPhone Just in Time before passing away because it could never match the huge demand.
And yes, not only did it lived up to its hype, it was more than anyone could ever imagine.
>Ok, maybe not so much the original 2007 model
It was. Original iPhone was extremely hyped before it was announced in the tech / Apple circles. In case anyone arguing that is a small niche, the same argument could be used for Games as the OP used in examples. It is very rare to see Technology Announcement being used on Front Page newspaper.( Remember that thing we used to buy every day?) And this wasn't just in US alone.
Original iPhone ( 2007 ) was only available in US, and it was very expensive at the time, $499 with contract. And Apple was selling every iPhone as fast as they could make it. And around the world iPhone continue the same strategy of only contract with iPhone. Arguably it wasn't until iPhone 5 before it was readily available , I guess Steve Jobs relented on making iPhone Just in Time before passing away because it could never match the huge demand.
And yes, not only did it lived up to its hype, it was more than anyone could ever imagine.
Although I totally agree, it also ushered in the virtual keyboard. 13 years of using them and I still absolutely hate them.
You obviously never used one before the iPhone! Part of the reason the iPhone was such a revolution was that it had the first decent virtual keyboard.
What pre-iPhone devices had virtual keyboards? I don't know of any and Googling for them is not turning up much. I could imagine old Windows Phone OSes had some kind of onscreen keyboard which I would guess was pretty bad.
Apple themselves positioned the iPhone against devices with physical keyboards: https://i.imgur.com/hXtRmbG.png
I would argue "decent virtual keyboard" is an oxymoron :)
Apple themselves positioned the iPhone against devices with physical keyboards: https://i.imgur.com/hXtRmbG.png
I would argue "decent virtual keyboard" is an oxymoron :)
Absolutely the iPhone. Especially the original. Even today I think you could remove every optionally installed "app", and if all it had was a world-class web browser, weather, and the Maps app, be completely indispensable.
What I like about this reply is that I think the best answers are probably the ones you don't immediately think of, as they've changed things so immensely that they're now a component of cultural background noise.
FWIW, I remember my uncle in 2007 trying to game his contract with Verizon just so he could get AT&T and the iPhone. I thought he was being stupid for what I gathered was a useless toy. But now...
FWIW, I remember my uncle in 2007 trying to game his contract with Verizon just so he could get AT&T and the iPhone. I thought he was being stupid for what I gathered was a useless toy. But now...
Retina displays. Not sure they were hyped (depends on the definition of hype of course), but I could never set my eyes on regular low DPI displays (e.g. 1080p at 27’’) again, ever, after working with one for a few days.
Having just upgraded to a 4k 27" I have to agree and am left wondering why I've been sticking to 1080p 24" non-HDR for the past few years.. But the monitors are more mainstream now..
Have a 24" 1080p second screen which is good for checking content on, and it really just keeps reinforcing how good hdpi is.
Have a 24" 1080p second screen which is good for checking content on, and it really just keeps reinforcing how good hdpi is.
Earlier this week I turned on an old MacBook Pro (circa 2010ish) and I couldn't believe we ever used to stare at such pixelated screens!
I bought a lenovo legion with 1080p screen after having used a macbook for a long time. I had to return it. It was fairly disturbing to read text even on a small screen such as a laptop screen.
I ended up getting Gigabyte Aero 15 with 4K display. It was a great decision.
I ended up getting Gigabyte Aero 15 with 4K display. It was a great decision.
I don't understand this. 1080p on 15 screen is still pretty decent, I think Windows by default set scaling on such ppi.
4k does make a difference if you are reading text, or doing coding.
I have a Macbook with retina at home and a ThinkPad without one at work. Yeah, retina makes text a little nicer, but overall it's not so big deal for me. It may be because, when I'm coding at work, I'm usually pissed off by a couple different things at least, so a less than perfect font is not even on my radar.
You're also closer to a laptop screen. After using a 14" 1080p laptop I definitely would never go lower than 1440p at that size again.
I personally immediately go into settings to get the maximum space out of a screen rather than using it at retina resolutions (for computer displays, not phone size). I guess I just prefer more pixels to prettier ones.
I agree, with one caveat - some old software just makes everything super-tiny.
It's a little like when widescreen monitors came out and people were trying to figure out how to play their 4x3 games.
It's a little like when widescreen monitors came out and people were trying to figure out how to play their 4x3 games.
I was hit hard by this when I casually booted up Warcraft 3 in a fit of nostalgia and realized the only resolution options were 800x600 and 1024x768.
How has nobody said "the iPhone". Hell it was called the Jesus phone before it came out. You don't get more hyped than that but it definitely lived up to it.
Two finales:
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. When the seventh book came out in 2007 there was this fear among the fandom that JK Rowling couldn't deliver a great ending. I think most people agreed she did very well (even more than expected, considering the complexity of the story in the prior six books).
- Breaking Bad last season / last episode: there aren't many tv shows that can end in a high note (check Game of Thrones, for example). I think Breaking Bad - and in general, what separates the best tv shows from great tv shows - is that they are able to have a good ending.
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. When the seventh book came out in 2007 there was this fear among the fandom that JK Rowling couldn't deliver a great ending. I think most people agreed she did very well (even more than expected, considering the complexity of the story in the prior six books).
- Breaking Bad last season / last episode: there aren't many tv shows that can end in a high note (check Game of Thrones, for example). I think Breaking Bad - and in general, what separates the best tv shows from great tv shows - is that they are able to have a good ending.
> Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Man... there is way too much deus ex machina at every plot point of that book to give it any credit. If you have the end of the 6th book as a starting point and the end of series that Rowling had in mind as an end, then Deathly Hallows is just connecting those two points using plot conveniences at every single opportunity. Too many fortunate coincidences in a very short period of time. (Half-Blood Prince is still peak Harry Potter IMO).
Man... there is way too much deus ex machina at every plot point of that book to give it any credit. If you have the end of the 6th book as a starting point and the end of series that Rowling had in mind as an end, then Deathly Hallows is just connecting those two points using plot conveniences at every single opportunity. Too many fortunate coincidences in a very short period of time. (Half-Blood Prince is still peak Harry Potter IMO).
How is there too much deus ex machina? You threw out that label and never mentioned a single plot point to substantiate your claim.
I believe there's very little deus ex machina. The main point is that Voldemort delved too greedily into dark magic, weakening himself very much, while Lily's love magic was pure and protected her son against Voldemort's evil magic. This is why Harry can see into his mind and why he manages amazing feats like Gringotts or escape at Godric's Hollow, because Voldemort's hubris handed Harry the tools. It's all explained in the chapter "King's Cross", re-read that chapter and you'll gain fresh clarity.
JKR does introduce new concepts and history unknown previously to Harry, but name a book she doesn't do that. She'd be raked over the coals if she didn't offer anything new in one of her longest of the seven books. She needed the Deathly Hallows as a new mystery, a new suspense that creates tension throughout the book, pulling you onwards and competing for the horcruxes. It also highlights Harry's temptation to attain that which Dumbledore sought, but ultimately Harry chose the wiser path than Albus.
The other new concept was wand lore, which was not very fleshed out before DH. I don't love that wand lore dictated the final duel so heavily, why does Harry have to win based on overpowering a 3rd wizard, the wand truly knows that? Why not just have Harry's courageous, love-inspired magic overcome Voldemorts? It's kind of a letdown that Harry beats Voldy because he took 3 wands from Draco's hand...
Other than these two concepts, I don't see anything new and cheap like a deus ex machina. That term would literally mean that Harry is defeated by Voldemort in the end (he never was), only to be saved by a God at the last minute (he never was). Harry won on his and his allies' courage, and Voldemort lost due to his own hubris and his own determination to focus on wands and to tell all his servants not to kill Harry.
I believe there's very little deus ex machina. The main point is that Voldemort delved too greedily into dark magic, weakening himself very much, while Lily's love magic was pure and protected her son against Voldemort's evil magic. This is why Harry can see into his mind and why he manages amazing feats like Gringotts or escape at Godric's Hollow, because Voldemort's hubris handed Harry the tools. It's all explained in the chapter "King's Cross", re-read that chapter and you'll gain fresh clarity.
JKR does introduce new concepts and history unknown previously to Harry, but name a book she doesn't do that. She'd be raked over the coals if she didn't offer anything new in one of her longest of the seven books. She needed the Deathly Hallows as a new mystery, a new suspense that creates tension throughout the book, pulling you onwards and competing for the horcruxes. It also highlights Harry's temptation to attain that which Dumbledore sought, but ultimately Harry chose the wiser path than Albus.
The other new concept was wand lore, which was not very fleshed out before DH. I don't love that wand lore dictated the final duel so heavily, why does Harry have to win based on overpowering a 3rd wizard, the wand truly knows that? Why not just have Harry's courageous, love-inspired magic overcome Voldemorts? It's kind of a letdown that Harry beats Voldy because he took 3 wands from Draco's hand...
Other than these two concepts, I don't see anything new and cheap like a deus ex machina. That term would literally mean that Harry is defeated by Voldemort in the end (he never was), only to be saved by a God at the last minute (he never was). Harry won on his and his allies' courage, and Voldemort lost due to his own hubris and his own determination to focus on wands and to tell all his servants not to kill Harry.
From wikipedia:
> Deus ex machina is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem in a story is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected and unlikely occurrence.
Examples from Deathly Hallows.
Having no idea how to proceed on your quest of finding and destroying Horcruxes? The only soul who was there with Voldemort when the locket was planted, happens also to be magically bound to Harry and have obligation to obey Harry's every command.
Need to impersonate someone? Just pick a hair off your cloak for the potion.
Don't know where the next horcrux is? Immediate vision from Voldemort's mind to help you.
A character who has crucial information is killed? Well no, instead of using a spell like any other time, Voldemort decides to leave Snape to slowly die giving him just enough time to share his memories with Harry.
Need to check if your mortal enemy is really dead? Don't verify yourself but send the only person in the group who has any incentive to lie to you about it. (And you're supposed to be able to magically tell when people are lying by the way).
The way to destroy a horcrux is hidden in a place accessible only to those who speak parseltongue? Nope, Ron can just guess his way into an ability that was previously established to be hereditary or transfered through magic.
I could go on... the point isn't any single one of these, it's more about how they accumulate throughout the book.
> Deus ex machina is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem in a story is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected and unlikely occurrence.
Examples from Deathly Hallows.
Having no idea how to proceed on your quest of finding and destroying Horcruxes? The only soul who was there with Voldemort when the locket was planted, happens also to be magically bound to Harry and have obligation to obey Harry's every command.
Need to impersonate someone? Just pick a hair off your cloak for the potion.
Don't know where the next horcrux is? Immediate vision from Voldemort's mind to help you.
A character who has crucial information is killed? Well no, instead of using a spell like any other time, Voldemort decides to leave Snape to slowly die giving him just enough time to share his memories with Harry.
Need to check if your mortal enemy is really dead? Don't verify yourself but send the only person in the group who has any incentive to lie to you about it. (And you're supposed to be able to magically tell when people are lying by the way).
The way to destroy a horcrux is hidden in a place accessible only to those who speak parseltongue? Nope, Ron can just guess his way into an ability that was previously established to be hereditary or transfered through magic.
I could go on... the point isn't any single one of these, it's more about how they accumulate throughout the book.
I think a key property of a deus ex machina is the abruptness of the occurrence. In vulgar Latin...an asspull. A lot of these examples had years of set-up or serve a narrative purpose.
- Yeah finding the locket was a bit too serendipitous but Kreacher has been shown before to obey Harry _contemptuously_. When asked to report on Draco's activities in HBP, he reports the most mundane things, making his report essentially useless without breaking his obligation. He only finally cooperated when Harry looked at him as a creature with feelings, not just a servant. Ties back to when he asked Dobby to sit down in CoS, which sends the elf wailing at the decency.
- Polyjuice has been established since CoS, along with the cost of using/making it and its limits. Hardly sudden and hardly an unfair advantage.
- Did a Voldyvision ever lead Harry directly to a Horcrux? I don't remember so. The closest I recall is Harry willingly slipping into this trance to verify Voldemort's anger at discovering the loss of the locket---not a huge advantage and a reasonable tactical move. The diadem, Harry had to rack his brains for that, even empathize with a ghost.
- Voldemort couldn't Avada Kedavra Snape because he believes Snape is the Elder Wand's master.
- Snape lied to Voldemort to the very end, his legillimency is not infallible. Sending Narcissa Malfoy is a bit of good luck, I'll grant, though it also emphasizes how one of Voldemort's weaknesses is his inability or plain refusal to read people. He failed to see that Snape loved Lily so, which caused him to turn for the good, and he failed to see how much Narcissa cared for her son---he didn't consider she'd have a reason to lie to him.
- Ron "speaking" Parseltongue as a plot turn feels a bit rushed and unsatisfying indeed but is not at all miraculous. I can say "Spasibo" to thank my Russian coworkers even if I'm not Russian and hardly has training in Russian.
- Yeah finding the locket was a bit too serendipitous but Kreacher has been shown before to obey Harry _contemptuously_. When asked to report on Draco's activities in HBP, he reports the most mundane things, making his report essentially useless without breaking his obligation. He only finally cooperated when Harry looked at him as a creature with feelings, not just a servant. Ties back to when he asked Dobby to sit down in CoS, which sends the elf wailing at the decency.
- Polyjuice has been established since CoS, along with the cost of using/making it and its limits. Hardly sudden and hardly an unfair advantage.
- Did a Voldyvision ever lead Harry directly to a Horcrux? I don't remember so. The closest I recall is Harry willingly slipping into this trance to verify Voldemort's anger at discovering the loss of the locket---not a huge advantage and a reasonable tactical move. The diadem, Harry had to rack his brains for that, even empathize with a ghost.
- Voldemort couldn't Avada Kedavra Snape because he believes Snape is the Elder Wand's master.
- Snape lied to Voldemort to the very end, his legillimency is not infallible. Sending Narcissa Malfoy is a bit of good luck, I'll grant, though it also emphasizes how one of Voldemort's weaknesses is his inability or plain refusal to read people. He failed to see that Snape loved Lily so, which caused him to turn for the good, and he failed to see how much Narcissa cared for her son---he didn't consider she'd have a reason to lie to him.
- Ron "speaking" Parseltongue as a plot turn feels a bit rushed and unsatisfying indeed but is not at all miraculous. I can say "Spasibo" to thank my Russian coworkers even if I'm not Russian and hardly has training in Russian.
I'd say a big thing is how old you are when reading HP. I loved all the books and loved the ending. Over time I started reading Asimov and Vinge and became repulsed by the quality of the whole HP story. One lucky boy doing dumb things and getting away with it, all happening in a world where magic is done in the worst balance between mystic and explained. If I recall correctly, they tried to make the most sense of the Snape's magic spells. Compare the nonsense to the way a young man of 16 years imagined magic in Eragon where I really liked how he tried to keep as much consistency with energy cost and implications. Harry Potter really is just mostly for kids
For a counterexampel, my personal experience is pretty different. I had read almost every one[1] of Asimov's novels and short stories by the time Deathly Hallows came out when I was 16, and I was still a big enough fan of Harry Potter to finish each book the day it came out.
To this day i'm pretty confident I could pick up a Harry Potter book and enjoy it. There are different types of storytelling, and not every kind has to have balanced stakes or world-building that stands up to scrutiny. And it's not like Asimov's work doesn't have similar flaws: as much as I love the scope of the Foundation series, it does settle into a bit of a pattern of setting up seemingly insurmountable challenges and then resolving them through neat changes to the rules of engagement of psychohistory (though as a much more ambitious series than HP, it's more understandable).
[1] Literally; I was ravenous
To this day i'm pretty confident I could pick up a Harry Potter book and enjoy it. There are different types of storytelling, and not every kind has to have balanced stakes or world-building that stands up to scrutiny. And it's not like Asimov's work doesn't have similar flaws: as much as I love the scope of the Foundation series, it does settle into a bit of a pattern of setting up seemingly insurmountable challenges and then resolving them through neat changes to the rules of engagement of psychohistory (though as a much more ambitious series than HP, it's more understandable).
[1] Literally; I was ravenous
True. I was around 9 when I got into HP and 15 when the last book came out so it hit me right at the appropriate age where the books get slightly more serious as you grow up but you're still a kid who is into the book universe. The lore or some of the overarching plot points don't make too much sense when looking at them with adult eyes but you still have to give Rowling credit for writing books that are just difficult to put down for someone at the right age.
Yeah, Eragon did get the "magic world" right in its fantasy series. But then it lost track of the story in its reams of pages ...
The almost carbon copy of Star Wars to Eragon really changed my perception of the series.
Yeah, but the Eragon stories were just one boy's quest to minmax himself.
Couldn’t agree more. I wish I hadn’t read it. HBP was the peak. In DH they just run around the woods for a while. I was extremely disappointed with DH.
"They just run around the woods for a while."
I'm sorry, that's plain incorrect. First, they're at Privet Drive, then the Burrow, then Grimmauld Place, then they camp for a few weeks-months but it's highly condensed plot-wise. They don't "run around the woods" at any point, that silly chase scene with the snatchers is onlyin the film.
Why do they hide? Because there is ZERO safe-space in the rest of the UK. They are forced into hiding to maintain their safety until such time as the horcruxes are gone and battle can commence. How is that much different from Frodo and Sam wandering the wilds alone at the last 2 LotR books? In HP, they are in society and non-wilderness far more than Frodo and Sam. And then they do a lot of epic shit at the end that has nothing to do with the woods.
Re-read the book, the woods part is a very small aspect.
I'm sorry, that's plain incorrect. First, they're at Privet Drive, then the Burrow, then Grimmauld Place, then they camp for a few weeks-months but it's highly condensed plot-wise. They don't "run around the woods" at any point, that silly chase scene with the snatchers is onlyin the film.
Why do they hide? Because there is ZERO safe-space in the rest of the UK. They are forced into hiding to maintain their safety until such time as the horcruxes are gone and battle can commence. How is that much different from Frodo and Sam wandering the wilds alone at the last 2 LotR books? In HP, they are in society and non-wilderness far more than Frodo and Sam. And then they do a lot of epic shit at the end that has nothing to do with the woods.
Re-read the book, the woods part is a very small aspect.
I have read it many times.
Why was the book centered around a children’s story that we didn’t hear about until book 7? Why were the deathly hollows items not mentioned at all throughout the entire rest of the series? Why do we not find out until the last book that the invisibility cloak should have faded a long time ago? That last point especially irritates me because it just smells like lazy writing.
I love Harry Potter. I have read the series many many times. I sincerely wish I had never read the last book. It felt rushed, unplanned, and almost desperate.
There is a fluid cohesion between books 1-6 that completely disappears in book 7.
Why was the book centered around a children’s story that we didn’t hear about until book 7? Why were the deathly hollows items not mentioned at all throughout the entire rest of the series? Why do we not find out until the last book that the invisibility cloak should have faded a long time ago? That last point especially irritates me because it just smells like lazy writing.
I love Harry Potter. I have read the series many many times. I sincerely wish I had never read the last book. It felt rushed, unplanned, and almost desperate.
There is a fluid cohesion between books 1-6 that completely disappears in book 7.
JKR didn't fully flesh out her universe at the start. She had feature creep just like any app, she added tons of spells and stories and characters and enriched the world book by book.
While HP:DH does have a "summary" vibe, going back to all the old places and seeing all the old characters' plots wrapped up nicely, I do think she needed SOME new material in there. She needed to create new tension, she needed new suspense; simply wrapping up things she'd already devised wouldn't have been fresh enough for her, or for us, I think.
If I had to change just two things about DH, I think I'd remove the epilogue (it could just be an online essay, there's no need to put a second bow on top of the present, you know?) and I'd remove wand lore. The idea that your wand changes allegiance whenever someone bests you in any way, physical or magical? Come on, that is borderline plot manipulation. Now, Harry wins the fight at the end because Voldemort's wand knew that Harry's hands pulled some wands out of Draco's hand, who in turn disarmed a Dumbledore who wasn't trying to not be disarmed? I mean, ugh, wand lore was a sort of hand-wavey MEH aspect, IMO.
I think Book 6 and Book 3 are the pinnacles...they don't feature battles with Lord Voldemort, they're nicely self-contained, they have fantastic endings, I'm getting chills thinking of them.
While HP:DH does have a "summary" vibe, going back to all the old places and seeing all the old characters' plots wrapped up nicely, I do think she needed SOME new material in there. She needed to create new tension, she needed new suspense; simply wrapping up things she'd already devised wouldn't have been fresh enough for her, or for us, I think.
If I had to change just two things about DH, I think I'd remove the epilogue (it could just be an online essay, there's no need to put a second bow on top of the present, you know?) and I'd remove wand lore. The idea that your wand changes allegiance whenever someone bests you in any way, physical or magical? Come on, that is borderline plot manipulation. Now, Harry wins the fight at the end because Voldemort's wand knew that Harry's hands pulled some wands out of Draco's hand, who in turn disarmed a Dumbledore who wasn't trying to not be disarmed? I mean, ugh, wand lore was a sort of hand-wavey MEH aspect, IMO.
I think Book 6 and Book 3 are the pinnacles...they don't feature battles with Lord Voldemort, they're nicely self-contained, they have fantastic endings, I'm getting chills thinking of them.
To be fair Frodo and Sam wandering alone was a low point of the LotR series for me as well. I do remember starting to skim when we got into the interminable sequence of "and they're still climbing the mountain". Like, I get it's a struggle but 800+ pages in and it's not going to get any realer for me sitting in a comfortable chair (or on an airplane as I was) then it already was.
Honestly, Frodo and Sam in the woods was also the least enjoyable part of lord of the rings for me.
Well, ok, second most if we're going by the books, there was the two chapters of bombadil
Well, ok, second most if we're going by the books, there was the two chapters of bombadil
BTW, why didn't they leave the country? Really weird that with the wide world open to them they decided to stick around the UK.
Because the whole series depicts the UK as the center of the world, a continuation of the pre war Pax Brittanica.
Little, if any, mention is made of wizards/witches from other countries unless absolutely required, and none are portrayed as being equal to the one based in England. There is not even a mention of Ministries of Magic of other nations (China?) or in former colonies (US? India?).
Little, if any, mention is made of wizards/witches from other countries unless absolutely required, and none are portrayed as being equal to the one based in England. There is not even a mention of Ministries of Magic of other nations (China?) or in former colonies (US? India?).
My biggest frustration with Harry Potter is that Harry never has to actually make tough decisions. All moral dilemmas are resolved by a deus ex. He never even has to murder the villain, just deflects his spell back at him. My eyes rolled straight to the back of my head.
The books deliver a fantastical, childish view of morality where the world will always save you from having to make difficult decisions.
The books deliver a fantastical, childish view of morality where the world will always save you from having to make difficult decisions.
> The books deliver a fantastical, childish view of morality
Almost like they were written for children...
Almost like they were written for children...
Plenty of young adult books, which is what Harry Potter was, especially after the first book, engage with difficult moral situations. Harry Potter instead tells you that you can have your cake and eat it too.
I mean, it's a book about magic... what do you expect?
Brian Sanderson (and others) have written plenty of magic-filled books with more interesting endings. If you want a 'hard magic' system, the one in the Mistborn series is pretty interesting (ingesting and 'burning' particular metals for particular abilities):
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistborn
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Sanderson
'Booktuber' Merphy Napier recently did two videos on magic systems in fantasy novels:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcMQk4ltJa0
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nd6f3tAOUHk
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistborn
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Sanderson
'Booktuber' Merphy Napier recently did two videos on magic systems in fantasy novels:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcMQk4ltJa0
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nd6f3tAOUHk
Brandon Sanderson*
Sanderson has lectures on a system of rules for magic in books to balance their coolness against deus ex machina: https://stormlightarchive.fandom.com/wiki/Sanderson%27s_Laws...
Sanderson has lectures on a system of rules for magic in books to balance their coolness against deus ex machina: https://stormlightarchive.fandom.com/wiki/Sanderson%27s_Laws...
That's not an excuse for sloppy writing though. Even a book about magic needs a level of consistency within its own universe and when the quality is above a certain level, I'm prepared to suspend disbelief and go along with the story and not nitpick.
It's also a children's book that evolved in a book for young adults. I always thought it was supposed to be whimsical and fun, not have serious complicated plots
It isn't really a true finale in the same way as those two examples, but I would throw out Infinity War and End Game as a joint example. The Marvel Cinematic Universe was able to successfully put a capstone on a cinematic project on the scale that had never even been attempted before. It was impressive enough to end a single story like Harry Potter in a satisfying way. The MCU was able to do the same for a wide variety of stories, dozens of characters, and over twenty movies.
Also it doesn't hurt the MCU's legacy that there is the obvious comparison with Game of Thrones that magnificently failed a very similar task the exact weekend that End Game came out.
Also it doesn't hurt the MCU's legacy that there is the obvious comparison with Game of Thrones that magnificently failed a very similar task the exact weekend that End Game came out.
It's really incredible just how well Endgame stuck the landing, but the whole MCU is impressive. Even the worst films of the MCU are still totally watchable, just forgettable. And comic movies are really easy to get wrong, that same decade of MCU movies overlapped with both Andrew Garfield Spiderman movies, and a smattering of forgettable or outright bad DC comics movies.
That Rise of Skywalker and the final season of Game of Thrones came out in the same year helps to contrast how much most things don't stick the landing.
That Rise of Skywalker and the final season of Game of Thrones came out in the same year helps to contrast how much most things don't stick the landing.
I really liked Infinity War and have re-watched it a couple of times.
I watched End Game in the theatre and have not seen it again since. I really didn't enjoy the whole "goofy time travel" aspect, and re-visiting all the prior movies/events.
I watched End Game in the theatre and have not seen it again since. I really didn't enjoy the whole "goofy time travel" aspect, and re-visiting all the prior movies/events.
> I really didn't enjoy the whole "goofy time travel" aspect, and re-visiting all the prior movies/events.
It is certainly more comic-booky than some of the other MCU movies and the acceptance of that will vary from person to person. It also isn't a completely unique concept. They basically stole it from Back To The Future 2 which was also a big hit.
It is certainly more comic-booky than some of the other MCU movies and the acceptance of that will vary from person to person. It also isn't a completely unique concept. They basically stole it from Back To The Future 2 which was also a big hit.
I'll call out Silicon Valley as having a great finale too. I still watch the final documentary every now and then. one of the greatest satires I will probably ever see.
True, silicon valley had a great finale but kinda rushed.
It probably felt rushed because of the rinse/repeat of all preceding seasons (group experiences success only to have it dissolve before their very eyes)
I would add Lord of The Rings, but it turns out that industrious old prof turned the whole trilogy out in one shot. It was his publisher who released it in stages. Interestingly he had a hard time convincing someone to print it at all:
> A dispute with his publisher, George Allen & Unwin, led to his offering the work to William Collins in 1950. Tolkien intended The Silmarillion (itself largely unrevised at this point) to be published along with The Lord of the Rings, but Allen & Unwin were unwilling to do this. After Milton Waldman, his contact at Collins, expressed the belief that The Lord of the Rings itself "urgently wanted cutting", Tolkien eventually demanded that they publish the book in 1952. Collins did not; and so Tolkien wrote to Allen and Unwin, saying, "I would gladly consider the publication of any part of the stuff", fearing his work would never see the light of day.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings#Receptio...
> A dispute with his publisher, George Allen & Unwin, led to his offering the work to William Collins in 1950. Tolkien intended The Silmarillion (itself largely unrevised at this point) to be published along with The Lord of the Rings, but Allen & Unwin were unwilling to do this. After Milton Waldman, his contact at Collins, expressed the belief that The Lord of the Rings itself "urgently wanted cutting", Tolkien eventually demanded that they publish the book in 1952. Collins did not; and so Tolkien wrote to Allen and Unwin, saying, "I would gladly consider the publication of any part of the stuff", fearing his work would never see the light of day.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings#Receptio...
Mr. Robot's entire final season. Especially the last half.
It really was incredible, especially after watching Game of Thrones and seeing how that ending turned out. Episode 8 of season 4 was briefly at the top of IMDb, and it was an amazing revelatory episode.
First half of the final season was great, but the writing in the last half felt rushed and at times cheap. It ended up being predictable, where the rest of the show was the complete opposite. They had the ability to write better, first half of that season and prior seasons proved this, but came off as if they were trying to wrap it up too quickly and finalize the loose ends :/
As I understand they intended to have 5 seasons but condensed it to 4.
I agree the last season felt rushed but overall I felt the whole course of the show was more cohesive than most series.
I agree the last season felt rushed but overall I felt the whole course of the show was more cohesive than most series.
I'm largely with you on HP. Most impressive was how JKR was able to keep Snape's loyal/evil question unresolved to the very end and still come up with a plausible explanation for it all. Rereading the whole series shows little hints along the way. It was deftly done.
It was a great time, having midnight release parties for a book!
It was a great time, having midnight release parties for a book!
> in general, what separates the best tv shows from great tv shows - is that they are able to have a good ending.
"Dexter" has made this painfully clear.
"Dexter" has made this painfully clear.
Ugh. I loved the premise of that show and the first two-ish seasons. There were a few more decent seasons in there, but I don't remember which ones. The final season was embarrassing, though.
Have you heard they've returned to do another season?
https://news.sky.com/story/dexter-one-of-tvs-best-known-seri...
https://news.sky.com/story/dexter-one-of-tvs-best-known-seri...
I have not. Wow. I don't even know what to think of this...
I thought that the Homeland series finale was in the same class. After a meandering few middle seasons, the last one was surprisingly satisfying.
well i gave up on homeland during the meandering middle seasons, i'll have to pick it back up now.
The Mandalorian Season 2 Last Episode: the best ending to a season finale ever! Totally lived up to the Hype!
Futurama also had a fantastic ending.
I agree. (Edit: to add to this, I've always thought that the third-last episode of Futurama, 'Murder on the Planet Express', was a return to form and reminiscent of the heyday of the show).
On the subject of tv shows, ‘Peep Show’, the British sitcom, also had a very strong final season and final episode.
On the subject of tv shows, ‘Peep Show’, the British sitcom, also had a very strong final season and final episode.
Yes, they tried to end the show a couple of times but the last-last episode is lovely.
Or four
Ozymandias it is, it wil live up to me for decades, such a good script.
> Breaking Bad last season
I actually thought BB went downhill and quit mid-way through the last season, but I understand I'm in the minority.
I actually thought BB went downhill and quit mid-way through the last season, but I understand I'm in the minority.
I'm with ya. While season 5 had some phenomenal individual scenes (like "tread lightly"), it didn't land with me as a whole in the way the earlier seasons did. The finale of season 4 is to me, with the haunting "I won" line, is the ultimate ending in my mind.
100% The first four seasons were great, with a ton of character development. The last season was incredibly rushed, and felt like they went from $0 to $millions overnight, and then introduced (annoying) characters and fell into quick traps. It was super frustrating to me.
[deleted]
Real tv fans have come to accept that the last season of The Wire and the last episode of Breaking Bad are pretty blah. We just shake our head and move on.
Surprised to see Harry Potter discussion on HN. I thought it is a book series for Kids and Teens. Do Adults (30+ age) find it interesting too?
2007 was thirteen years ago, Gordon. Have the Men in Black stolen time from you again?
Someone who was a teenager when it came out could easily be in their thirties now. So could someone who started in on the series when they were a kid, and kept up with it as they grew.
Someone who was a teenager when it came out could easily be in their thirties now. So could someone who started in on the series when they were a kid, and kept up with it as they grew.
I have learnt many lessons from Harry Potter and consider them real. The beautiful scene of Death and the Three Brothers [1][2] has so much to teach us.
[1]https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Death_(The_Tale_of_the_T...
[2]https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/The_Tale_of_the_Three_Br...
[1]https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Death_(The_Tale_of_the_T...
[2]https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/The_Tale_of_the_Three_Br...
Well. I was 10-12 when Harry Potter was released and it’s been 20 or so years...
You could make a case for The Mandalorian, although that didn't get as much hype due to the internets... dislike ...of the sequel trilogy.
Another one I can think of is Breath of The Wild, and probably Mario Odyssey. I've also heard good things about the FF7 remake, but haven't played it.
Another one I can think of is Breath of The Wild, and probably Mario Odyssey. I've also heard good things about the FF7 remake, but haven't played it.
The Mandalorian has restored the faith in the future of the franchise in millions of fans. Most of us thought Star Wars was over considering how mediocre the last six movies have been but along comes this well-written, fun adventure that manages to tie together the previous movies, animated series and books. Imagine a new trilogy made by Filoni and Favreau - they would absolutely kill it.
> Imagine a new trilogy made by Filoni and Favreau - they would absolutely kill it.
This is all I've been thinking throughout the series. The writing is damn good, the character development is on point, it's not forceful (no pun intended) or disingenuous in trending social themes, cinematography is amazing, great casting, it's immersive in keeping to canon. It's something you can point to and say, "That's Star Wars".
One could only wish those two get a shot at making the full lengths.
This is all I've been thinking throughout the series. The writing is damn good, the character development is on point, it's not forceful (no pun intended) or disingenuous in trending social themes, cinematography is amazing, great casting, it's immersive in keeping to canon. It's something you can point to and say, "That's Star Wars".
One could only wish those two get a shot at making the full lengths.
Disney through Fox now owns Firefly. I'd love to see Favreau reboot firefly. I think he could actually pull that off, or at least Something in that 'verse. Especially if he can get Whedon's blessing and some of the original cast members.
is it really well written?
“can you help me?”
“only if you complete this task that makes you look like a bad ass”
repeated 8 times
“can you help me?”
“only if you complete this task that makes you look like a bad ass”
repeated 8 times
Yeah, I have to believe this intentionally leaning in to the genre, but it's definitely just about every episode plot line (along with the rescue that comes just at the right moment).
The story is garbage, nothing happens. It's video game questing set in a cool universe. It's hard to feel for any of the characters. It's a bummer because the nailed vibe and visuals and all they'd really need to do is attach a more compelling story to it.
This is the take that Chapo Traphouse made on a recent episode. Though I agree that it is quest-y in its approach to each episode/sub plot and personally don't mind it, what makes it any different from the "hero story" structure?
Sure there's a formula, but few stories, if any at all, are original in their foundations. Their success seems to be more in the execution of such story/production and immersion of audiences.
Or is it more of an issue of the predictability in knowing what the "quest" objectives and items are, and from that extrapolating the outcome? Imo, both cases are understandable, as many times the main story quests can feel on rails/going through the motions, but again those quests seem to be more about the audience's immersion (including player playthrough/execution in games) in the modeled experience.
Tldr: I totally understand your point, and can agree to an extent. Though I believe one can find enjoyment in well curated/executed experiences/productions/writing/immersion, rather than seeking "originality" in story telling, as on rails/predictable as they can be
Sure there's a formula, but few stories, if any at all, are original in their foundations. Their success seems to be more in the execution of such story/production and immersion of audiences.
Or is it more of an issue of the predictability in knowing what the "quest" objectives and items are, and from that extrapolating the outcome? Imo, both cases are understandable, as many times the main story quests can feel on rails/going through the motions, but again those quests seem to be more about the audience's immersion (including player playthrough/execution in games) in the modeled experience.
Tldr: I totally understand your point, and can agree to an extent. Though I believe one can find enjoyment in well curated/executed experiences/productions/writing/immersion, rather than seeking "originality" in story telling, as on rails/predictable as they can be
I agree in that I wouldn't say it meets the standards of great writing. However, unlike the Sequel trilogy, it:
1) Thematically feels like Star Wars and ties into the established world, and
2) Meets the minimal standard for good writing/storytelling.
"I'll allow it."
1) Thematically feels like Star Wars and ties into the established world, and
2) Meets the minimal standard for good writing/storytelling.
"I'll allow it."
In the context of an action sci-fi western blend, that’s good writing to me, I enjoyed watching it.
Even though the formula is simple, the events didn’t feel predictable to me.
And I could easily imagine more complex plot that would be less satisfying to watch.
Even though the formula is simple, the events didn’t feel predictable to me.
And I could easily imagine more complex plot that would be less satisfying to watch.
Which books are you referring to? I don't feel like it draws particularly from the EU, though also no big contradictions like episodes 7-9.
If you include The Clone Wars as EU, it draws a lot from that. There's also a little bit from some of the novels.
https://www.thewrap.com/the-mandalorian-ahsoka-tano-star-war...
https://www.thewrap.com/the-mandalorian-ahsoka-tano-star-war...
Rogue 1 was also pretty good. It seems like the Star Wars jinx is that nobody can pull off extensions of the Skywalker story without getting hokey and weird. But the stories that explore other parts of the universe tend to be at least interesting and sometimes excellent.
Rogue 1 is my favorite star wars film overall.
Incredibly well executed and fantastic characters.
Disney dropped the ball on every single thing other than R1 and Mandalorian.
Incredibly well executed and fantastic characters.
Disney dropped the ball on every single thing other than R1 and Mandalorian.
Solo was not bad either, and honestly Revenge of the Sith is a great story too.
RoTS is my second favourite after rogue one. I am just of the age where the prequels were my jam when I was a kid and I love them still to this day.
1. Rogue One 2. Revenge of The Sith 3. Empire Strikes Back
1. Rogue One 2. Revenge of The Sith 3. Empire Strikes Back
Rogue 1 is great, how many mainstream movies kill off everyone at the end of the movie - brilliant!
I was watching The Mandalorian last night and thinking about what it would have been like to have a new Star Wars movie on broadcast TV each week as a kid back in the 80s.
I think most of my actual exposure was through toys and advertising. The movies were only on TV every couple of years. I remember listening to Star Wars on the radio
I think most of my actual exposure was through toys and advertising. The movies were only on TV every couple of years. I remember listening to Star Wars on the radio
> I've also heard good things about the FF7 remake, but haven't played it.
Playing it at the moment, and I'm nearly done with it. I think it's a great game. Its' beautiful, and has a nice mix of carrying forward old storylines and settings and mixing in new things. It also made a lot of characters more authentic to me than the original one - e.g. the turks felt more like real bad guys. Aerith character is great too.
What I'm not too sure about is whether it was the right decision to stretch the Midgar part of the story that much (I'm already at 45 hours in chapter 17). The original FF7 had a lot more places to offer, and climbing up a buildling or moving through sewers or tunnels for 2 hours isn't that exciting compared to that.
Playing it at the moment, and I'm nearly done with it. I think it's a great game. Its' beautiful, and has a nice mix of carrying forward old storylines and settings and mixing in new things. It also made a lot of characters more authentic to me than the original one - e.g. the turks felt more like real bad guys. Aerith character is great too.
What I'm not too sure about is whether it was the right decision to stretch the Midgar part of the story that much (I'm already at 45 hours in chapter 17). The original FF7 had a lot more places to offer, and climbing up a buildling or moving through sewers or tunnels for 2 hours isn't that exciting compared to that.
The WWW.
It was a huge bubble when it came out, and then the dot-com crash came and a lot of people were like "Oh, it was a fad, it's over now." But it wasn't. The Web ended up changing society far more than was predicted in 1995 and remaking both the economy and likely soon the political environment.
It was a huge bubble when it came out, and then the dot-com crash came and a lot of people were like "Oh, it was a fad, it's over now." But it wasn't. The Web ended up changing society far more than was predicted in 1995 and remaking both the economy and likely soon the political environment.
The fact that such a great proportion of human knowledge is now available to such a great proportion of human beings is enormous, and holds enormous ongoing potential. The fact that every nut-job on earth ("The earth is flat!") now (potentially) has a platform is a huge negative, and the fact that on-line discourse so often has a beyond-ugly tone is a big negative as well. If the hype is simply "This will have a huge impact", without regard to positive or negative, the WWW stands out well beyond LeBron James, the Iliad, or anything else I've heard mentioned so far (No offense meant to LeBron or Homer).
I don't know, I have mixed feelings on this - with all the captcha, cloudflare gatekeeping, amp link, Facebook "free basic" and so much tracking and ads, the internet seems to be on a downhill slope so much ...
In addition:
- sites don't make use of link options (news sites not linking sources etc.)
- more walled gardens
- apps replacing websites
- sites don't make use of link options (news sites not linking sources etc.)
- more walled gardens
- apps replacing websites
I think that's separate from whether it has lived up to the hype or not. It's pretty much changed everything, whether you think that's good or bad or imperfect.
I love this answer. You could say the same about Cloud computing. So much early hype and outlandish claims but it's kinda snuck into being a ubiquitous everyday thing we take for granted although in a different way from what the hype predicted. I wonder if the same will happen for 'blockchain' or 'VR' or other buzzy tech that look for a while like they won't live up to the hype (Looking at you IoT)
I was in highschool in the early 90s and wrote a paper in why the "Internet Superhighway" would change society, and got a number of things right (and of course did nothing with them and just watched it happen around me, sigh).
Got a C on the paper, mostly because the instructor found it too unrealistic and so not convincing. I misplaced it at some point, I really wish I still had a copy of it.
Got a C on the paper, mostly because the instructor found it too unrealistic and so not convincing. I misplaced it at some point, I really wish I still had a copy of it.
Vim: Although I use IDE for coding, Vim has been a good all-around editor for my past 8 years. I just hate working on editor without vim kb binding.
MacOSX: As a veteran developer on Windows (and Linux), I really liked how everything worked well in GUI. While I can't explain it all, everything looks and feels intuitive and easier to work with, even little things like the command key, its various keyboard shortcuts, and other UI/UX elements that are very subtle yet makes everything better as a whole.
Next thing on the list of hypes that I plan on trying: * Emacs (and Lisp) * 4k monitor * Docker
MacOSX: As a veteran developer on Windows (and Linux), I really liked how everything worked well in GUI. While I can't explain it all, everything looks and feels intuitive and easier to work with, even little things like the command key, its various keyboard shortcuts, and other UI/UX elements that are very subtle yet makes everything better as a whole.
Next thing on the list of hypes that I plan on trying: * Emacs (and Lisp) * 4k monitor * Docker
+1 to vim, but no word of a lie, +2 to kakoune. This editor is literally the best possible right now. I'm still waiting for someone to write the paper proving editing with ranges is superior.
A very interesting editor, but...no folding and no concealing. Once it gets those it will be worth a serious look.
I have to disagree that macOS has a good GUI. I have used Ubuntu with KDE Plasma (Ubuntu) extensively in the past, but when I started a new job a year ago I was supplied a 2019 MBP. This year has been my first Mac experience.
I find a lot of things annoying. I'm mostly used to it now and don't mind the day to day experience, but it was jarring and I know it's not ideal.
* If I want to maximize a window, I have to hover over the green button and then select 'Zoom' from the drop down menu. So it takes multiple seconds to maximize. (I have noticed for a long time throughout university and employment that it is common style for Mac users to have many windows floating around, and to never maximize.)
* If you decide to use 'Full Screen' / 'tiling', notifications don't work while you are in full screen mode. Maybe there is a way to change this or maybe some people find this desirable.
* Because of how long the green button hovering takes, I tried to setup keyboard shortcuts for maximizing windows and also for "Move Window to Left Side of Screen" and move to the right. The shortcuts randomly don't work for me, so I no longer use them.
* If I drag a window to the left edge of the screen, it doesn't snap to take up the left half of my screen. Again, have to do the annoying green hover.
This is all in contrast to KDE where it was simple to snap windows onto sides of the screen, or into corners, or to maximize windows. It never failed. Continuing...
* On KDE I could setup a separate 'task bar' for each monitor with those boxes/buttons that show up on the bottom of your screen for each window you have open on that monitor. So I can switch between windows independently on each monitor. On MacOS you can only have one dock. When you click a dock icon, it brings the window to the front on each display, possibly blocking something you had in the front on a display.
* When you have multiple displays on MacOS, moving your mouse around in the bottom area of the screen can move the dock to that display. This is easy to accidentally trigger, and sometimes it's hard to do this 'mouse wiggle' on the other display to put it back. That is, I have spent 10+ seconds wiggling my mouse in different ways to put my dock back on the display I want it on.
* Oh, back to full screen mode. If you are in full screen mode and you try to do something toward the top of the window, the macOS menu bar drops down and blocks you, and you have to wait for it to go away and then carefully go for the button you were aiming for. (Imagine flinging your mouse up to the address bar of your browser and then being blocked by the menu bar for multiple seconds each time.)
By the way, about your list... Emacs is good and works great on the Mac. Mapping the Caps Lock key to be Ctrl (in the system settings, not just for Emacs) and using sticky keys has completely mitigated any 'accessibility' concerns / sore pinky for me.
Lisps I like a lot too. I did the first few chapters of SICP quite a while ago, which gave me a great feel for recursion and probably some other things. I like Clojure a lot and learnt it super quickly by reading this book free online. The Emacs setup works pretty good. https://www.braveclojure.com/clojure-for-the-brave-and-true/
The MBP display was my first high-res / high-dpi. It looks great. Then I tried plugging my mac into multiple different 1080 monitors I wanted to use with it. Looked absolutely terrible. I thought it was broken. Couldn't find any fix online. Now I do notice how much worse (than retina) 1080 looks on Windows and Linux, but I'm pretty sure on Mac it is much much worse for some reason. I bought a 24" 4k monitor from LG for $300 bucks, and it looks about identical to my MBP display. I'm very happy with it. The smaller screen size helps keep high DPI, so I definitely don't see any pixels. Happy Holidays!
I find a lot of things annoying. I'm mostly used to it now and don't mind the day to day experience, but it was jarring and I know it's not ideal.
* If I want to maximize a window, I have to hover over the green button and then select 'Zoom' from the drop down menu. So it takes multiple seconds to maximize. (I have noticed for a long time throughout university and employment that it is common style for Mac users to have many windows floating around, and to never maximize.)
* If you decide to use 'Full Screen' / 'tiling', notifications don't work while you are in full screen mode. Maybe there is a way to change this or maybe some people find this desirable.
* Because of how long the green button hovering takes, I tried to setup keyboard shortcuts for maximizing windows and also for "Move Window to Left Side of Screen" and move to the right. The shortcuts randomly don't work for me, so I no longer use them.
* If I drag a window to the left edge of the screen, it doesn't snap to take up the left half of my screen. Again, have to do the annoying green hover.
This is all in contrast to KDE where it was simple to snap windows onto sides of the screen, or into corners, or to maximize windows. It never failed. Continuing...
* On KDE I could setup a separate 'task bar' for each monitor with those boxes/buttons that show up on the bottom of your screen for each window you have open on that monitor. So I can switch between windows independently on each monitor. On MacOS you can only have one dock. When you click a dock icon, it brings the window to the front on each display, possibly blocking something you had in the front on a display.
* When you have multiple displays on MacOS, moving your mouse around in the bottom area of the screen can move the dock to that display. This is easy to accidentally trigger, and sometimes it's hard to do this 'mouse wiggle' on the other display to put it back. That is, I have spent 10+ seconds wiggling my mouse in different ways to put my dock back on the display I want it on.
* Oh, back to full screen mode. If you are in full screen mode and you try to do something toward the top of the window, the macOS menu bar drops down and blocks you, and you have to wait for it to go away and then carefully go for the button you were aiming for. (Imagine flinging your mouse up to the address bar of your browser and then being blocked by the menu bar for multiple seconds each time.)
By the way, about your list... Emacs is good and works great on the Mac. Mapping the Caps Lock key to be Ctrl (in the system settings, not just for Emacs) and using sticky keys has completely mitigated any 'accessibility' concerns / sore pinky for me.
Lisps I like a lot too. I did the first few chapters of SICP quite a while ago, which gave me a great feel for recursion and probably some other things. I like Clojure a lot and learnt it super quickly by reading this book free online. The Emacs setup works pretty good. https://www.braveclojure.com/clojure-for-the-brave-and-true/
The MBP display was my first high-res / high-dpi. It looks great. Then I tried plugging my mac into multiple different 1080 monitors I wanted to use with it. Looked absolutely terrible. I thought it was broken. Couldn't find any fix online. Now I do notice how much worse (than retina) 1080 looks on Windows and Linux, but I'm pretty sure on Mac it is much much worse for some reason. I bought a 24" 4k monitor from LG for $300 bucks, and it looks about identical to my MBP display. I'm very happy with it. The smaller screen size helps keep high DPI, so I definitely don't see any pixels. Happy Holidays!
Fully agree that MacOS is not great. It relies too much on hidden knowledge. It claims to be intuitive, but IMO the discoverability of things is just broken. I don't stumble on a nice way to do something I have to google how do I fix this annoying thing.
It may be fine for people who literally have used macs their entire lives, but as a windows and linux user before using a mac, it is super frustrating at times.
It may be fine for people who literally have used macs their entire lives, but as a windows and linux user before using a mac, it is super frustrating at times.
> I have to disagree that macOS has a good GUI.
MacOS has a predictable UI. However, Apple products have the LEAST customizable UIs of any system I've used (probably predictable = 1/customizable)
MacOS has a predictable UI. However, Apple products have the LEAST customizable UIs of any system I've used (probably predictable = 1/customizable)
Sounds like you really need an app called Magnet ($2 on the App Store). It completely solved the snapping/window maximization problem for me. I think it should ship as part of the OS.
1. Okami.
I've always been slightly frustrated by video games. Here we have the opportunity to create truly fantastical worlds with the only limits being what we can imagine and so much effort goes in to creating WW2 shooters or football games or whatever. When the first trailer was revealed for Okami at e3 in 2005, wow. That fake celestial language starts up, showing flowers blooming in the path of the sun god as she runs and then, at the press of a button, the whole screen turns into parchment and you paint on it with a celestial brush to instantiate your nature god powers. I almost cried. I tried not to get my hopes up too much because I thought there was no way for it to live up to my imagination. And then it did. Easily the greatest video game experience I have ever had. Windwaker and Hollowknight are close seconds.
2. Worm. Heavily hyped in my friend circles, I waited for it to finish. Not without its flaws but holy hell, ruined a lot of traditional fiction for me with its length, depth, and quality of ending.
3. As an adult reading the books that childhood movies were based on: The Princess Bride and The Neverending story were both incredibly satisfying books.
4. Therevada Buddhism. Many things in life focus on individual insights. Only a few focus on strengthening the machinery that generates insights. I write about it here: http://neuroticgradientdescent.blogspot.com/2020/01/mistrans...
2. Worm. Heavily hyped in my friend circles, I waited for it to finish. Not without its flaws but holy hell, ruined a lot of traditional fiction for me with its length, depth, and quality of ending.
3. As an adult reading the books that childhood movies were based on: The Princess Bride and The Neverending story were both incredibly satisfying books.
4. Therevada Buddhism. Many things in life focus on individual insights. Only a few focus on strengthening the machinery that generates insights. I write about it here: http://neuroticgradientdescent.blogspot.com/2020/01/mistrans...
2. Is this what you mean? https://parahumans.wordpress.com/
That's the only Worm I'm aware of that could fit the bill. I second the recommendation; there's nothing quite like Worm (though if you enjoy Worm, the author has written several other serial works since then and afaik intends to continue indefinitely).
The Beatles. They were the definition of hype during their boy-band years in the early 60s, but pivoted mid-decade to a more experimental sound and more accomplished musicianship that remains unique, relevant, and impressive a half-century later.
I can't think of a modern equivalent. I guess it would be like if BTS somehow transformed into The Decemberists.
I can't think of a modern equivalent. I guess it would be like if BTS somehow transformed into The Decemberists.
To me, The Beatles are truly the Mozarts of pop music. At once accessible (remember that Mozart was a 'pop' artist of his day) and yet brilliant and layered and effortless in a way that will be remembered just as long as Mozart.
Even though their early work sounded like everyone else at the time, it was brilliant. It wasn't just hype.
The Impossible burger is pretty good. I was skeptical. They did a good job creating non animal meat.
I tried the impossible whopper expecting to like it, but also expecting that I could easily distinguish it from beef. It turned out it was the opposite. It did taste like beef to me, but but it reminded me of a bad cafeteria burger made with inferior ground beef that was overworked.
I can certainly tell the difference but I too was surprised with how close flavor and texture is to a real patty.
Feel free to point me in the right direction if I’m missing a nuance here, but the impossible burger as it appears as a Burger King Whopper alternative is the worst “burger” I’ve ever eaten. I couldn’t even finish it. I like vegetarian patties and I like a good beef burger. The whopper variant had a strange rubbery smell and mouth feel.
I haven’t tried a national chain’s version. I have tried Honeybee in Los Angeles. I thought it was better than Beyond Meat patty but I do still like pure veggie patties too. https://honeybeeburger.com/
Try to find any local non-chain burger place that has it. It takes a little bit of skill from the cook to get it right from what I understand. I tend to agree it won’t replace your wagyu medium patties for sure but if you want just a general pretty good patty it’s impressive
I've recently tried the Beyond Meat patties from CostCo. They taste great. I could tell it wasn't beef but it tasted good enough that I didn't care.
I'm gonna go back a short bit and say, for me? Ruby on Rails.
In 2007 I was plugging away at PHP with whatever frameworks were around at the time -- the vast majority of web dev that I saw then was pure procedural scripting down the page, maybe some `include` statements to pull in database functions. Especially in PHP, which encouraged mixing logic and HTML. The consultancy I was with had built custom stuff on top of Zend framework, and it helped a lot.
But around summer of 2007 is when I started hearing folks crow about Ruby on Rails, this hot new web framework written by a Dane in a Japanese programming language. It had been out for a few years and it was the hot topic in web dev circles, and so I decided to see what the fuss was about one weekend.
Instantly stuff I'd always had to do by hand was done for me. A decent data access layer with a few lines of code per db table, that automatically handled preparing and executing statements, and could handle keeping the database up to date with migrations. A REPL where I could load up the code I'd written for the app and use it for one-off debugging or maintenance tasks. A thriving plugin scene where many of the things I'd bashed together over the years were available, for free, just by cloning a repo.
That weekend I reimplemented the core functionality of one of the apps we'd been working on for a client. We'd taken about 10 weeks to get this thing into rough shape and I had its equivalent in two not-very-busy days. Authentication, authorization, CRUD, and fancy database queries I'd all had to hand-roll before just fell out of Rails.
I'm not overselling it when I say that for me, Rails was an absolute game-changer, and I myself and many folks I know owe their careers to the Ruby community and its (not always perfect) attitudes about software development. MINASWAN.
(I'm still active in Rails and the local Ruby community [Columbus Ruby Brigade!] but I'm running an Elixir/Phoenix shop now, which feels to me like the next step on the path Rails forged us.)
In 2007 I was plugging away at PHP with whatever frameworks were around at the time -- the vast majority of web dev that I saw then was pure procedural scripting down the page, maybe some `include` statements to pull in database functions. Especially in PHP, which encouraged mixing logic and HTML. The consultancy I was with had built custom stuff on top of Zend framework, and it helped a lot.
But around summer of 2007 is when I started hearing folks crow about Ruby on Rails, this hot new web framework written by a Dane in a Japanese programming language. It had been out for a few years and it was the hot topic in web dev circles, and so I decided to see what the fuss was about one weekend.
Instantly stuff I'd always had to do by hand was done for me. A decent data access layer with a few lines of code per db table, that automatically handled preparing and executing statements, and could handle keeping the database up to date with migrations. A REPL where I could load up the code I'd written for the app and use it for one-off debugging or maintenance tasks. A thriving plugin scene where many of the things I'd bashed together over the years were available, for free, just by cloning a repo.
That weekend I reimplemented the core functionality of one of the apps we'd been working on for a client. We'd taken about 10 weeks to get this thing into rough shape and I had its equivalent in two not-very-busy days. Authentication, authorization, CRUD, and fancy database queries I'd all had to hand-roll before just fell out of Rails.
I'm not overselling it when I say that for me, Rails was an absolute game-changer, and I myself and many folks I know owe their careers to the Ruby community and its (not always perfect) attitudes about software development. MINASWAN.
(I'm still active in Rails and the local Ruby community [Columbus Ruby Brigade!] but I'm running an Elixir/Phoenix shop now, which feels to me like the next step on the path Rails forged us.)
Cannot agree more.
The convention over configuration was brilliant - the implicit mappings made so much more sense. I could look at any given url and imply so much about what route/controller/view code was going to execute. The standardized code organization. ActiveRecord using the column names as data attributes.
Was CoverMyMeds written in Rails?
The convention over configuration was brilliant - the implicit mappings made so much more sense. I could look at any given url and imply so much about what route/controller/view code was going to execute. The standardized code organization. ActiveRecord using the column names as data attributes.
Was CoverMyMeds written in Rails?
Ironically this is exactly what I don't like so much about Rails. It's such a "batteries included" framework that if you want to do what Rails is good for, it's going to be super easy, but if you want to do something a little bit different a lot of times it feels like you have to almost break Rails to make it work.
To some degree I think it's a matter of taste, but I would much rather start from a blank slate, with a set of sensible tools to build my solution up from scratch, rather than having an almost finished product I have to carve my solution out of.
To some degree I think it's a matter of taste, but I would much rather start from a blank slate, with a set of sensible tools to build my solution up from scratch, rather than having an almost finished product I have to carve my solution out of.
> that if you want to do what Rails is good for, it's going to be super easy, but if you want to do something a little bit different a lot of times it feels like you have to almost break Rails to make it work.
I feel like this is implicit in the name: these are the guide rails, stay on them and you will deliver more value in less time than you ever have before. If you need to do anything where you have to leave them, you have deRailed the whole thing.
The train metaphor is actually a pretty good one.
I feel like this is implicit in the name: these are the guide rails, stay on them and you will deliver more value in less time than you ever have before. If you need to do anything where you have to leave them, you have deRailed the whole thing.
The train metaphor is actually a pretty good one.
> you will deliver more value in less time than you ever have before
I think this is arguable. It's also not that hard, for instance, to get a bare-bones node API up and running and pair it with a React single-page app. And that approach is more modular so you can replace components in the future in a way which is harder than with rails.
I think this is arguable. It's also not that hard, for instance, to get a bare-bones node API up and running and pair it with a React single-page app. And that approach is more modular so you can replace components in the future in a way which is harder than with rails.
This gets a hard disagree from me. I _really tried_ to give the whole node + react approach a go because, to me, GraphQL & all the things you can generate with it is _magical_ (especially fine-grained authz with app-specific graphql directives - beautiful!). Singularly, the availability of xstate to replicate business processes identically between api & ui. So useful! So undervalued!
Then I ran into finding myself spending time on background jobs, authentication management (not the basic functionality but tinkering & modification past password reset / session management, blacklist/expiry if jwt's, etc), file upload integrations, db management (when not utilizing prisma or hasura), etc. High variety of effort spent on tasks where I found myself asking the question, "why am I having to work on this...?"
I still ship more in Rails. It's still a better tool for most things. There are cases where I'll reach to node when needs are simple and short-lived. Other tools have the potential to exceed Rails (and I hope they do), but they're not there yet.
One of my least favorite things about Rails, & one of the best ideas to emerge in the past decade or so, is react. The componentization of views driven by state is such a useful approach. Rails has historically had a has & belong to many relationship between controller contexts and views, which is essentially global and easy to get super confusing. React (and now browser-react aka web components) provide a better way of tackling this problem.
And... they hook up directly to my cache? They provide a great way of broadcasting dom updates directly? They interoperate with web components no problem where I need high fidelity interaction/performance? etc etc. Rails... has done it again.
No getting away from how useful it is.
Then I ran into finding myself spending time on background jobs, authentication management (not the basic functionality but tinkering & modification past password reset / session management, blacklist/expiry if jwt's, etc), file upload integrations, db management (when not utilizing prisma or hasura), etc. High variety of effort spent on tasks where I found myself asking the question, "why am I having to work on this...?"
I still ship more in Rails. It's still a better tool for most things. There are cases where I'll reach to node when needs are simple and short-lived. Other tools have the potential to exceed Rails (and I hope they do), but they're not there yet.
One of my least favorite things about Rails, & one of the best ideas to emerge in the past decade or so, is react. The componentization of views driven by state is such a useful approach. Rails has historically had a has & belong to many relationship between controller contexts and views, which is essentially global and easy to get super confusing. React (and now browser-react aka web components) provide a better way of tackling this problem.
And... they hook up directly to my cache? They provide a great way of broadcasting dom updates directly? They interoperate with web components no problem where I need high fidelity interaction/performance? etc etc. Rails... has done it again.
No getting away from how useful it is.
For most of the professional work I've done, I'm doing a CRUD web app. So if Rails or Phoenix lets me get to market faster with a tested solution, I'm sold. I've even got a talk I used to give about getting Rails to work with a legacy database, which has gotten much easier from the early days.
Now that I'm hiring devs, I do not want to pay them to build a CRUD framework from scratch, I'd rather have them building business logic we can't get off the shelf for free.
But whatever ends up working for you is cool!
Now that I'm hiring devs, I do not want to pay them to build a CRUD framework from scratch, I'd rather have them building business logic we can't get off the shelf for free.
But whatever ends up working for you is cool!
It’s hard to know what cases you’re discussing without specifics?
A majority of online information based systems take input via forms and retrieve data from a database based on that input.
This is where Rails is the GOAT.
A majority of online information based systems take input via forms and retrieve data from a database based on that input.
This is where Rails is the GOAT.
The initial application that powered CoverMyMeds was PHP, as it grew out of the consultancy I mentioned in my original post and we were a PHP shop then. AFAIK it still exists and is actively maintained.
Most other apps and services at CMM were written in Rails after we showed that we could ship better software faster with it, and it now accounts for the vast majority of code there.
Most other apps and services at CMM were written in Rails after we showed that we could ship better software faster with it, and it now accounts for the vast majority of code there.
I haven’t used RnR but I assume its similar to Python/Django in taking people who know how to program in any language and turning them in to full stack web developers.
Its a funky learning curve where all team members are effective and few need to have extensive experience with the framework.
Its a funky learning curve where all team members are effective and few need to have extensive experience with the framework.
I've used Django, and while there's a base similarity the philosophical differences between it and Rails are definitely there.
Not gonna take a side on the Rails vs Django deal though. Like you said, if a team can effectively ship software with it that's the only measure that counts.
Not gonna take a side on the Rails vs Django deal though. Like you said, if a team can effectively ship software with it that's the only measure that counts.
I’m curious what your take is on the JAMStack+lambdas style of app development.
I am working on a new web app. Initially, Elixir/Phoenix was looking like an excellent option, but then I looked at hosting and decided it would be easier to use something like the Serverless framework for AWS deployment which JAMstack+lambdas seems to match better — no need to manage VMs and networking infrastructure, mostly.
I am working on a new web app. Initially, Elixir/Phoenix was looking like an excellent option, but then I looked at hosting and decided it would be easier to use something like the Serverless framework for AWS deployment which JAMstack+lambdas seems to match better — no need to manage VMs and networking infrastructure, mostly.
JAMstack is...not my jam.
I'm a big fan of rendering majority on a server and then shipping it, especially with Phoenix's LiveView which allows you to write reactive UI without writing Javascript.
But I said it in another comment: shipping value beats everything. If you can ship quickly and effectively in JAMstack to lambda, don't let anyone tell you that's wrong.
I'm a big fan of rendering majority on a server and then shipping it, especially with Phoenix's LiveView which allows you to write reactive UI without writing Javascript.
But I said it in another comment: shipping value beats everything. If you can ship quickly and effectively in JAMstack to lambda, don't let anyone tell you that's wrong.
Shipping value is important. If you can build a solution faster in a monolithic, MVC style framework running on EC2 instances, then do that. I think people get too bogged down in the minutiae up front and forget they are being paid to solve a problem ASAP. Worry about optimisations and improvements when its going to add more value than right up front when the burning need of the business is to have something - ANYTHING - up and running and helping generate revenue.
I have been building JAMstack apps since 2016 using exactly the stack you are asking about. Using something like the Serverless Framework to help you build and deploy your collection of microservice backends into AWS as well as your static frontend into S3 is just awesome to behold. I have had an app running for 3 years with spikes of traffic and have never had to worry about maintenance or downtime.
As a Perl programmer I didn’t get the hype of Ruby. Then I wrote my dissertation on it. I still didn’t get it. Python is fine and I see it’s strengths and weaknesses but Ruby is just hipster Perl and doesn’t have Moose. Don’t, as they say on Twitter, “at” me.
I think you’re making the classic mistake of confusing Ruby with Rails.
Which is an oddly pervasive mistake! I had a coworker once assume since I knew Ruby the language, that I'd be completely comfortable with Ruby on Rails' Active Record system.
Absolutely. I learned Ruby at the same time as Rails, and then when I started using Ruby by itself I saw how much heavy lifting ActiveSupport had been doing for me.
Rails seems to land best with those having an Intimate and Arcane Knowledge of the Ye Old Webbe and Its Attendant Developmente.
GP is talking about Rails.
Earlier this year I played around with Phoenix for a bit. As a JS dev learning about all this all at once it looks like such a great dev env.
One thing that still felt rough around the edges was the tie in with npm packages. Has that part been improving?
One thing that still felt rough around the edges was the tie in with npm packages. Has that part been improving?
AFAIK Phoenix doesn't tie in with npm packages whatsoever.
You have an `assets/` dir that contains your javascript stuff, and out of the box Webpack is set up there, but besides that it's all your choice, with the exception of the pre-shipped stuff for Channels and LiveView.
You have an `assets/` dir that contains your javascript stuff, and out of the box Webpack is set up there, but besides that it's all your choice, with the exception of the pre-shipped stuff for Channels and LiveView.
It’s not supposed to tie in with NPM packages. Phoenix handles the back end, and can handle the HTML as well. If you want to include any front end JS stuff, just include the scripts or bundles like you would a regular site where you include JS stuff.
Can i do Ruby in rails without having to learn Ruby? I like Python, I think.
Oh definitely. I picked up Rails without doing a single line of Ruby beforehand, and I think that's true for many of the Rails devs I know. Knowing Python is a plus, much of the language is gonna make basic sense.
For me, the big hurdles early were Blocks, which seem strange at first but make sense, and some of the metaprogramming stuff which you can definitely ignore to start and be just fine.
For me, the big hurdles early were Blocks, which seem strange at first but make sense, and some of the metaprogramming stuff which you can definitely ignore to start and be just fine.
This was what I did when I was playing with Rails, but I felt like I was missing a lot about the fundamentals of the language. Especially because Ruby has a very free syntax, and steps far away from other languages in terms of syntax, I was able to copy things and make it work, but it was harder for me to really get the language than with many others.
Oh definitely, but for me I was never gonna be able to learn Ruby in a vacuum. If I had needed a general-purpose scripting language in 2007 I'd have reached for PHP or Perl, both of which I knew from web dev.
But with Rails I had a reason to pick up Ruby in the first place. So I didn't know a damn thing about metaprogramming or duck-typing going in, but I knew Rails was lightning and I wanted to capture it.
But with Rails I had a reason to pick up Ruby in the first place. So I didn't know a damn thing about metaprogramming or duck-typing going in, but I knew Rails was lightning and I wanted to capture it.
Actually, yes. Contrary to received wisdom, most Rails devs learn Rails before or as they learn Ruby.
Short answer, yes.
Serenity.
I wasn't part of the 'original run' of Firefly fan base, but when I read the story I get the filling that it lived and surpassed the hype by a wide margin.
The series is excellent, and this is the only example I can think of (at the moment) of a movie based on, or continuing, a good TV series that was actually worthy of its inspiration. Chiwetel Ejiofor almost steals the show, he is so good.
How about Radiohead's 2007 album In Rainbows?
Maybe OK Computer too, but I don't know how much hype there were because I was too young then...
Maybe OK Computer too, but I don't know how much hype there were because I was too young then...
Wasn't In Rainbows famously released as a surprise and thus had no real hype built up to it?
I was a particularly anxsty teenager at the time, but I do remember there being plenty of hype and speculation about "LP7" in Radiohead fan circles before In Rainbows finally arrived.
If I recall it was initially a self released pay how much you want download.
I believe this was a 'first' and there was more hype about that than the album itself.
In Rainbows is my favorite Radiohead album for sure, closely followed by the Bends.
I believe this was a 'first' and there was more hype about that than the album itself.
In Rainbows is my favorite Radiohead album for sure, closely followed by the Bends.
I do remember the "name your price" thing, but it seems I've completely forgotten it was unannounced release!
Therefore, there was virtually no hype...
Therefore, there was virtually no hype...
Ehhh, Radiohead is very divisive. My music friends are very split with them. Half can't get off their knees praising them.
The other half see them as bandwagon music.
I think they're music is alright but I think most people dive into like it's the bible or something and you can't say anything bad about them.
The other half see them as bandwagon music.
I think they're music is alright but I think most people dive into like it's the bible or something and you can't say anything bad about them.
>Half can't get off their knees praising them.
The other half see them as bandwagon music.
They are both right. OK Computer and Kid A deserve all their praise and more. They were like nothing else in popular music at the time. After those two records, they were rather bandwagonesque, although to their credit, they did create the bandwagon they have ridden on since then. Although the self-release they did for In Rainbows certainly changed the artist relationship with fans and media companies. How they released that album was far more the game changer than the content.
The other half see them as bandwagon music.
They are both right. OK Computer and Kid A deserve all their praise and more. They were like nothing else in popular music at the time. After those two records, they were rather bandwagonesque, although to their credit, they did create the bandwagon they have ridden on since then. Although the self-release they did for In Rainbows certainly changed the artist relationship with fans and media companies. How they released that album was far more the game changer than the content.
Regarding OK Computer, not so much hype as I recall but after The Bends they were certainly a group to pay attention to.
I don't think anyone was expecting anything as exceptional as OK Computer from them. What lived up to all the hype was the follow up, Kid A.
I try not to hype up albums I love too much anymore.
I think of Radiohead as our late stage Beatles. Experimental and exciting, even if there's a jagged edge now and then.
In Rainbows was very accessible and holds up in my view.
OK Computer was more of a surprise. Listen to The Bends first, and you will hear what a break it was in quality and style. Their next release, Kid A, was the one that was hotly anticipated. It was also a huge departure, but when they were the biggest band in the world.
Kid A holds up too.
I think Radiohead lives up to the hype. One way to check on this is to watch them live (say, on YouTube) or pick up some of their concerts on etree (a free taper sharing site). They make headphone records, and then they replicate most of their sounds in real time.
I think of Radiohead as our late stage Beatles. Experimental and exciting, even if there's a jagged edge now and then.
In Rainbows was very accessible and holds up in my view.
OK Computer was more of a surprise. Listen to The Bends first, and you will hear what a break it was in quality and style. Their next release, Kid A, was the one that was hotly anticipated. It was also a huge departure, but when they were the biggest band in the world.
Kid A holds up too.
I think Radiohead lives up to the hype. One way to check on this is to watch them live (say, on YouTube) or pick up some of their concerts on etree (a free taper sharing site). They make headphone records, and then they replicate most of their sounds in real time.
this one is interesting because they basically invented the “pay what you want” box for selling digital media.
tons of people copy this now, it’s not even notable. but at the time, the idea that they would let you type in $0 was shocking.
tons of people copy this now, it’s not even notable. but at the time, the idea that they would let you type in $0 was shocking.
Jolt Cola, but not New Coke.
Haskell typeclasses. They really are interfaces that don’t leak.
Solid state disks. Huge speed boost.
Solid state disks. Huge speed boost.
I came here to says SSD. There's never been as big a performance upgrade you could make.
This made me think back to HDD days. As much as they sucked I kind of miss the HDD grunt - I could hear when stuff was using my disk, it was kind of reassuring that the PC was working. Sort of like that floppy drive boot check sound. That HDD seek rumble and CD spin when you were installing games. Objectively these things are a negative but I kind of miss it. This also made me realize where car fans complaining about the electric car feel are coming from :)
I remember the first time I used a computer with an SSD. Many of the performance issues I naively blamed on the CPU or lack of memory were really the HDD. I just never had anything better to compare it to.
I recently moved from a M.2 750MB/s SSD to an M.2 NVME one that does about 3,750MB/s.
That was an amazing boost that I'm so very glad to have purchased. Ironically enough, it was to have enough space to install Cyberpunk 2077 :)
That was an amazing boost that I'm so very glad to have purchased. Ironically enough, it was to have enough space to install Cyberpunk 2077 :)
Instead of making my own top level comment I'll just add onto this one: functional programming in general and Elm in particular. A lot of languages and frameworks promise to make programming fun, Elm is the only one that's held up for more than a few weeks. Months later I'm still doing substantial side projects in it and get a rush just from opening up a new .elm file and starting a new set of types and pure functions.
Funny you should mention type classes-- that's one of the biggest things that Elm, the little brother to Haskell in many ways, doesn't support (and doesn't intend to, for reasons of limiting the footguns available to devs and also keeping to the high standard it sets for itself for error messages IIRC...)
Funny you should mention type classes-- that's one of the biggest things that Elm, the little brother to Haskell in many ways, doesn't support (and doesn't intend to, for reasons of limiting the footguns available to devs and also keeping to the high standard it sets for itself for error messages IIRC...)
I would agree with "Haskell", and typeclasses are probably are the most important feature, if such a thing could exist. However, was there a lot of hype for typeclasses when they came out in the 90s? It seems like outside the pure functional programming domain, typeclasses have not yet reached their zenith!
Interesting, i've haven't seen hype for Haskell type classes, is there anywhere I can see the hype for this on the internet?
Uh, not typeclasses specifically, but Haskell gets a bit of hype. Typeclasses deliver so much, I think they alone make the pain of learning worth it.
To elaborate a bit, I came from a perl, java background. I'm aware of clos protocols, I've fiddled with squeak and the "here's a test case, give me all the functions that pass the test". Different languages have different strengths.
But golly, Haskell has (had) a lot of hype. Monads, lazy evaluation, random lens stuff is fine and all, but type classes are unreal. you get to specify up front what capabilities you want to buy into.
I guess, just try implementing Num of Float as the first derivative. It's pretty magical how much power the compiler provides. And you _know_ it's doing what you think it's doing.
Haskell opens up a bunch of rabbit holes. but really getting a good grasp on interfaces that don't leak is, well from my background, really really mind expanding. There's a large difference between being real smart and having the compiler enforce assumptions. I dunno. I think the Haskell hype lives up to the claims from type classes alone.
But golly, Haskell has (had) a lot of hype. Monads, lazy evaluation, random lens stuff is fine and all, but type classes are unreal. you get to specify up front what capabilities you want to buy into.
I guess, just try implementing Num of Float as the first derivative. It's pretty magical how much power the compiler provides. And you _know_ it's doing what you think it's doing.
Haskell opens up a bunch of rabbit holes. but really getting a good grasp on interfaces that don't leak is, well from my background, really really mind expanding. There's a large difference between being real smart and having the compiler enforce assumptions. I dunno. I think the Haskell hype lives up to the claims from type classes alone.
F# feature request forum :)
> Solid state disks. Huge speed boost.
You should have seen the leap from tapes to magnetic disks :)
You should have seen the leap from tapes to magnetic disks :)
The Internet becoming mass market. In the early to mid 90s there was a lot of very recognisable hype about online shopping, TV streaming, use of it for phone/video calls etc. And a lot of skeptics too.
E-Commerce absolutely lived up to the hype.
World of Warcraft.
Blizzard mentioned development of a MMORG in the late 1990's and started teasing in the early 2000's, and really ramped it up prior to launch.
And when it landed, holy hell: it devastated worker's and student's sleep schedules for years.
Plus it lived up to the hype: the world was huge and immersive, and they had tuned raiding & PvP based on the experience with co-operative Battle.net.
Blizzard mentioned development of a MMORG in the late 1990's and started teasing in the early 2000's, and really ramped it up prior to launch.
And when it landed, holy hell: it devastated worker's and student's sleep schedules for years.
Plus it lived up to the hype: the world was huge and immersive, and they had tuned raiding & PvP based on the experience with co-operative Battle.net.
Still could never get into WoW after enjoying Everquest for so many years. Such an amazing game if you had the time to sink into it.
I think there’s really only one or two MMOs you can really get into in your life. After that it’ll be very hard to feel the magic again.
I played a small one Ashen Empires because it had an amazing local community. Then WOW because it was so well made, everyone was playing it and I loved blizzard. After a few years of both, any MMO hasn’t been able to keep me interested for more than a few days.
I played a small one Ashen Empires because it had an amazing local community. Then WOW because it was so well made, everyone was playing it and I loved blizzard. After a few years of both, any MMO hasn’t been able to keep me interested for more than a few days.
I recall that sentiment. I think those of us who avoided MMORPGs (either because of poor internet, or general fear of playing with other people << me) we weren't corrupted. I also recall a devoted following to UO also complaining about lack of domain-building in WoW.
Everquest is still around. They've got a free play option which is great if you want to indulge in nostalgia.
The main limits on free play are you can't have as many different characters, and you don't get some of the newer features or you get limited versions of them.
If you can remember your old account information, your account will have limits and abilities somewhere between a paid account and a new free account.
Some big changes since the old days, aside from a very large number of new zones, include:
1. The game is much more solo friendly. I had no trouble soloing a bard a couple years ago to around level 60 on a free play old account. I then switched to paid and got him to the mid 80s. There I stopped, not because it was getting difficult to solo, but because I'd satisfied my nostalgia need.
2. Related to #1, you can hire an NPC mercenary. There are tank, healer, and DPS mercenaries. There are apprentice mercenaries and journeyman mercenaries, with four different tiers of each type (lower tiers cost less, but are wimpier). If you play a healer or DPS class and hire a tier 4 apprentice tank mercenary, you and the mercenary will be able to take on nearly any content that would normally require a full group, up to around level 60. Same of you play a tank class and hire a healer mercenary.
Only paid accounts get to use journeyman mercenaries. That was the main reason I switched to paid after level 60.
3. There are a large number of good quests now. You can go to a lot of the expansion zones and find quests that will involve taking you to all the interesting spots in the zone. The Hero's Journey quest, which you get in a book at the start of the game, will suggest a path that can keep you busy and advancing for the next 60 levels.
4. Lots of UI improvements.
5. Veteran Rewards for existing accounts. For each year of your account, you get certain bonuses. One big one, which will almost certainly be on your old account, is a free resurrection. Once a week real time, you can go to an NPC healer in certain zones and ask them for a resurrection, and they will summon all your corpses and then give you a 100% XP resurrection.
Other Veteran Rewards include a 15 minute resist, stats, and run speed boost, usable once every 20 hours, a health/mana/endurance complete restoration usable every 3 days, 30 minutes of double XP usable once every 20 hours, one that summons a banker to your location and one that summons a merchant (both usable every 20 hours), and a few more.
All in all, free play EQ is nowadays a quite good solo game, at least for 30 levels or so, and for at least 50-60 levels if you have an old account, and for quite a bit farther on a paid account.
PS: system requirements are quite low by today's standards. My ancient PC (Asus P5Q, Core 2 Duo e8400, 8 GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 460) has no trouble running two instances of EQ at once. It could probably do 3.
The main limits on free play are you can't have as many different characters, and you don't get some of the newer features or you get limited versions of them.
If you can remember your old account information, your account will have limits and abilities somewhere between a paid account and a new free account.
Some big changes since the old days, aside from a very large number of new zones, include:
1. The game is much more solo friendly. I had no trouble soloing a bard a couple years ago to around level 60 on a free play old account. I then switched to paid and got him to the mid 80s. There I stopped, not because it was getting difficult to solo, but because I'd satisfied my nostalgia need.
2. Related to #1, you can hire an NPC mercenary. There are tank, healer, and DPS mercenaries. There are apprentice mercenaries and journeyman mercenaries, with four different tiers of each type (lower tiers cost less, but are wimpier). If you play a healer or DPS class and hire a tier 4 apprentice tank mercenary, you and the mercenary will be able to take on nearly any content that would normally require a full group, up to around level 60. Same of you play a tank class and hire a healer mercenary.
Only paid accounts get to use journeyman mercenaries. That was the main reason I switched to paid after level 60.
3. There are a large number of good quests now. You can go to a lot of the expansion zones and find quests that will involve taking you to all the interesting spots in the zone. The Hero's Journey quest, which you get in a book at the start of the game, will suggest a path that can keep you busy and advancing for the next 60 levels.
4. Lots of UI improvements.
5. Veteran Rewards for existing accounts. For each year of your account, you get certain bonuses. One big one, which will almost certainly be on your old account, is a free resurrection. Once a week real time, you can go to an NPC healer in certain zones and ask them for a resurrection, and they will summon all your corpses and then give you a 100% XP resurrection.
Other Veteran Rewards include a 15 minute resist, stats, and run speed boost, usable once every 20 hours, a health/mana/endurance complete restoration usable every 3 days, 30 minutes of double XP usable once every 20 hours, one that summons a banker to your location and one that summons a merchant (both usable every 20 hours), and a few more.
All in all, free play EQ is nowadays a quite good solo game, at least for 30 levels or so, and for at least 50-60 levels if you have an old account, and for quite a bit farther on a paid account.
PS: system requirements are quite low by today's standards. My ancient PC (Asus P5Q, Core 2 Duo e8400, 8 GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 460) has no trouble running two instances of EQ at once. It could probably do 3.
Thanks for the tip! I need a good holiday game. (I just tried Baldur's Gate 3 and my system isn't good enough because it crashed three times in 30 minutes... got a refund tho)
> The game is much more solo friendly
Music to my ears. I don't have a gaming posse anymore and need more flexible play hours due to family. Downloading now...!
> The game is much more solo friendly
Music to my ears. I don't have a gaming posse anymore and need more flexible play hours due to family. Downloading now...!
There are a couple things I forget in the above comment that I remembered when I posted a similar comment a couple years ago. That comment is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18341427
Just to close the loop, I started playing EQ yesterday and hoo-boy does it feel like 1999: the graphics, the music, the interactions! I'm blown away by how similar it is to WoW, it kinda feels a little like the later Might & Magic's. There's clearly an evolution at play. Especially in UI.
Anyway, I got past the stiffness of it and it's kinda fun. Can't seem to change my fonts so its a bit of an eye chart thought. LOL. Good stuff!
Anyway, I got past the stiffness of it and it's kinda fun. Can't seem to change my fonts so its a bit of an eye chart thought. LOL. Good stuff!
I saw contrarian opinions, but I believe Avengers: End Game pretty much delivered the insane hype cultivated for 10 years.
I dunno. It was just hours and hours of violence. How long can you watch a bunch of people flying around and punching each other? I found it very boring.
Not for me. Too much quantum time travel hand-waving just magically solving problems.
Actually, I thought this was the clever part. If you pay attention, they created a lot of other problems as a side effect.
It wraps up all the existing plots, and introduces new ones. There's a lot of hints on what went wrong with time travel, and if you read up on Marvel lore, there are plenty of villains who are able to maneuver time travel better than the heroes.
It wraps up all the existing plots, and introduces new ones. There's a lot of hints on what went wrong with time travel, and if you read up on Marvel lore, there are plenty of villains who are able to maneuver time travel better than the heroes.
And it created a wonderful narrative device to revisit scenes and references from several other filmes. Marvel movies never positioned themselves to be hard scifi.
Imagine being upset about quantum time travel when the main characters are a Norse God of Thunder, a man that got bitten by a radioactive spider, a lab created super soldier and the main villain is some demi god alien with reality warping powers derived from some rocks in a gold glove...
Scifi is much more satisfying when it sets up a fantastical world/premises and then keeps an internal consistency as the narrative develops.
It’s far less satisfying to force the use of fantastical elements as a crutch for a weak narrative.
Exactly. Introducing new things out of nowhere that just happen to be exactly what the characters need right then is poor writing IMHO. It breaks my suspension of disbelief, pulls me out of the story, and makes it much harder to enjoy.
But Marvel is a comic book universe not sci-fi.
Does that distinction change the point that I’m making?
This
Agreed
Also I was so looking forward to how they were gonna manage to track down antman
Then it’s a rat ex machina
Also I was so looking forward to how they were gonna manage to track down antman
Then it’s a rat ex machina
Sure, but in the end of the day it’s a super hero movie. A certain degree of hand-waving is allowed.
I second this. With so many movies in the epic, they'll still be fun to watch 30 years from now.
Vision really disappointed in the penultimate. I think his character was hyped up a lot in Age of Ultron. Became disappointing seeing him go so easily.
Older Thanos was a really well-thought and played villain. One which many people got to identify with (based on his goals in the movie). Captain America delivered when he proved worthy. I think Captain Marvel was an arrogant addition that needed to fill in pieces to the story, like how Stark and Nebula get saved.
It's going to be a classic series in the decades to come. Marvel delivered.
Vision really disappointed in the penultimate. I think his character was hyped up a lot in Age of Ultron. Became disappointing seeing him go so easily.
Older Thanos was a really well-thought and played villain. One which many people got to identify with (based on his goals in the movie). Captain America delivered when he proved worthy. I think Captain Marvel was an arrogant addition that needed to fill in pieces to the story, like how Stark and Nebula get saved.
It's going to be a classic series in the decades to come. Marvel delivered.
> Vision really disappointed in the penultimate. I think his character was hyped up a lot in Age of Ultron. Became disappointing seeing him go so easily.
To be fair most overpowered characters where nerfed in Endgame. eg. Fat Thor, Dr. Strange aside of the battle containing a flood, Captain Marvel arriving last minute and being knocked out immediately, Hulk as Prof. Hulk. The stakes can't be that high if all superheroes are at their full performance.
To be fair most overpowered characters where nerfed in Endgame. eg. Fat Thor, Dr. Strange aside of the battle containing a flood, Captain Marvel arriving last minute and being knocked out immediately, Hulk as Prof. Hulk. The stakes can't be that high if all superheroes are at their full performance.
I missed a Hulk as strong as in the comics. I heard that they audience tested Hulk busting out of the Hulk-buster armor that Bruce Banner was using, but it didn’t test well.
Odd, because that sounds extremely epic.
People went absolutely bananas in the theater during the final battle.
The final battle was great. One small thing that I wish they did better, was not to butcher the African language that they used. Whenever they spoke, many of us cringed. Small thing though, Chadwick still won our hearts.
Perhaps dumb of me but I never realized they were using an actual language. I presumed it was a made up language based on how certain African languages can sound.
It was mostly Xhosa. The actor who played T'Chaka speaks it and coached the cast during Black Panther and Civil War. Guess he wasn't around for the last two.
It was good but too much deux ex machina with Captain Marvel.
Re-usable first stage rockets from SpaceX. They hyped the hell out of this idea before it was possible. The reality (at least visually) is even cooler than anything they ever rendered and sold as a vision.
This thread is clarifying to me. I now have more anecdotal data to back up my anecdotal feeling that I don't agree with most people on HN on matters such as this. The highest voted answers are things I feel are overhyped.
Harry Potter, Breaking Bad, The Wire, Apple Watch, Ruby on Rails, Hamilton.
I'm not saying these things are bad, but the hype level far exceeds the delivered value, in my opinion.
I had to scroll down to things like M1, AMD Zen, and the original iPhone before I felt a sense of agreement. Perhaps I am overly sensitive to hype, so fewer things can possibly measure up for me.
Harry Potter, Breaking Bad, The Wire, Apple Watch, Ruby on Rails, Hamilton.
I'm not saying these things are bad, but the hype level far exceeds the delivered value, in my opinion.
I had to scroll down to things like M1, AMD Zen, and the original iPhone before I felt a sense of agreement. Perhaps I am overly sensitive to hype, so fewer things can possibly measure up for me.
It's easy to explain. All answers that you put in the first category are people answering the wrong question, that nobody actually here asked. They are answering the question "what was the thing that lots of other people liked, that I also liked", as if their opinion is somehow special here, on a semi-anonymous forum, where visitors don't recognize most other visitors. And since it isn't, their opinion is just one of the data-points in the "people, that liked product X" dataset. And people, who upvoted their posts also upvote something they like. And since things, that are liked and endorsed by a lot of people, but that are not worth the attention (in your opinion) you call "overhyped", it is pretty much by definition that the top answers to that question (which nobody asked) would be a collection of overhyped things.
The answers from the second category are answers to the question that OP actually asked: what are the things that were hyped prior to their release (or shortly after) and didn't disappoint. Unlike the first question, this can be answered somewhat objectively, because it's not about the opinion of some semi-anonymous HN user anymore, it's about things that are hyped before the release and having impact after. You personally may not like the original iPhone, but you'll have to admit that the early hype didn't really fade — maybe it's a shitty product in your opinion, but it did conquer the market. And even if people are answering/upvoting that based on subjective feelings, in the end it's still turns out to be a somewhat fair assessment of the topic: because a product was hyped before the release a long time ago (well, not M1) and enough people still can vouch that it "lived up to the hype". That's impact.
Exceptions here are Apple Watch and Ruby on Rails, because they received some, uh, prenatal hype, but let's be honest: Apple Watch doesn't have nearly the amount of adoption iPhone had, and while Ruby on Rails was quite a significant thing at some point of time, it isn't anymore, other frameworks and languages filled the domain and now it's just "one of them" at best.
The answers from the second category are answers to the question that OP actually asked: what are the things that were hyped prior to their release (or shortly after) and didn't disappoint. Unlike the first question, this can be answered somewhat objectively, because it's not about the opinion of some semi-anonymous HN user anymore, it's about things that are hyped before the release and having impact after. You personally may not like the original iPhone, but you'll have to admit that the early hype didn't really fade — maybe it's a shitty product in your opinion, but it did conquer the market. And even if people are answering/upvoting that based on subjective feelings, in the end it's still turns out to be a somewhat fair assessment of the topic: because a product was hyped before the release a long time ago (well, not M1) and enough people still can vouch that it "lived up to the hype". That's impact.
Exceptions here are Apple Watch and Ruby on Rails, because they received some, uh, prenatal hype, but let's be honest: Apple Watch doesn't have nearly the amount of adoption iPhone had, and while Ruby on Rails was quite a significant thing at some point of time, it isn't anymore, other frameworks and languages filled the domain and now it's just "one of them" at best.
This should be the top comment.
I have to agree. Although some of these things are clearly subjective and can't be compared, I think the true mark of a concept living up to its hype is how ubiquitous the approach it pioneered has become. IPhone, for example, can be seen as one clear example of this. The others are a bit harder to verify for their impact.
Electricity, cars, reusable rockets I think all belong to this category yet due to their popularity people don't even consider them as things that at some point were hyped and critiqued.
Opinion of my own is that the actor Daniel Day-Lewis is indeed the greatest actor who has ever lived. It is just his dedication to the craft that sets him apart from the rest so clearly by total immersion to the character which I've never seen anyone else replicate. Many other actors still remain "themselves" in the process but he can truly transform in a way no one else can and with such great range of characters. Granted we do not have accurate historical data over the course of the whole human civilization but well, I'd say it's a good guess.
Electricity, cars, reusable rockets I think all belong to this category yet due to their popularity people don't even consider them as things that at some point were hyped and critiqued.
Opinion of my own is that the actor Daniel Day-Lewis is indeed the greatest actor who has ever lived. It is just his dedication to the craft that sets him apart from the rest so clearly by total immersion to the character which I've never seen anyone else replicate. Many other actors still remain "themselves" in the process but he can truly transform in a way no one else can and with such great range of characters. Granted we do not have accurate historical data over the course of the whole human civilization but well, I'd say it's a good guess.
Electric toothbrushes. I always saw ads for them but they were expensive and I thought, how much better can they be? Finally listened to my dentist’s recommendation to buy one and my teeth have so much less plaque now to where I barely notice a difference after getting my teeth cleaned and the dentist takes much less time to do it.
Please be careful not to press too hard or you could wear off your enamel.
Also waterpiks. Much better for your gums than flossing, and 10x easier. (Granted you still need to floss to prevent cavities, but still.)
That's interesting. My dentist said electric or not didn't matter when I asked.
I went electric because with proper brushing habits electric vs manual matters less.
You're supposed to be making tons of small circular strokes and reaching every surface and taking the right amount of time... but it's easy to mess that up subtly. A lot of people make wide strokes for example or are unable to get the large head of the toothbrush in the corners of their teeth or use too much pressure...
That's why I went with the reciprocating electric toothbrush over the vibrating kind. The reciprocating type has a smaller head that can reach more places, and it's less dependent on correct usage than the vibrating kind.
Mine vibrates to let me know roughly how long to spend in each quadrant of my mouth and lights up red if I'm pushing too hard
You're supposed to be making tons of small circular strokes and reaching every surface and taking the right amount of time... but it's easy to mess that up subtly. A lot of people make wide strokes for example or are unable to get the large head of the toothbrush in the corners of their teeth or use too much pressure...
That's why I went with the reciprocating electric toothbrush over the vibrating kind. The reciprocating type has a smaller head that can reach more places, and it's less dependent on correct usage than the vibrating kind.
Mine vibrates to let me know roughly how long to spend in each quadrant of my mouth and lights up red if I'm pushing too hard
How do you actually see plaque? I feel like I wouldn't be able to tell the difference if I got an electric toothbrush.
Are you saying it actually makes your teeth look whiter?
I don’t think he can see it. But you know all that scraping the dentist does when you visit? That’s plaque. If you floss and use an electric toothbrush you’re in and out of a dental checkup in half the time.. with very little scraping.
+1
I got one at my dentists recommendation. Manual toothbrushes are ruined forever.
I got one at my dentists recommendation. Manual toothbrushes are ruined forever.
Lisp (specifically, I've learned Common Lisp). The power is amazing, being able to have code write code was something I didn't realize I was trying to do over and over in different languages, but to have it all just be code....amazing. And the parentheses are also great, just a simple syntax and auto formatting with a decent editor.
Which brings me to Emacs. Still learning and being amazed at what can be done in there, the more of my computing life in there the better it gets.
Which brings me to Emacs. Still learning and being amazed at what can be done in there, the more of my computing life in there the better it gets.
Can you recommend a resource on lisp? I have some interest in learning a bit of it for fun because proper around here seem to marvel over it so much and I'd like to see what the hype is about.
That recent thread linked had lots of good stuff. For me it was the Practical Common Lisp [1] and Land of Lisp [2] books. I like starting with a book and articles, but then need a project to work on to really learn it and experience the language. I will now make some quick scripts with Lisp since it is so easy to write it as you figure it out in a REPL, and a big project has been a text-based game engine using CEPL [3].
For me the power was really just in trying it out, seeing the joy of using a REPL and that everything is code. The development process is just better and more fun.
[1] http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/ [2] http://landoflisp.com/ [3] https://github.com/cbaggers/cepl
For me the power was really just in trying it out, seeing the joy of using a REPL and that everything is code. The development process is just better and more fun.
[1] http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/ [2] http://landoflisp.com/ [3] https://github.com/cbaggers/cepl
Recent thread on HN:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25441664&ref=upstract.c...
The 1989 version of Batman. The hype was huge. You couldn’t move without seeing marketing for it. And it was one of the most successful comic book movies ever made, certainly one of the better DC movies.
> In the months before Batman's release in June 1989, a popular culture phenomenon known as "Batmania" began. Over $750 million worth of merchandise was sold
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_(1989_film)
> In the months before Batman's release in June 1989, a popular culture phenomenon known as "Batmania" began. Over $750 million worth of merchandise was sold
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_(1989_film)
one of the top movies ever, unfortunately the sequels were really bad (Batman returns is still ok) until The Dark Knight come out, which is as good or better.
For me Jack Nicholson Joker > Heath Ledger Joker.
For me Jack Nicholson Joker > Heath Ledger Joker.
Vue 3.
It was highly anticipated but when it was initially announced everyone including HNers were up in arms about how it's going to kill Vue. I can't find the thread but I do remember it vaguely.
Thankfully the release not only lived up to its hype (faster, smaller, easier) but also put to rest almost all objections about backward compatibility. I really think the Vue team did an awesome job with their next release.
It was highly anticipated but when it was initially announced everyone including HNers were up in arms about how it's going to kill Vue. I can't find the thread but I do remember it vaguely.
Thankfully the release not only lived up to its hype (faster, smaller, easier) but also put to rest almost all objections about backward compatibility. I really think the Vue team did an awesome job with their next release.
For me it was the opposite, but I guess it really depends on your use case. I was heavily into a typescript based custom server side rendered setup and I would need massive refactoring to be able to use vue 3 (vue class based components). The SSR story in Vue 3 is still very much up in the air. I switched to next.js with mobx and for me React seems to live up to it's hype more than I expected.
Same here.
Since React I'd say maybe Svelte delivered the most in relation to it's hype. Otherwise nothing special happened in the frontend framework world.
Since React I'd say maybe Svelte delivered the most in relation to it's hype. Otherwise nothing special happened in the frontend framework world.
Funny as yesterday I was thinking that since Vue 3 release I had not heard much about it.
My theory was that not having the router and vuex ready on day one had hindered the hype. Maybe I've been wrong.
My theory was that not having the router and vuex ready on day one had hindered the hype. Maybe I've been wrong.
Interesting. After Vue 3 was announced, I switched to React, and I found I liked it a lot more than Vue since there's no templating language, everything is a function.
That's funny, I had the same experience. I enjoyed using Vue 2 but when Vue 3 came out and was totally different I decided I'd try out React again. React hooks changed the game for me and now back to only using React.
I have no doubt Vue 3 is the bee's knees, but I'm rather enjoying React.
I have no doubt Vue 3 is the bee's knees, but I'm rather enjoying React.
Exactly, I thought, well if Vue is getting hooks, why not just go to the source directly? Also I got annoyed that many popular libraries these days are React only, and I didn't want to miss out.
That's good to know. And how did the upgrade from 2.x projects go? I have got a couple of projects I want to migrate, but haven't started yet.
Climate change.
Drought,unseasonal rainfall, ravaging bwildfires, breaking ice shelfs...
Some reports [0] indicate Oil and Gas knew about it in the early 80s.
0: https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382
Drought,unseasonal rainfall, ravaging bwildfires, breaking ice shelfs...
Some reports [0] indicate Oil and Gas knew about it in the early 80s.
0: https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382
htmx.org and Svelte: two JavaScript libraries that I use and like very much. Natural extensions of HTML and CSS, tiny downloads for the user, very efficient.
Spotify: I resisted for a long time. People laughed at my small bookcase of CDs. But, OK, I’m sold. The premium subscription is the best return on the dollar I’ve seen since Wo Hop’s.
Learning to converse in a foreign language. A lot of work, but very rewarding.
The Avengers: no, not that one. The 1960’s series, specifically (and only) the two seasons with Diana Rigg as Mrs. Peel. It appeared on Amazon and I started watching out of nostalgia, but—wow.
Julia (the programming language). The power of the type system and its version of multiple dispatch lives up to the hype.
Spotify: I resisted for a long time. People laughed at my small bookcase of CDs. But, OK, I’m sold. The premium subscription is the best return on the dollar I’ve seen since Wo Hop’s.
Learning to converse in a foreign language. A lot of work, but very rewarding.
The Avengers: no, not that one. The 1960’s series, specifically (and only) the two seasons with Diana Rigg as Mrs. Peel. It appeared on Amazon and I started watching out of nostalgia, but—wow.
Julia (the programming language). The power of the type system and its version of multiple dispatch lives up to the hype.
Virtual reality.
Now don't get me wrong, the games ecosystem is still quite limited, but I think Half-Life: Alyx really showed what kind of phenomenal experiences the technology can provide when given a huge budget. If it ever becomes economically viable then there's going to be a ton more experiences like this on the market one day.
Against all odds, these super expensive bulky headsets with only a few games has shipped millions of units to early adopters. Even if it all fails, I'm happy to have been a part of it.
Now don't get me wrong, the games ecosystem is still quite limited, but I think Half-Life: Alyx really showed what kind of phenomenal experiences the technology can provide when given a huge budget. If it ever becomes economically viable then there's going to be a ton more experiences like this on the market one day.
Against all odds, these super expensive bulky headsets with only a few games has shipped millions of units to early adopters. Even if it all fails, I'm happy to have been a part of it.
I think it didn't.
After I played multiple games and I had the impression, I just want a regular FPS, with mouse and keyboard and a VR headset as display.
Regular VR games are too tyring with all the standing, ducking, holding and aiming weapons.
After I played multiple games and I had the impression, I just want a regular FPS, with mouse and keyboard and a VR headset as display.
Regular VR games are too tyring with all the standing, ducking, holding and aiming weapons.
Sounds like you need more exercise...
Probably.
I do exercise, though.
Cardio and weights, multiple times a week.
But somehow I think games should be more chill.
I do exercise, though.
Cardio and weights, multiple times a week.
But somehow I think games should be more chill.
I was hyped for a new Half-Life game for the past ~13 years. Half-Life: Alyx delivered. Granted, it was my first VR experience so that definitely contributed to my enjoyment.
It's worth it as-is if you're into flight sims. I don't mind the bulky headsets, it helps me larp as a fighter pilot.
DooM 1993. I’ve played it on and off for decades, but it had been a while. After playing Doom 2016 I got curious how the original would stand up. With gzdoom, it was one of the best games I’ve played in recent years, better than Doom 2016. The navigation, movement speed, sound effects, enemy ai, map design are just brilliant. Lots of features don’t look impressive today, but judged from a “how fun is it” perspective, even the buggy ai is fantastic and gives massive replayability - decades of it apparently as long as you take 5 year breaks here or there and add mouse look
“Avatar: The Last Airbender” tv series.
Enjoyable storyline with one of the most unique and satisfying endings. Great option to watch with the kids and it teaches life lessons along the way.
Enjoyable storyline with one of the most unique and satisfying endings. Great option to watch with the kids and it teaches life lessons along the way.
The Sega Saturn. No I'm not kidding! Panzer Dragoon 1/Zwei and Saga, Nights (and Christmas Nights!), Radiant Silvergun, Virtua Fighter Megamix, X-Men Vs Street fighter, Burning Rangers, Guardian Heroes, Grandia, the digital and analogue pads. I got fired from a computer game shop for convincing customers to buy it instead of the PlayStation, but to this day I'll stand by that amazing underappreciated black box.
Who are you and how are you me?
I'll throw in Saturn Bomberman with 2 6-player taps for a total of 10-player mayhem on a single screen.
Also, if you haven't seen it... https://bravewave.net/panzerdragoonsaga
I'll throw in Saturn Bomberman with 2 6-player taps for a total of 10-player mayhem on a single screen.
Also, if you haven't seen it... https://bravewave.net/panzerdragoonsaga
No game console will ever again have a mascot as great as Segata Sanshiro.
The lord of the rings trilogy - how long we’ve been waiting for a fantasy to actually make it onto the big screen? The return of the king sweeping the Oscars with a cherry on top. Final fantasy 7 remake delivering. the Mac to Intel transition.
I absolutely dreaded The Fellowship of the Ring because of how terrible the animated LotR film was. I loved the books but was convinced they were unfilmable.
Instead, I think the movies are sincerely better than the books.
Instead, I think the movies are sincerely better than the books.
I recently re-read The Fellowship and appreciated how prudent the filmmakers were to remove the Bombadil side plot entirely.
Can you elaborate? Why was it prudent?
For much the same reasons as ojnabieoot gives above. The Bombadil chapters feel like a haphazard insertion from a different book and perhaps even from a different fictional universe, and seem to serve no narrative purpose in the context of the trilogy. The film version feels much more coherent for having omitted them.
Not the OP, but I think in FotR the Bombadil interlude is an unnecessary distraction that saps a lot of the momentum from the story, and it’s tonally inconsistent with the rest of Middle-Earth (as seen up to that point). And the character simply has little relevance for the entirely of the book - only briefly mentioned at Elrond’s council and then in Return of the King, and never actually revisited. His only tangible impact on the plot involves giving the blades of Westernesse, which could have been accomplished in a much more straightforward way. In general the Bombadil scenes are confusing, even to dedicated Tolkien fans, and only detract from the book.
For the film, it is really the pacing issue that is most crucial: FotR is already a long and complicated movie, and it really doesn’t have a second to spare on unnecessary scenes. And, unlike a book, movies can’t really be digested slowly (especially not in a theater). The Bombadil scene is a small oddity in the book but it could have been a fatal flaw in the film, disengaging audiences before we even get to Bree.
I think Bombadil could have been effective later in the trilogy - where the fact that the Ring has no affect on him would carry more dramatic weight, and where the “tonal inconsistency” would be surprising and refreshing rather than confusing. Perhaps shortly after meeting the Ents - it would strengthen the idea that Bombadil is vastly powerful (even compared to Sauron) but aloof from human/elf/dwarf concerns.
For the film, it is really the pacing issue that is most crucial: FotR is already a long and complicated movie, and it really doesn’t have a second to spare on unnecessary scenes. And, unlike a book, movies can’t really be digested slowly (especially not in a theater). The Bombadil scene is a small oddity in the book but it could have been a fatal flaw in the film, disengaging audiences before we even get to Bree.
I think Bombadil could have been effective later in the trilogy - where the fact that the Ring has no affect on him would carry more dramatic weight, and where the “tonal inconsistency” would be surprising and refreshing rather than confusing. Perhaps shortly after meeting the Ents - it would strengthen the idea that Bombadil is vastly powerful (even compared to Sauron) but aloof from human/elf/dwarf concerns.
> Final fantasy 7 remake delivering.
Nobody is talking about it anymore now 6 months later, so I'd say it did not live up to the hype.
Nobody is talking about it anymore now 6 months later, so I'd say it did not live up to the hype.
GNU/Linux phones, Pinephone and Librem 5. Even though they aren’t daily drivers for everyone yet, they are truly full computers in you pocket without stupid restrictions of the duopoly.
Somewhat related to that, Termux on Android. The few times I've had to use it, it's been a joy. Being able to use a bluetooth keyboard with my phone hooked up to a monitor via USB-C to HDMI was very cool.
Maybe don't get too attached. Google is making a valiant effort to kill it.
Ugh, of course they are.
Definitely going to look at breaking away from their control with my next phone, whenever that may be.
Definitely going to look at breaking away from their control with my next phone, whenever that may be.
I'd say Avengers: Endgame lived up to the decade of hype, which is no small feat.
LotR sequels probably had a lot of hype prior to release.
The latest God of War had a great release afaik.
To be honest, it's hard to remember which things were really hyped up before release and met expectations. I keep thinking of stuff I heard was good after it was release, and things which were hyped and failed, or havr not yet fully delivered on the hype. I can't think of any tech which fits the bill. Maybe raytracing? Most tech tends to be overhyped.
LotR sequels probably had a lot of hype prior to release.
The latest God of War had a great release afaik.
To be honest, it's hard to remember which things were really hyped up before release and met expectations. I keep thinking of stuff I heard was good after it was release, and things which were hyped and failed, or havr not yet fully delivered on the hype. I can't think of any tech which fits the bill. Maybe raytracing? Most tech tends to be overhyped.
Endgame stuck the landing, which was extremely hard to do, but wasn’t the best movie of the bunch. That goes to Infinity War which was near perfect.
My point was not that it was a good movie, but it matched the expected hype. Even though it delivered more fan service than a great story/villain. I count that as a win in terms of "did it live up to the hype" department. It's fine if it wasn't perfect :).
Many (not all) marvel movies lived up to the hype, but I think the challenge was hardest for endgame.
Many (not all) marvel movies lived up to the hype, but I think the challenge was hardest for endgame.
> I'd say Avengers: Endgame
It really didn't. "Let's take a compelling villain and a nice-ish philosophical dilemma, create a world that's reeling in the aftermath of said villain's actions... and just quantum time travel kill the villain with no effort and literally exactly zero consequences for anyone involved." Oh. Right. Boohoo exactly one single character died with exactly zero consequences for anyone because his contract with the studio ran out.
It really didn't. "Let's take a compelling villain and a nice-ish philosophical dilemma, create a world that's reeling in the aftermath of said villain's actions... and just quantum time travel kill the villain with no effort and literally exactly zero consequences for anyone involved." Oh. Right. Boohoo exactly one single character died with exactly zero consequences for anyone because his contract with the studio ran out.
Vision, Black Widow, and Iron Man. That's a pretty major trio of deaths. Plus half the population still has the trauma of five years post-snap, and the other half finds themselves suddenly in a different world.
Vision and Black Widow are entirely inconsequential.
None of the perceived trauma exists, except in the minds of avid fans.
None of the perceived trauma exists, except in the minds of avid fans.
well, if you've followed mainstream (read: predictable) cinema for the last few years, that's exactly what was to be expected, wasn't it? Especially since it was foreshadowed in the first movie that some kind of time travel vehicle could be used in the second movie...
Dr Andrew Ng's courses on machine learning and deep learning
Beautiful explained lectures. I can't believe what a great instructor he is. I feel he truly embodies the Feynman learning technique.
Beautiful explained lectures. I can't believe what a great instructor he is. I feel he truly embodies the Feynman learning technique.
I still don't _really_ understand why all those matrix multiplications can reliably determine which handwritten digit they've just seen but having implemented it from the ground up in his class I feel like I at least understand the moving parts.
Have you checked out the new stuff he added a while ago? I assume it's just as good but haven't made the time yet.
Have you checked out the new stuff he added a while ago? I assume it's just as good but haven't made the time yet.
Agreed, they are absolutely amazing.
Link?
COVID-19, back in December 2019 it was starting to get hot - but it really exploded at about March 2020 onward.
Does anyone remember there was some VC explaining how bad the exponential growth is going to get in January or February here. After reading that blog I bought the hype and it was completely on point. I even told my wife to fly to see her family before it’s too late (cases were in the 1-20 range per day) at that point.
Looking forward to the sequel coming soon!
I thought a little bit about this and I would say Apple Watch for me. When it first came out it was not perfect and there were lots of limitations to it but then Apple iterated on it with focus on Fitness based features and I finally ended up buying Series 5 version. I could definitely say the gamification (nudging you to close the rings and monthly challenges) has changed my habits and I am more active than ever before because of Apple Watch. It lived up to the hype for me!
Don't forget the "Half Life" series which still lives up to enormous hype, Gordon Freeman ;)
I have enormous expectations for the next chapter in Half Life series: HL3 and I hope when it comes out it'd live up to the hype. :)
Cormac McCarthy. Finally started "bingeing" his books from the local library and not since Virginia Woolf has a writer's use of words to paint pictures made such an impression on me.
That's an apt description. His use of language is remarkable. The hapax legomenon Salitter, and this brief post about it, are what convinced me to read his books. https://thefirstmorning.com/2008/09/11/salitter/
Is McCarthy hyped...? I read Blood Meridian because a pretentious literature/philosophy snob I knew in college told me it was good. I was also pretentious, so I read it. Other than that, I've almost never heard anyone talk about his work, other than briefly when the movies came out.
He was for a bit with a Oprah book of the month (the road) and no country for old men getting made into a movie
hmm, good question. I guess I'd heard for a while that he was one of the best writers out there. Maybe he's just hyped in the corners of the internet that I wander.
Blood Meridian is a top 3 book for me. Just fantastic. With one of those endings that takes the book from a 4.5/5 to a 5/5
If anyone takes this book up, avoid at all costs the foreword in the 25th anniversary edition. It gives away the ending !
I also love Blood Meridian -- curious what your other two would be? Mine are probably Moby-Dick and The Brothers Karamazov.
Stoner by John Williams and Crime & Punishment. I love TBK and other of Dostoyevsky's works but C&P really resonated with me
I was looking for some English language fiction literature. Any book you'd recommend?
From McCarthy ? I'd start with his Border Trilogy which is 3 books sold together. Or just All The Pretty Horses if you want to dip your toes to see if you like his writing.
I've also enjoyed Elmore Leonard quite a bit recently. More pulpy I suppose, but well written. Out of Sight is a good one with a somewhat faithful movie version as well.
Normal People by Sally Rooney is something I read recently that I liked.
Unless by literature you actually mean classic literature, in which case I'm really not qualified to recommend anything :-)
I've also enjoyed Elmore Leonard quite a bit recently. More pulpy I suppose, but well written. Out of Sight is a good one with a somewhat faithful movie version as well.
Normal People by Sally Rooney is something I read recently that I liked.
Unless by literature you actually mean classic literature, in which case I'm really not qualified to recommend anything :-)
No Country for Old Men is the most accessible. Blood Meridian is harder, but very good.
Gotta be careful reading those, they are very good by can be a little...bleak.
upvoted
The internet, computers, iPhone, The Mandalorian, SSDs, GTA3, bitcoin (so far), mRNA, SpaceX, graphene, cars
Still hoping nuclear fusion and carbon removal pulls through.
Still hoping nuclear fusion and carbon removal pulls through.
Does Bitcoin scale nowadays?
It does not need to scale since people treat it as digital gold nowadays.
"digital gold" was a line that was made up when the people in charge refused to make the throughput more than a few kilobytes per second. It doesn't make any sense.
Why would people use an illiquid currency when there are others that have the same advantages of being able to use money electronically except for actually being able to make cheap and fast transactions?
If there was a version of gold that fluid and easy to transact with, people would use that instead gold.
There is no reason for bitcoin to exist without transaction throughput except for speculation using IOUs from exchanges.
Why would people use an illiquid currency when there are others that have the same advantages of being able to use money electronically except for actually being able to make cheap and fast transactions?
If there was a version of gold that fluid and easy to transact with, people would use that instead gold.
There is no reason for bitcoin to exist without transaction throughput except for speculation using IOUs from exchanges.
> If there was a version of gold that fluid and easy to transact with, people would use that instead gold.
Unless it was built on complex technology that most people don't understand. Hence comments like yours calling it a failure because there's still a stigma around it. Luckily the are others that have done their research and are investing heavily and helping build out the ecosystem.
Unless it was built on complex technology that most people don't understand. Hence comments like yours calling it a failure because there's still a stigma around it. Luckily the are others that have done their research and are investing heavily and helping build out the ecosystem.
First, I never called it a 'failure', that's something you hallucinated.
Second, I never said there was a 'stigma' around it, that's also something you hallucinated.
> Luckily the are others that have done their research and are investing heavily and helping build out the ecosystem.
People who 'have done their research' say the same thing and people 'building out the ecosystem' aren't doing it with the one cryptocurrency that is purposely trying not to scale well.
Ask me anything you want instead of the lazy rationalization of 'they just don't understand'. Some people have been involved before /r/bitcoin was taken over and turned into a propaganda machine to churn out people that actually buy into the 'digital gold' nonsense.
You didn't actually confront anything I said at all, you just avoided it with a flimsy dismissal.
Second, I never said there was a 'stigma' around it, that's also something you hallucinated.
> Luckily the are others that have done their research and are investing heavily and helping build out the ecosystem.
People who 'have done their research' say the same thing and people 'building out the ecosystem' aren't doing it with the one cryptocurrency that is purposely trying not to scale well.
Ask me anything you want instead of the lazy rationalization of 'they just don't understand'. Some people have been involved before /r/bitcoin was taken over and turned into a propaganda machine to churn out people that actually buy into the 'digital gold' nonsense.
You didn't actually confront anything I said at all, you just avoided it with a flimsy dismissal.
Bitcoin is a really bad currency: it has pretty wild price fluctuations, and the transaction time for enough confirmations to be secure between two random parties takes a long time.
It's a store of value, not a currency.
Based on what? Its only technical difference is intentionally hobbled throughput. How is it an advantage to have only a few kilobytes per second for the whole world?
Graphene? Where is it actually used today?
printf
Man, when I first read about it I was like “whaaaaa???” A little interpreted language in my print statements? That’s crazy talk!
Now it’s like ... everywhere!
Man, when I first read about it I was like “whaaaaa???” A little interpreted language in my print statements? That’s crazy talk!
Now it’s like ... everywhere!
I feel it’s worth giving credit to Python f-strings in that case. They blew my mind in terms of convenience vs printf.
Python has a few cool things like that. List comprehension blows my mind at how elegant it is.
Agreed. Same with dict, set and generator comprehensions. I wish more languages included that feature.
In addition to Python format strings: Javascript template strings:
`I am ${variable.foo} ${variable.bar}.` - Life changing!
`I am ${variable.foo} ${variable.bar}.` - Life changing!
Wait til you try scanf
What year did reaction happen? I spent my entire life taking it for granted, not realizing that it indeed is a little interpreted language in print statements.
For many of us it was in 2015 when Control-Flow Bending: On the Effectiveness of Control-Flow Integrity was presented at USENIX proving printf is turing complete. https://github.com/carlini/printf-tac-toe https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity15/technical...
> Cyberpunk’s reviews paint it as a tire fire. I think it’s a fun game, but it doesn’t live up to the expectation - it’s not the next Witcher 3.
You have a short memory though. Witcher 3 was also deeply criticized for several aspects when it was just out as well before being recognized as a massive game a few months later. I'd say you should probably wait half a year to evaluate Cyberpunk properly.
You have a short memory though. Witcher 3 was also deeply criticized for several aspects when it was just out as well before being recognized as a massive game a few months later. I'd say you should probably wait half a year to evaluate Cyberpunk properly.
Having completed the game, I think it will eventually go down as one of the best games of all times. We’ll need time to forget about PS4, to get bug fixes and some DLCs. But by the time PS6 comes out, I think people will say that “Cyberpunk was the last truly great game”.
I’m playing it on PC and it’s definitely one of the best games of the year. People are getting too caught up in the hype and backlash to see it for what it is. It’s doing so many things incredibly well and in fresh new ways.
I just feel bad for anyone too stuck in the hate-cycle to enjoy it.
Starcraft 2. It's not perfect, but it's an excellent successor to the original 98 game.
It’s a Wonderful Life. As a father of little ones now, there are some scenes in that movie that cut me to the core like nothing else.
The Iliad. Hard to put my finger on one thing in particular, but after having finally read it earlier this year I continually find myself doing some task and randomly thinking about it, pausing, and just saying “wow”.
The Iliad. Hard to put my finger on one thing in particular, but after having finally read it earlier this year I continually find myself doing some task and randomly thinking about it, pausing, and just saying “wow”.
> The Iliad.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand how the Iliad was hyped. The thing is 3000 years old. Or we are not talking about [0]?
0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iliad
I'm sorry, but I don't understand how the Iliad was hyped. The thing is 3000 years old. Or we are not talking about [0]?
0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iliad
Any old skateboarders here on HN?
I remember when Lakai Fully Flared came out, it felt like a crescendo in skateboarding, and IMO lived up it. The Mike Mo switch kickflip + napalm explosion was seared into my 13 year old brain forever:
https://youtu.be/zIu8NfUGScc?t=242
I remember when Lakai Fully Flared came out, it felt like a crescendo in skateboarding, and IMO lived up it. The Mike Mo switch kickflip + napalm explosion was seared into my 13 year old brain forever:
https://youtu.be/zIu8NfUGScc?t=242
Lionel Messi. He recently even surpassed most goals for a club. He was touted as maradona successor which is an impossible bar and he has lived up to it. In contrast, not a single "messi" successor is even remotely close to him.
Most importantly, if you ignore a couple of tax evasion issues he seems like an all-right guy.
Maradona was a drug addict and wife beater who fathered a dozen unrecognised children and was a horrible person overall. He became a national embarrassment for Argentina ever since he was kicked out of the world cup for doping.
In contrast, Messi's positive legacy will hopefully endure for longer.
Maradona was a drug addict and wife beater who fathered a dozen unrecognised children and was a horrible person overall. He became a national embarrassment for Argentina ever since he was kicked out of the world cup for doping.
In contrast, Messi's positive legacy will hopefully endure for longer.
Maradona was always see as the star of the teams where he played, even when he was young. Plus he came from a poblacion, those ghettos in Argentina where people live with next to nothing.
Messi on the other side came from a middle class family, and had his dream of being a professional player broke as a young kid by Newells due to his height problems.
The two has different histories, and should not be compared I think., except on the football side.
The two has different histories, and should not be compared I think., except on the football side.
AWS. Sure, it's complicated and sometimes weirdly obfuscated (currently debugging a load balancer health check in a very locked down environment sucks) but it's really changed a lot of the IT ecosystem forever. (some may argue for the worse, others, for the better)
And from my sysadmin experience, the move to devops. Using a language like Puppet or Ansible allowed me to deploy complex software on limited hardware. Terraform lets me apply that knowledge to AWS/Azure/GCP and more.
And from my sysadmin experience, the move to devops. Using a language like Puppet or Ansible allowed me to deploy complex software on limited hardware. Terraform lets me apply that knowledge to AWS/Azure/GCP and more.
Tenet.
Just watched it last night and found it to be absolutely incredibly well done.
Dialogue audio was weirdly quiet, but that was solved by cranking the center channel up relative to other channels.
Just watched it last night and found it to be absolutely incredibly well done.
Dialogue audio was weirdly quiet, but that was solved by cranking the center channel up relative to other channels.
Nah. I watched this a few nights ago, and was largely confused. I didn’t hate it, but it wasn’t anywhere close to “great”.
Most people won’t like it because it gets more and more confusing, and at some point you’re like okay whatever and give up trying to understand. That’s the way it was for me.
They were trying to shove too many complex ideas into too short of a timeframe and it didn’t work. It felt very self- indulgent to me.
Most people won’t like it because it gets more and more confusing, and at some point you’re like okay whatever and give up trying to understand. That’s the way it was for me.
They were trying to shove too many complex ideas into too short of a timeframe and it didn’t work. It felt very self- indulgent to me.
That's part of the beauty of it. She tells him right at the beginning not to try and understand; just intuit. I didn't give up, frustrated, until almost the end of the movie. Loved my second viewing, and would watch again. And I almost never rewatch anything.
That was my favorite part of Looper: when asking how time travel works, Willis says something like, “we could sit around all morning drawing boxes and arrows on the backs of napkins and all it would do is give you a splitting headache – time travel just works, ok?” Just totally dismisses it, haha.
2nd and third viewings for me really sold the plot.
This is a great movie IMHO.
> Dialogue audio was weirdly quiet
That's Nolan for you. His sound quality (there is probably a more precise word for this) is appalling. A lot of the music in Interstellar is too loud while the dialogue is hard to make out. Same with Dunkirk - the gunfire in the opening had me cover my ears in the cinema to protect my hearing and throughout the rest of film I was wishing there were subtitles.
That's Nolan for you. His sound quality (there is probably a more precise word for this) is appalling. A lot of the music in Interstellar is too loud while the dialogue is hard to make out. Same with Dunkirk - the gunfire in the opening had me cover my ears in the cinema to protect my hearing and throughout the rest of film I was wishing there were subtitles.
The cinema I was in was literally vibrating all over the place due to the loud music, it was very distracting.
> absolutely incredibly well done
I completely disagree.
The worst part wasn't the unenjoyably convoluted plot, it was the director who insisted the dialog be spoken like a grade 5 play: utterly unnatural. Every spoken sentence ends with a unnatural pause before the response, like a grade 5 play. I could only force myself to get through half the movie before I had to turn it off.
I completely disagree.
The worst part wasn't the unenjoyably convoluted plot, it was the director who insisted the dialog be spoken like a grade 5 play: utterly unnatural. Every spoken sentence ends with a unnatural pause before the response, like a grade 5 play. I could only force myself to get through half the movie before I had to turn it off.
+1. However, the experience of watching in theatre was a bit painful because of the background music. It could be because of that particular theatre but man, if there was no subtitle there's no way in hell I could've followed the movie. I've pre-ordered it on Apple TV to understand all the layers.
Same here, the audio in IMAX is not good.
Two more for you: predestination and primer. Predestination is a trip and primer folds in on itself in ways you won’t uncover until after multiple viewings (and even then, you may still be missing things!).
Venice lives up to the hype. It’s got everything you’ll hate about overrun tourist cities, but it’s also everything they promise.
I didn't realise how much I had internalised the sound of cars until I found out how pleasantly silent Venice is at night.
All cities should be car-free. Noise, fumes, and bad use of city space are a disservice to humanity.
All cities should be car-free. Noise, fumes, and bad use of city space are a disservice to humanity.
Much the same effect can be achieved by upping the requirements for exhaust mufflers and then actually enforcing them
Spectacular! What a beautiful city! Truly a man made treasure.
Joe Posnanski's sports writing. A friend turned me onto his blog in 2008 and since then I've read nearly everything he's written. It amazes me one can be so prolific and write with such beauty and grace for such an extended timeframe.
For television I think the original "Arrested Development" series was absolutely as good as my friends were telling me. And "The Good Place" deserved every bit of hype it got.
For television I think the original "Arrested Development" series was absolutely as good as my friends were telling me. And "The Good Place" deserved every bit of hype it got.
Half-Life 2
I preordered it in 2003, before the big hack/leak caused Valve to delay release into 2004. Because of the success of the original and the long wait, combined with Valve being almost complete silence during development, there was a huge buildup of hype leading up to the release.
Totally worth it.
I preordered it in 2003, before the big hack/leak caused Valve to delay release into 2004. Because of the success of the original and the long wait, combined with Valve being almost complete silence during development, there was a huge buildup of hype leading up to the release.
Totally worth it.
Half-Life 2 is the gold standard for living up to the hype. There were videos of the physics and physics based puzzled that kicked the most anticipated game into an impossibly high bar of expectations but it still delivered on all its promises. People forget that it launched steam and made valve into a multi-billion dollar company.
I thought Half-Life 2 was a good 15 hour game that could have been a great 10-hour game. It just dragged on a little too long, like a lot of games do.
Then along came Episode 1 and Episode 2, cut down and polished to perfection like a pair of gemstones.
Then along came Episode 1 and Episode 2, cut down and polished to perfection like a pair of gemstones.
Type hints in python. Structured programming in general.
Rust. It took me a long time to get remotely comfortable, but once it starts to click, it's awesome how the structure guides your development. Worth the investment, but don't expect to be able to grok it immediately.
Rust. It took me a long time to get remotely comfortable, but once it starts to click, it's awesome how the structure guides your development. Worth the investment, but don't expect to be able to grok it immediately.
> Rust
Man, so many features and the syntax is so heavily annotated and the subjective feeling that everything you interact with is some vaguely defined overcomplicated computer science concept ("what you get back from this function is not a vector but an immutable future-closure-trait-promise-with-sprinkles, you must be familiar with those already").
Not a critcism towards the language, I'm sure that it would make much more sense if I put in the time to study it systematically, but the beginner learning experience hasn't been great. It doesn't seem like a language that you can just dip your toes in, you need to go deep to see the benefits.
Man, so many features and the syntax is so heavily annotated and the subjective feeling that everything you interact with is some vaguely defined overcomplicated computer science concept ("what you get back from this function is not a vector but an immutable future-closure-trait-promise-with-sprinkles, you must be familiar with those already").
Not a critcism towards the language, I'm sure that it would make much more sense if I put in the time to study it systematically, but the beginner learning experience hasn't been great. It doesn't seem like a language that you can just dip your toes in, you need to go deep to see the benefits.
> It doesn't seem like a language that you can just dip your toes in, you need to go deep to see the benefits.
It really is. Hence why I list it as living up to the hype, you really have to buy in to it to "get" the hype.
There needs to be a corpus of different skill levels of Rust programs to study, not just intro snippets.
It really is. Hence why I list it as living up to the hype, you really have to buy in to it to "get" the hype.
There needs to be a corpus of different skill levels of Rust programs to study, not just intro snippets.
Any resources in particular that helped you grok Rust?
Having someone you can ask questions to is huuuge. I have a friend who knows it pretty well and that was supremely helpful to get through some initial stumbling blocks and confusions.
I use Clion which is also super helpful in letting me inspect, autocomplete, and lint code before compiling.
The main rust-lang.org is quite good, but beyond that nothing in particular stands out. But lots of one-off blog posts on specific topics help get through certain blocks, eg how to write traits/impls.
I use Clion which is also super helpful in letting me inspect, autocomplete, and lint code before compiling.
The main rust-lang.org is quite good, but beyond that nothing in particular stands out. But lots of one-off blog posts on specific topics help get through certain blocks, eg how to write traits/impls.
Thank for the tips! I use CLion too (and even built a theme called Blackbird with good Rust highlighting).
It looks like there’s a Rust mentorship program here: https://rustbeginners.github.io/awesome-rust-mentors/
It looks like there’s a Rust mentorship program here: https://rustbeginners.github.io/awesome-rust-mentors/
Not OP, but: jonhoo youtube streams
Reading r/rust a lot... asking questions in comments.
Reading r/rust a lot... asking questions in comments.
I discovered Jon's channel recently and there's a lot of gold in there!
Doug Milford is also worth following, although aimed more at Rust beginners: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmBgC0JN41HjyjAXfkdkp-Q/pla...
Doug Milford is also worth following, although aimed more at Rust beginners: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmBgC0JN41HjyjAXfkdkp-Q/pla...
As lame as it sounds, leetcoding in rust has helped me quite a bit.
Thanks, am working through exercism at the moment so will try that next.
I've been working through this:
https://github.com/pingcap/talent-plan
https://github.com/pingcap/talent-plan
Nier: Automata definitely lived up to the hype for me. A beautiful game through and through. I would say it's still very underappreciated.
The Last of Us 2. A lot of people were anticipating the game. And I'm surprised how many people hated it. Maybe to them, it didn't live up to the hype. But it lived up to the hype for me. I just finished the game and loved it.
Functional Programming. I've been doing FP for almost 10 years. I've drank the kool aid. Give me those monads and referential transparency.
Functional Programming. I've been doing FP for almost 10 years. I've drank the kool aid. Give me those monads and referential transparency.
> And I'm surprised how many people hated it.
Probably because of the 'second half'.
A lot of people were invested in the Ellie and Joel stuff, and weren't really interested in other characters, so for a lot of folks it was a matter of slogging through story line(s) that had no appeal to them.
All for seemingly making the moral lesson of 'revenge can be costly' and 'forgiveness makes you a better person'.
Probably because of the 'second half'.
A lot of people were invested in the Ellie and Joel stuff, and weren't really interested in other characters, so for a lot of folks it was a matter of slogging through story line(s) that had no appeal to them.
All for seemingly making the moral lesson of 'revenge can be costly' and 'forgiveness makes you a better person'.
I played through it, and it by far was the hardest game to through for me this year. I didn't enjoy it that much.
The reason was less the second half of the game (which I actually found refreshing), but more that the whole thing felt continuosly slow, very violent, and surfaced the worst about humanity. I'm typically not sensitive to games and have played my fair amount of shooters - but this one felt like a bit too much.
The reason was less the second half of the game (which I actually found refreshing), but more that the whole thing felt continuosly slow, very violent, and surfaced the worst about humanity. I'm typically not sensitive to games and have played my fair amount of shooters - but this one felt like a bit too much.
The 2020 elections.
Good entertainment value for the whole world. During pandemic as someone who doesn't live in the US,I actually followed the US election on a daily basis for the first time.
Giuliani farting in court made it all worth it.
[deleted]
I agree. I live in GA, and it was exciting to see my vote could make a difference.
Now that the elections are over: does anyone think they were underwhelming?
2016 had the real threat of both never-Trumpers and Bernie-or-busters, and a lot of weird drama with pizzagate, grab them by the pussy, and her emails. 2020 had nothing anywhere near that and had a comfy and predictable ending.
2016 had the real threat of both never-Trumpers and Bernie-or-busters, and a lot of weird drama with pizzagate, grab them by the pussy, and her emails. 2020 had nothing anywhere near that and had a comfy and predictable ending.
I agree. It was a roller coaster. If someone had told me halfway through 2019 that not only would a Biden/Harris ticket win, but also that I would be overjoyed about it, I would have responded that the first was unlikely and as to the second, not a chance.
Yet here we are.
Hagrids motorbike roller coaster at universal studios in Orlando was worth the wait (if you get the front row and ride at night).
> The attraction "has been plagued by downtime problems from day one" and has been cited as "one of the most unreliable in the entire theme park industry" due to its frequent downtime.
Most of those issues have been resolved and I wouldn't call it particularly downtime prone anymore. In case you're curious, here's a video from one of my favorite theme park YouTubers describing the ride and why it took so long to get the kinks ironed out: https://youtu.be/iXBkB5xjFR8 (TL;DW: an insane amount of animatronics and effects that are rare to roller coasters)
The West Wing lived up to the hype for me. People told me to watch it. I've now watched the first 5 seasons probably 5-6 times. I've even met non USA people for whom it's their favorite series ever.
You should check out Designated Survivor. I love West Wing but I also love stuff like 24. Designated Survivor is basically a perfect lovechild of the 2 series IMO. Relatively fresh, exciting, and really well made.
VMWare.
We take virtualization for granted now but I thought it was smoke and mirrors when it was announced. But nope, it did exactly what it said on the tin.
We take virtualization for granted now but I thought it was smoke and mirrors when it was announced. But nope, it did exactly what it said on the tin.
That's an oldie but goodie.
I was on that bandwagon pretty early around 2000, although back then it was mainly to be able to test sites on older versions of IE than whatever was out back then.
Crazy to think my smartwatch is probably more powerful than the laptop I used to run VMWare back then (I'm guessing it was a Pentium 3).
I was on that bandwagon pretty early around 2000, although back then it was mainly to be able to test sites on older versions of IE than whatever was out back then.
Crazy to think my smartwatch is probably more powerful than the laptop I used to run VMWare back then (I'm guessing it was a Pentium 3).
Flutter.
It's what React Native wanted to be, but JavaScript has too much baggage
It's what React Native wanted to be, but JavaScript has too much baggage
SpaceX reusable first stages. They were pretty hyped by SpaceX and they delivered much to the astonishment of their detractors.
Quake 1-3. Q3 was my favorite.
Docker. After using it with almost every web I've developed since 2015 I think they delivered on what it promised to do. It's not a 100% quality of life improvement since certain things take a bit longer to do vs not using Docker (starting containers have a penalty, installing a new package dependency takes a long time to build since layers aren't diffed for changes, etc.). But overall I've found it very much worth using.
Docker. After using it with almost every web I've developed since 2015 I think they delivered on what it promised to do. It's not a 100% quality of life improvement since certain things take a bit longer to do vs not using Docker (starting containers have a penalty, installing a new package dependency takes a long time to build since layers aren't diffed for changes, etc.). But overall I've found it very much worth using.
Mad Max. It’s raw. It’s real. It’s insane. It tells a suspenseful story without much dialogue.
The original or Fury Road?
Avatar, Titanic, Avengers: End Game, The Matrix, Gostbusters 1984
Call of Duty I, Quake, Full Metal Furies, Dr Kawashima’s Brain Training DS, Donkey Kong Country Returns Wii
Google Street View, Google Maps
Windows 10
Mac Retina 2012
Zoom
Live Music: The Rolling Stones, Paul McCartney, Brian Wilson, James Brown, Tiesto, Paul Oakenfold, Outkast, Pixies, Bruno Mars (a surprise to me), Harry Connick Jr., Rufus Wainwright, Prince, Billy Joel
Las Vegas... I got married there and it was amazing
Sydney Beaches
Schwarzwald in Southern Germany
Full Moon Party on Koh Pannang
Varkala cliffs in Kerala, India
Jazz @ Harry’s American Bar in Paris
Glastonbury Festival
Tokyo
Millennium Party on Bondi Beach 2000 ( Mobile Home )
Call of Duty I, Quake, Full Metal Furies, Dr Kawashima’s Brain Training DS, Donkey Kong Country Returns Wii
Google Street View, Google Maps
Windows 10
Mac Retina 2012
Zoom
Live Music: The Rolling Stones, Paul McCartney, Brian Wilson, James Brown, Tiesto, Paul Oakenfold, Outkast, Pixies, Bruno Mars (a surprise to me), Harry Connick Jr., Rufus Wainwright, Prince, Billy Joel
Las Vegas... I got married there and it was amazing
Sydney Beaches
Schwarzwald in Southern Germany
Full Moon Party on Koh Pannang
Varkala cliffs in Kerala, India
Jazz @ Harry’s American Bar in Paris
Glastonbury Festival
Tokyo
Millennium Party on Bondi Beach 2000 ( Mobile Home )
PHP7 (coming from earlier versions comparatively)
Death Stranding, many who felt the hype then played, wrote it off as a walking/delivery simulator, but miss how well, and in detail, the story and gameplay melded. Sure it could feel at times that it was simply about walking to point A/B, but with that came the challenges and points being made throughout the game. That alone challenges can be overcome, but there will be more obstacles, and the weight of burden (literally and metaphorically in the game) will crush one's morale, motivation, and ability. Together, with the right motives, we can accomplish more to benefit everyone. But the ones who only build or help for self gain/their reward system, will ultimately be corrupted and left empty by their own doing, as their structures will whither unless they exhaustively maintain them to gain pointless intangible/abstract rewards/social scores.
The satisfaction that comes with collaboration and helping one another is where one finds true satisfaction with this game.
It's also just a lot of fun, challenging, and beautiful in general, aside from the story :p
The satisfaction that comes with collaboration and helping one another is where one finds true satisfaction with this game.
It's also just a lot of fun, challenging, and beautiful in general, aside from the story :p
The story is one of the campiest, silliest ones I have ever encountered in a videogame, but hats off to Kojima for trying something new and radical. I definitely enjoyed my time with it and I look forward to his next endeavour.
This might not be around what's asked, but I remember that people in Silicon Valley and around Google had buzzwords like "Social Mobile Cloud" back around ~2010 or ~2012.
https://www.wired.com/insights/2012/05/social-mobile-cloud/
Some people rolled their eyes, maybe including myself at time. (I was never dismissive publicly, but probably didn't pay as much attention as I could have). I would have to say that the buzzword turned out to be pretty accurate: those 3 things largely defined the last decade in terms of software technology, as I see it.
Especially for young people -- there is no world where they don't use some form of social media on their phones (including ones that didn't exist in 2012).
They use cloud applications rather than desktop ones -- that's the "default". Businesses also use cloud infrastructure -- that's the "default".
Lots of money was made in these 3 areas.
https://www.wired.com/insights/2012/05/social-mobile-cloud/
Some people rolled their eyes, maybe including myself at time. (I was never dismissive publicly, but probably didn't pay as much attention as I could have). I would have to say that the buzzword turned out to be pretty accurate: those 3 things largely defined the last decade in terms of software technology, as I see it.
Especially for young people -- there is no world where they don't use some form of social media on their phones (including ones that didn't exist in 2012).
They use cloud applications rather than desktop ones -- that's the "default". Businesses also use cloud infrastructure -- that's the "default".
Lots of money was made in these 3 areas.
I have 2 answers.
1. Coronavirus
The hype
I have a Chinese girlfriend, and when the coronavirus was breaking out in China, she was freaking out, buying masks and so forth. She was really hyping it as a big deal!
Needless to say, it's been a big deal.
2. Election fraud
The hype
Before the election, the President was massively hyping mail-in ballot fraud.
It didn't happen
For those living in the world at large there really was none (dozens of lawsuits were thrown out, the attorney general said there was no evidence.)
But for me it lived up to the hype
But for those living in the President's filter bubble (like me), this election definitely lived up to the hype, and keeps living up to the hype. Those of us in the filter bubble wrongly think we're seeing a massive conspiracy to hide a total of literally hundreds of thousands of fraud ballots across many states in a coordinated collusion. So for me personally (even though I am wrong and living in a filter bubble of proven lies) the voter fraud definitely lived up to the hype!
(I am a conspiracy theorist and everything I believe on this subject had been disproven.)
It is definitely living up to the hype though!
1. Coronavirus
The hype
I have a Chinese girlfriend, and when the coronavirus was breaking out in China, she was freaking out, buying masks and so forth. She was really hyping it as a big deal!
Needless to say, it's been a big deal.
2. Election fraud
The hype
Before the election, the President was massively hyping mail-in ballot fraud.
It didn't happen
For those living in the world at large there really was none (dozens of lawsuits were thrown out, the attorney general said there was no evidence.)
But for me it lived up to the hype
But for those living in the President's filter bubble (like me), this election definitely lived up to the hype, and keeps living up to the hype. Those of us in the filter bubble wrongly think we're seeing a massive conspiracy to hide a total of literally hundreds of thousands of fraud ballots across many states in a coordinated collusion. So for me personally (even though I am wrong and living in a filter bubble of proven lies) the voter fraud definitely lived up to the hype!
(I am a conspiracy theorist and everything I believe on this subject had been disproven.)
It is definitely living up to the hype though!
So you're saying you're a MAGA denialist conspiracy theorist who's been debunked to the point, you can't buy into that crowd anymore and have 'seen the light'? Or are you trolling right-wing people w/ this comment, to show them how insane their logic/world view is?
I can't tell if this is sarcasm, hyperbole or what? lol
I can't tell if this is sarcasm, hyperbole or what? lol
Star Wars (1977).
I suspect most people who read HN weren't around when this movie came out, but I was around then.
There was tremendous hype -- the excitement that this film generated led to lines of people waiting outside movie theaters just to get their chance to see it. People would watch it and then get back into line to watch it again. I remember hearing of people who watched it 15, 20, 25 times.
Star Wars substantially advanced special effects. If you want to get an idea of what the state of special effects were in that era, watch Star Trek (the original series).
"Star Wars" felt _real_. Lightsabers, the use of a "Force" where you could physically moves things from a distance, the glissando effect when a starship goes into hyperspace-- these were all incredibly credible and mind-blowing to people back then.
Star Wars didn't just live up to its hype-- it has exceeded it, becoming a fixture in American culture, and becoming a franchise that continues to generate interest and income today.
I suspect most people who read HN weren't around when this movie came out, but I was around then.
There was tremendous hype -- the excitement that this film generated led to lines of people waiting outside movie theaters just to get their chance to see it. People would watch it and then get back into line to watch it again. I remember hearing of people who watched it 15, 20, 25 times.
Star Wars substantially advanced special effects. If you want to get an idea of what the state of special effects were in that era, watch Star Trek (the original series).
"Star Wars" felt _real_. Lightsabers, the use of a "Force" where you could physically moves things from a distance, the glissando effect when a starship goes into hyperspace-- these were all incredibly credible and mind-blowing to people back then.
Star Wars didn't just live up to its hype-- it has exceeded it, becoming a fixture in American culture, and becoming a franchise that continues to generate interest and income today.
The ending of The Game, with Michael Douglas. From final climax to the final shot. Chef’s kiss.
Shakespeare, but I didn't understand the enduring brilliance until I started reading it side-by-side with a modern translation: https://www.sparknotes.com/nofear/shakespeare/msnd/page_38/
Elfen Lied.
For whatever reason, I only watched it about a year ago despite being inside of the initial hype in secondary school when everyone was talking about it.
I later hard that it was purely shock value from nudity and gore, but it actually had a very coherent plot and very interesting characters, and a tragic serial killer protagonist is always nice, of course.
For whatever reason, I only watched it about a year ago despite being inside of the initial hype in secondary school when everyone was talking about it.
I later hard that it was purely shock value from nudity and gore, but it actually had a very coherent plot and very interesting characters, and a tragic serial killer protagonist is always nice, of course.
The reMarkable 2 tablet! As long as you don't expect it to do more than what it's designed for, I've been loving using it and it's helped me enjoy writing a lot more.
Could you talk more about how you use it?
https://remarkable.com/store/remarkable-2 says it's for taking notes and writing on PDFs. That's not much to go on...
I have it on the side while I work to take meeting notes and then email them to myself, or use it as aid to explain designs/ideas visually.
I sketch blog posts for my blog on it. It has pushed me to write end-to-end without distractions because there's no browser tab to check. I also don't end up finding existing blog posts and ending up demotivated.
I download sheet music from imslp and put it on the tablet, I study and annotate the sheet music and use the tablet to read on the piano.
Sometimes I draw on it, too...
I sketch blog posts for my blog on it. It has pushed me to write end-to-end without distractions because there's no browser tab to check. I also don't end up finding existing blog posts and ending up demotivated.
I download sheet music from imslp and put it on the tablet, I study and annotate the sheet music and use the tablet to read on the piano.
Sometimes I draw on it, too...
Beowulf, translated by Seamus Healy. I can’t read the other translations at all but that book is incredible with his wording. It’s a dark story of warriors, glory, monsters, tiny kingdoms carved out by champions, and gives a rare look at how Christianity blended with paganism in those days to create a unique literary folklore
The Sopranos - even though the end was controversial it was the consistently the best TV ever created.
Ken Burns Docs Series - especially Civil War and Vietnam
Nassim Taleb's - Incerto - so much interesting and useful info int those books. Really eye-opening stuff.
Robert Caro's Biographies - I am not finished with all of them yet but the ones I have read are excellent
Ken Burns Docs Series - especially Civil War and Vietnam
Nassim Taleb's - Incerto - so much interesting and useful info int those books. Really eye-opening stuff.
Robert Caro's Biographies - I am not finished with all of them yet but the ones I have read are excellent
If you like the Burns/Novack Vietnam, I highly recommend WGBH's Vietnam: A Television Series
cool thanks!
Having a kid. Every day is filled with joy, and sometimes sadness, but it's so great to watch him grow and learn.
Unpopular opinion - Java virtual machine (JVM).
Yes, I needed that to install VB6. Let's also add VB6 to the list, I use it at least once a year for something quick.
The Popeyes Chicken Sandwich.
It's honestly the best fast food item I've ever eaten.
It's honestly the best fast food item I've ever eaten.
I just got Disney+ to enjoy while I’m off and as someone who had to try 3 times to get through the latest Star Wars movie: the mandalorian is good.
Rogue One is worth watching if you haven't already. Miles ahead of anything else SW related Disney has put out.
It’s the third best Star Wars movie, behind New Hope and Empire. It’s actually fantastic.
Nah, it's good but return of the jedi was better. The final fight between Luke and Vader was masterfully executed and I cannot believe that people trash on this movie just because of ewoks and the dancing at the end.
Rouge one had the most one dimensional and forgettable villain ever. We like it because it was a very pretty and unusually unique and dark war movie. It's not like the story or world building was up to the standards of the original trilogy...
Rouge one had the most one dimensional and forgettable villain ever. We like it because it was a very pretty and unusually unique and dark war movie. It's not like the story or world building was up to the standards of the original trilogy...
My favorite scene in all three original trilogy is the opening when luke does the somersault flip as r2d2 launches the light saber at him...
That said, as an adult, after being let down immensely by eps 1-3, and finding mediocre/nostalgic entertainment in 7-9, rogue one actually feels better to me than all other movies.
I can't really compare it with Mandalorian though, except that they compliment each other nicely. I like RO because of it's dark, everybody dies in the end, that is totally NOT something you'd expect from ANY disney movie.
That said, as an adult, after being let down immensely by eps 1-3, and finding mediocre/nostalgic entertainment in 7-9, rogue one actually feels better to me than all other movies.
I can't really compare it with Mandalorian though, except that they compliment each other nicely. I like RO because of it's dark, everybody dies in the end, that is totally NOT something you'd expect from ANY disney movie.
Not sure why you are being downvoted for this, I 100% agree.
It wasn’t bad at all. I guess I just had too much SW fatigue
The iPhone. Unbelievable hype when it launched and it delivered beyond what was expected in 2007.
My N95 did more, and did it better. Style over substance won.
I would argue the opposite. Substance won over style, and this is coming from someone who bought an expensive Symbian phone a few months before the first iPhone came out.
Setting a goal for yourself and following it through to completion.
Delayed gratification and hard work.
Doing the right thing, when everyone else is doing the easy thing.
Delayed gratification and hard work.
Doing the right thing, when everyone else is doing the easy thing.
Avatar the Movie (from director of Titanic, not the anime). I remember how hyped it was before the release and I felt it definitely delivered (second one is slated for 2022 release)
I don't know about this one. The special effects didn't age well, the plot and characters are generic, the overall message is too much on the nose, there's the word "unobtanium"... it's not great.
Final Fantasy 7 Remake and Animal Crossing: New Horizons. Both released this year, both with much hype. No disappointment on both.
But regarding Cyberpunk, we should be fair. Witcher 3 wasn't the beloved Wircher 3 from today at release either. It had also problems and took it's time to ripe. People forget it.
Similar think happend at No Mans Sky. Released to early, and still grew in a fantastic game after all the shitstorms. Some games just need longer to satisfy the hype.
But regarding Cyberpunk, we should be fair. Witcher 3 wasn't the beloved Wircher 3 from today at release either. It had also problems and took it's time to ripe. People forget it.
Similar think happend at No Mans Sky. Released to early, and still grew in a fantastic game after all the shitstorms. Some games just need longer to satisfy the hype.
I played TW3 on release. It had some problems, but nowhere near the issues that Cyberpunk has. It wasn't fundamentally flawed like CP2077.
What fundamental flaws does CP2077 has? I mean except the problems on last gen-consoles, which is not a general flaw.
Linear story.
Interstellar, the 2014 movie. Waited for it for a long time and I went to the theatre on the first day. I was stunned. I keep re-watching it every now and then too.
The Marvel Cinematic Universe Finale (infinity wars/endgame)
I remember I saw Iron Man 1 in high school and it really felt like it was the beginning of something different. This movie wasn't like the other ones that came out each year...
Of course there were some boring ones in the 22 movie run, but overall I think the final 2 were tremendous and pretty much everyone loved them with very little disappointment.
I remember I saw Iron Man 1 in high school and it really felt like it was the beginning of something different. This movie wasn't like the other ones that came out each year...
Of course there were some boring ones in the 22 movie run, but overall I think the final 2 were tremendous and pretty much everyone loved them with very little disappointment.
Spacex landing those rockets.
Rust! The theme is similar to C++ but the script is a lot tighter and you really care about the types. Only on season two though.
TBH, I really enjoy playing Cyberpunk 2077, and I think of it as one of the best game ever. For me it lived up to the hype.
Fiber internet. Aww inspiring speeds that never waver. It's a giant leap above cable and dsl in my experience.
This is something that actually turned out to me meh for me. I think cable internet was the huge jump.
As far as overall impact you are probably right. But I'm back on cable again after having fiber and the difference is striking in my experience. Cable delivers such an inconsistent experience versus fiber being 100% rock solid. But that's just my experience, maybe I got (un)lucky.
WiFi kills fiber for me.
I can only get ~400mbps out of my 1gbps connection since all of my devices are wireless, and this is still so fast that I cannot justify the work of adding a physical cable to my setup.
I can already stream 4K video in WiFi. What would I have to lose the freedom to watch it anywhere in my house?
I can only get ~400mbps out of my 1gbps connection since all of my devices are wireless, and this is still so fast that I cannot justify the work of adding a physical cable to my setup.
I can already stream 4K video in WiFi. What would I have to lose the freedom to watch it anywhere in my house?
I'd like to nominate Apocalypse Now. Very particularly, Marlon Brando's performance. The whole movie is built up to this mythic man, a god among mortals, a figure that human psyche cannot understand, the end to an Odyssey. And Brando and Coppola have managed to surpass all the expectations.
One of the two times I’ve been in a theater where the audience was laughing at what was supposed to be a dramatic performance was Brando’s turn in this film. The other was in Wrath of Kaaaaan.
The original iPod.
I was a teen listening to tons of music on MP3 CD players and cheap MP3 players with 64-128MB of flash memory. The 5GB iPod cost about four weeks pay, was so far ahead of any other option. I could almost fit my entire music library onto it!
I was a staunch PC+Windows supporter who thought Apple was dumb. The iPod was the only Apple product I owned, but it was obviously the best music player. There was no competition in my mind.
Unnecessary nostalgia: the original iPod was Firewire only, so I had to buy a PCI card to be able to plug it in to my PC. The first iPod came out before iTunes was ported to Windows, so the official solution for Windows users was MusicMatch Jukebox with a shitty iPod plugin. Eventually I discovered EphPod, an excellent third-party software, which I used for the life of my iPod.
I was a teen listening to tons of music on MP3 CD players and cheap MP3 players with 64-128MB of flash memory. The 5GB iPod cost about four weeks pay, was so far ahead of any other option. I could almost fit my entire music library onto it!
I was a staunch PC+Windows supporter who thought Apple was dumb. The iPod was the only Apple product I owned, but it was obviously the best music player. There was no competition in my mind.
Unnecessary nostalgia: the original iPod was Firewire only, so I had to buy a PCI card to be able to plug it in to my PC. The first iPod came out before iTunes was ported to Windows, so the official solution for Windows users was MusicMatch Jukebox with a shitty iPod plugin. Eventually I discovered EphPod, an excellent third-party software, which I used for the life of my iPod.
You might find this channel interesting https://youtube.com/c/DankPods
It’s a guy taking iPods and breathing new life into them
Robot Vacuum, cleaning the floors in my place used to honestly be a task that took well over an hour I used to only really do it when it started to look bad. Do it all the time now and every time it's done you walk in the room and are surprised how nice it suddenly looks.
Yeah, I was about to make a post about how nice the Roomba I got is.
Setup had issues with android, which is sad (but the iphone app is rock solid).
I love how easy they are to clean and service (compared to taking apart bulky vacuums), and they do a shockingly good job if you get the top-shelf models.
Setup had issues with android, which is sad (but the iphone app is rock solid).
I love how easy they are to clean and service (compared to taking apart bulky vacuums), and they do a shockingly good job if you get the top-shelf models.
The OA, season 2.
I think it was even more divisive than the first season. I found a lot of people who loved the first season weren't sold on the second. I wouldn't expect it to go down well with the HN audience.
It was just hard to start the 2nd season. But the ending was wild.
I enjoyed both seasons, even though they were quite different. I hope they make a 3rd one.
I hope the cancellation was a marketing gimmick. I love it so much!
I loved the end to the second season and while there are so many questions I'd love to see answered, I felt like it also made for good series finale.
I doubt there was much hype about the printing press when Gutenberg introduced invented it circa 1440 but if there was any hype, the printing press certainly lived up to the hype.
I can think of no mechanism which has enabled such widespread transmission of knowledge/information (without distortion) in human history. No great success or failure is usually the result of one cause but I'd wager that most of technological progress in the last 5 centuries has been greatly enabled by the printing press.
Some (light) reading on the topic :
https://www.history.com/news/printing-press-renaissance
Some (light) reading on the topic :
https://www.history.com/news/printing-press-renaissance
iPhone definitely did. It was months between the announcement and an actual premiere, and people were very hyped.
Apple’s M1 and iPad as well.
Arguably, SpaceX and Tesla.
Also arguably, Facebook. I remember thinking it was overhyped at it’s initial IPO valuation.
Oh, and of course Internet - it was massively hyped up 1996-1999.
Apple’s M1 and iPad as well.
Arguably, SpaceX and Tesla.
Also arguably, Facebook. I remember thinking it was overhyped at it’s initial IPO valuation.
Oh, and of course Internet - it was massively hyped up 1996-1999.
Total solar eclipse. Unbelievable. Life changing. Partial is meh. Totality made me cry.
After seeing this in 2017, I had commented to a coworker that it “it wasn’t like changing, but I’d be willing to travel to see one again” to which she replied “that sounds like it is life changing” and I was a people surprised.
Watching a total solar eclipse of amazing and I’m so glad I went out of my way to go down and experience it.
Game of Thrones^^
Friends raved about it, but I just am not into fantasy genre so ignored it for a few years. When I finally caved, after a few episodes I fell hook-line-and-sinker into what is an incredibly well crafted story about the human condition: greed, lust, loyalty, ambition, betrayal... you name it, it has it all.
What it has in common with other amazing writing (e.g. Breaking Bad) is realistic (i.e. human) responses to incredible situations.
Edit: ^^ excluding the last season and the horrid finale!!
Martin's books are exquisitly well written and the early seasons were a credit to them - not so much once they diverted.
Friends raved about it, but I just am not into fantasy genre so ignored it for a few years. When I finally caved, after a few episodes I fell hook-line-and-sinker into what is an incredibly well crafted story about the human condition: greed, lust, loyalty, ambition, betrayal... you name it, it has it all.
What it has in common with other amazing writing (e.g. Breaking Bad) is realistic (i.e. human) responses to incredible situations.
Edit: ^^ excluding the last season and the horrid finale!!
Martin's books are exquisitly well written and the early seasons were a credit to them - not so much once they diverted.
Just it of curiosity, did you finish GoT?
It's so bad I never wanna rewatch it nor do I anticipate the books anymore. The end made me totally be over it and only sometimes complain about being pissed off at last few seasons and especially the last one, like I am now.
Hell we've been stuck at home for almost the entire year and I've never seen or heard anyone saying something along the lines of "I'm gonna rewatch GoT".
It's so bad I never wanna rewatch it nor do I anticipate the books anymore. The end made me totally be over it and only sometimes complain about being pissed off at last few seasons and especially the last one, like I am now.
Hell we've been stuck at home for almost the entire year and I've never seen or heard anyone saying something along the lines of "I'm gonna rewatch GoT".
The ending didn't make me fully over it, I still want to see what Martin had planned, but I'm doubtful I'll enjoy it nearly as much as I would had I never seen the shit-stain which is GoT season 8.
Right. I had read the book in the days they were published and found them damn good in their realm, but when I heard that there was a TV serial about it, I didn't even bother giving it a try. Then hype started, but hype has a negative influence on me, it is the best to get me not to watch/read/listen/do something :-) .
So it was only after a number of years that I started watching the serial. I had no hope for it, but I found the first episodes unexpectedly great, and then again and again. Well of course, as usual it went down when the book material went thin and finally ran out, and ended in a wreck, but still the first seasons were up to the hype. The only thing I may have against it is the abuse of colour filters: a cheap, too cheap, trick to build a mood, give a graphical style, or like in this case indicate a setting, that way too many directors use and abuse.
So it was only after a number of years that I started watching the serial. I had no hope for it, but I found the first episodes unexpectedly great, and then again and again. Well of course, as usual it went down when the book material went thin and finally ran out, and ended in a wreck, but still the first seasons were up to the hype. The only thing I may have against it is the abuse of colour filters: a cheap, too cheap, trick to build a mood, give a graphical style, or like in this case indicate a setting, that way too many directors use and abuse.
The first season(s) that followed the books, sure. But the quality declined until the last season that was just horrible.
LOL... agreed. Updated!
La Sagadra Familia.
I had seen a bunch of other Gaudi buildings, and wasn't all that impressed. The outside of La Sagadra Famailia just seemed tedious.
I went inside and ... words fail me to describe the experience.
I had seen a bunch of other Gaudi buildings, and wasn't all that impressed. The outside of La Sagadra Famailia just seemed tedious.
I went inside and ... words fail me to describe the experience.
Channel Tunnel
Games: Portal, FSX. Incredible, even now, and still what I play the most (not that I'm much of a gamer)
Science: Mars Opportunity Rover, Starship
Music: Nathaniel Rateliff && and the Night Sweats. Incredible.
Electronics/Radio: Arduino, QRP Labs QCX radio kits.
Internet: YouTube. When I first heard about it in the mid-2000's I thought it was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard of. But lately, I've been having more fun with it than ever. Love it or hate it, it's incredible in so many ways. Except the ads. Those suck.
Science: Mars Opportunity Rover, Starship
Music: Nathaniel Rateliff && and the Night Sweats. Incredible.
Electronics/Radio: Arduino, QRP Labs QCX radio kits.
Internet: YouTube. When I first heard about it in the mid-2000's I thought it was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard of. But lately, I've been having more fun with it than ever. Love it or hate it, it's incredible in so many ways. Except the ads. Those suck.
Bose QC-15 headphones. Yeah, I know they're now old and there are newer and better models that are wireless. But I bought mine in 2010 I believe and they have exceeded my expectations by a huge margin. Biggest benefits: (1) ability to concentrate/focus in noisy office environment, (2) heard sounds in music that I had never heard before (for music that I had known for decades), and (3) made flying dramatically more comfortable. Mine are old but they still work great.
Mmm, nobody mentioning the Starship launches like the recent SN8? Even though it crashed on landing, the fact that it did everything else perfectly is absolutely mind-blowing.
games from valve, blizzard, Nintendo or rockstar. They usually get quite a bit of pre release hype and then great reception afterwards. I mean gta5 might not be my personal taste but i cant say it did not deliver.
I believe cyberpunk will still deliver, actually. These huge single player rpgs tend to have buggy releases and cyberpunk was still worse than others, but five years from now people will still be talking about them and i doubt cyberpunk will be very different.
I believe cyberpunk will still deliver, actually. These huge single player rpgs tend to have buggy releases and cyberpunk was still worse than others, but five years from now people will still be talking about them and i doubt cyberpunk will be very different.
Nintendo Switch. Still play boxing fitness game 2 player with my gf every day. Despite the fact that we have VR systems, PCs, and smart phones that all cost way more.
fast DNA/RNA sequencing - we're sequencing everything now; sequencing thousands of COVID variants and making trees of whats happening around the world.
[deleted]
AirPods
Not even the pros, although they're even better in some ways, but just the original AirPods. They don't even sound all that great, but the sound quality was an acceptable compromise for the freedom and convenience that they brought. I used headphones far more often in situations when I didn't normally use headphones because they were so much more convenient to use than any other headphones I've owned.
Not even the pros, although they're even better in some ways, but just the original AirPods. They don't even sound all that great, but the sound quality was an acceptable compromise for the freedom and convenience that they brought. I used headphones far more often in situations when I didn't normally use headphones because they were so much more convenient to use than any other headphones I've owned.
Jagged Alliance 2.
I played the demo for longer than I played whole other games, and I still play the game that was released in 1999 regularly.
In my top five video games ever made.
I played the demo for longer than I played whole other games, and I still play the game that was released in 1999 regularly.
In my top five video games ever made.
[deleted]
Oof, seeing Reddit karma farming style posts upvoted on hacker news is... disappointing. I hope we do not see more of these in the future.
It's okay, the answers are different from reddit's answers and people are a bit more relaxed around the holidays so chatting about random stuff feels appropriate for a bit.
Since its tenth anniversary release is soon, Wonderful Everyday.
I'm only five chapters in, but so far it's a deeply constructed story with a lot of cultural references woven in seamlessly. Even halfway through there are still more mysteries being hinted at. It also speaks about topics like perception, the purpose of existence and the ego. I hope to finish it soon.
I'm only five chapters in, but so far it's a deeply constructed story with a lot of cultural references woven in seamlessly. Even halfway through there are still more mysteries being hinted at. It also speaks about topics like perception, the purpose of existence and the ego. I hope to finish it soon.
Apps on the iPhone.
When Apple introduced the iPhone, they told third-party developers to build web apps for the phone, presumably because they hadn't the dev tools ready yet. But everybody wanted to build native apps.
That's the funny thing, Apple didn't create the hype, the eager dev community did. Then the tools and the apps came. The rest is history, as they say.
When Apple introduced the iPhone, they told third-party developers to build web apps for the phone, presumably because they hadn't the dev tools ready yet. But everybody wanted to build native apps.
That's the funny thing, Apple didn't create the hype, the eager dev community did. Then the tools and the apps came. The rest is history, as they say.
[deleted]
I love my reMarkable. The software might not be as polished as an iPad, but the marker, the feel of writing on the device, and the focus that it gives me is incredible. I love writing on paper, but I hate my disorganization with storing and referencing notebooks. The 8 month pre-order had me quite worried, but I’m so glad I waited it out.
over my life ive seen dozens of new languages show up claiming c like speed and not living up to that. Rust did.
Coronavirus.
When I first heard alarmists at mid-January 2020, I couldn't have imagined that they would turn out so correct.
When I first heard alarmists at mid-January 2020, I couldn't have imagined that they would turn out so correct.
I remember reading the subreddit in early February and questioning how much of what I'm seeing is legit and how much is the hivemind just blowing things out of proportion.
A couple games and/or systems:
Super Nintendo, Super Mario 3, Starcraft 2, street fighter 2, Warcraft 3...
Bitcoin is pretty big these days, at least in price. I earn half of my income in Bitcoin, as a consultant.
Isaac Asimov’s body of work, especially his short stories, especially “The Last Question” and “The Egg”.
Dave Matthews. ~1998.
Bitcoin
Did it though? I acknowledge the price is still climbing. Originally we thought it would have replaced credit cards which are a monopoly but it stayed a niche payment method and high risk investment target.
I agree, it's still a niche investment, and after 10 years, I'm not very impressed with what blockchain technology, or the
philosophy behind it, has given us. And on the issue of btc price increase: how much of this price inflation is through manipulation?
- https://medium.com/@kaistinchcombe/ten-years-in-nobody-has-c...
and followup
- https://medium.com/@kaistinchcombe/decentralized-and-trustle...
and followup
- https://medium.com/@kaistinchcombe/decentralized-and-trustle...
I read both articles but it isn't very convincing. He goes on to point out the 150 different companies and projects that solve the same things as bitcoin/ eth. However, instead of a million different 'endpoints' there's one its self-contained. You have this extremely powerful technology that has the ability to do all of these different things that have taken hundreds of thousands of people 20 years to make. Eth has done that in 7 years with a fraction of the resources. As adoption grows so will the development speed.
There is one sustainable use case for pseudoanonymous distributed ledger currencies, and that's as the de facto currency for illegal online marketplaces! If you're goal is to subvert AML/KYC, you've found what you're looking for, until the authorities find you...
Until I tried writing bitcoin script.
Then I found Ethereum, which lived up to the hype.
Then I found Ethereum, which lived up to the hype.
Hey - this is the second time i've ran across one of your comments that intrigued me. I'm currently in the process of selling my business and will be focusing full time on ethereum development. I don't know anyone in the space so i'd love to chat and i'd gladly pay you for you time. Email me at [email protected] if you're interested.
Ryzen 5xxx assuming you could buy one
Half-life 2. It delivered way more than expected. Looking back, it also feels that the hype was more genuine, mostly fed from the bottom by fans rather than orchestrated by PR and marketing departments. May be that could be a part of it's apparent overdelivery?
Tesla. Acceleration of their cars and autopilot actually being impressive.
I would also add to this electric bikes.
I would also add to this electric bikes.
Overhyped is one thing, unfinished is another.
For all it's faults and failings, Duke Nukem Forever worked. In the literal functioning sense.
Cyberpunk is just unfinished. We went from "when's it done" to "burn the customer on a fast release" in a few short decades.
For all it's faults and failings, Duke Nukem Forever worked. In the literal functioning sense.
Cyberpunk is just unfinished. We went from "when's it done" to "burn the customer on a fast release" in a few short decades.
World of Warcraft. I grew up with WC1 and 2 being just childhood defining games. WoW let me explore endless hours of childhood imagination of what the world was like. And it was everything I hoped it could be. Exploring was amazing.
The gameplay was okay.
The gameplay was okay.
Yeezy 350 v1/v2, never owned a pair but they were definitely extremely coveted when they released and have certainly made a lasting impact on public perception of Adidas as a brand, trimmer sneaker profiles, and men’s fashion.
- Halt & Catch Fire
- IntelliJ
- Toyota having dependable cars.
- IntelliJ
- Toyota having dependable cars.
Assassin's Creed Odyssey. It's the one that got me sucked into the series.
Johnathan Strange & Mr. Norrel. I heard it hyped on radio and interviews for weeks before I bought a copy, and it was even better than the hype.
Batman Arkham series
Johnathan Strange & Mr. Norrel. I heard it hyped on radio and interviews for weeks before I bought a copy, and it was even better than the hype.
Batman Arkham series
Phoenix LiveView
A solid meditation practice.
Surprised no one mentioned all the Grand Theft Auto games.
Right from Vice City, every game has been an overload of fun to play.
GTA 5, especially, had a lot of hype for a long time and it lived up to every bit of it.
GTA 5, especially, had a lot of hype for a long time and it lived up to every bit of it.
Maybe I just paid less attention to the hype, but I think Cyberpunk lived up to it for me. I've been perfectly happy with it. Sure, it has some bugs, but they're being addressed rapidly.
. NET Core
I came here for this one. Between the platform convergence and incredible productivity you get with tools like Blazor, I could not be happier. The latest C# language version is also really nice w/ the additional functional paradigms, pattern matching, et. al.
There are certainly a few rough spots on non-windows platforms if you want to port legacy .NET Framework apps, but for most enterprisey use cases, .NET Core is an amazing fit.
The performance also constantly staggers me. AspNetCore is trading blows within the top 10 slots of the techempower composite benchmark these days.
There are certainly a few rough spots on non-windows platforms if you want to port legacy .NET Framework apps, but for most enterprisey use cases, .NET Core is an amazing fit.
The performance also constantly staggers me. AspNetCore is trading blows within the top 10 slots of the techempower composite benchmark these days.
The Instant Pot
The Taj Mahal.
It's perhaps the most beautiful thing ever built by anyone.
I've done a fair amount of traveling, and it's easy to get a bit jaded, but the Taj Mahal is every bit as spectacular as you imagine.
It's perhaps the most beautiful thing ever built by anyone.
I've done a fair amount of traveling, and it's easy to get a bit jaded, but the Taj Mahal is every bit as spectacular as you imagine.
Chess is an amazing game. It has personality and if you know a bit about the game it has infinite depth. Players have playing style. There is a rich history going back hundreds of years.
Was chess hyped though? The question was not, which things are good and stood the test of time, it's what lived up to hype, and for me it doesn't seem like chess was really ever hyped all that much.
Chess is becoming an e-sport and as the other comments mention there is also the series queens gambit.
Chess is growing in popularity on sites like Twitch and Youtube.
Chess is growing in popularity on sites like Twitch and Youtube.
Becoming? Chess was an e-sport before we knew what an e-sport was, with observers dissecting tournament games on rec.games.chess.
There is something of a resurgance lately since The Queen's Gambit came out on Netflix.
The iPhone.
At first there was hype, confusion and criticism (who would use a software keyboard?).. and with time, it redefined computing in a way few devices did.
[deleted]
The Manhattan Project.
The stock market hype during the beginning of the pandemic.
The Remarkable tablet!
It has completely replaced paper for me. Diagraming, reading, etc. I waited 5 months for the device, and it was definitely worth the wait.
It has completely replaced paper for me. Diagraming, reading, etc. I waited 5 months for the device, and it was definitely worth the wait.
Not one of motorcycles, horses, cuban cigars, Bach, Helene Grimaud, faith, and as a super weird outlier, Freemasonry, has disappointed me.
It’s been a while but Skyrim is definitely up there
mRNA vaccines and big pharma in general. In a big, “we went to the moon” kind of way.
Avengers: Endgame, I feel like they did a great job bringing an end to the slow build up of all the previous movies.
Linux, and the entire free/open source world.
In my opinion, it is the greatest achievement in modern human history.
In my opinion, it is the greatest achievement in modern human history.
Climate Change
Lebron James. I thought for sure he was gonna crash and burn after the absolutely insane hype.
The Dark Knight Rises.
Overdelivered on top of the hype behind the first 2 movies.
The second one was really hard to beat.
Overdelivered on top of the hype behind the first 2 movies.
The second one was really hard to beat.
Stanford. I didn't complete public higher education when I was younger, so I've been filling in some of the blanks through independent study lately. So far I've really clicked with cs106a/b homework assignments and Youtube video of Classical Mechanics lectures.
Bloodstained. A remake of Castlevania. It's better than the originals.
Not visually at least. The move to 3D is made with really poor taste.
I don't agree. I just finished it and I have no problem with it. It reminds me of Dark Souls 1.
[deleted]
Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon. It has a well deserved reputation of impenetrability, and it takes a bit of mental adjustment to shift into the gear necessary to negotiate it. My first time through, at approx 20 was easily my third or fourth attempt at it, and was possible only because I forced myself to continue through it at a relatively normal pace without stopping too long to go "wha...." and try to figure out what was really going on. I would compare it to the reading version of what you have to do with your eyes to see those MagicEye images. It worked and I made it through after a few weeks and I think it is the book that in some way taught me to read other books, and I only actually arrived at that reflection as writing this, but it is a true statement. While the plot of the book is clearly discernible from beginning to end, the frequent shift of setting, characters, tone, voice, etc occurs nearly continuously, at least within the first section. Its like one of those movies where a different director shoots a single plot thread, only in this case its as though there were a different director for every scene or cut.
The quantity of invention on display for the 700-however many pages it consumes, is titanic. And the various pastiches that Pynchon pulls off with both accuracy and love are astonishingly numerous. Its like he was daring the world to come up with something he couldn't write and had so far come out on top. The additional pay off for all the work required to consume GR is that it is outrageously funny. Jokes and Broadway numbers performed transparently by the characters, complete with blocking directions straight out of Gene Kelly - Vincent Minnelli musical.
Gravity's Rainbow is one of those ciphers of modern American literature, in which the reality of it, and the cultural parodies it has inspired, like one of my other electrifying reads, IJ, almost perfectly balance. For every proto-hipster than insists that it is to be disregarded for its self indulgence and self-consciousness of pretensions, a serious reader who will stipulate to all of the above, but go on to acknowledge and assert that all the cultural baggage aside, there really is a THERE there.
I think its probably good that Pynchon writes so infrequently, because it prevents him from becoming his own self-parody. There is something remarkable to me about V., GR, Mason & Dixon, and to a lesser extent, ATD. They all exude an empathy with their characters, that is remarkable anywhere. I'm not sure what happened with Vineland, Inherent Vice, or The Bleeding Edge, except to say that though the plot devices and Pynchonian character names, which are frequently even more omnisciently specific than anyone since Dickens, can be entertaining, the characters themselves prompted zero interest or engagement with me. They are as pure a mechanical constructs. I felt with the first group, that it was clear and emotionally satisfying to me when Pynchon demonstrated that he cared for a given character, and it made reading them a transporting experience the first time around. I kept working to get myself emotionally invested in the characters of the second group only to fail for lack of purchase. I recall reading the DFW thought Pynchon a failed genius because he tended to trivialize his own work and never really betray any emotional engagement to the reader. I wonder if he was responding to the same thing I am describing.
Anyway, Gravity's Rainbow, way worth the hype, as well as the effort to complete it.
The quantity of invention on display for the 700-however many pages it consumes, is titanic. And the various pastiches that Pynchon pulls off with both accuracy and love are astonishingly numerous. Its like he was daring the world to come up with something he couldn't write and had so far come out on top. The additional pay off for all the work required to consume GR is that it is outrageously funny. Jokes and Broadway numbers performed transparently by the characters, complete with blocking directions straight out of Gene Kelly - Vincent Minnelli musical.
Gravity's Rainbow is one of those ciphers of modern American literature, in which the reality of it, and the cultural parodies it has inspired, like one of my other electrifying reads, IJ, almost perfectly balance. For every proto-hipster than insists that it is to be disregarded for its self indulgence and self-consciousness of pretensions, a serious reader who will stipulate to all of the above, but go on to acknowledge and assert that all the cultural baggage aside, there really is a THERE there.
I think its probably good that Pynchon writes so infrequently, because it prevents him from becoming his own self-parody. There is something remarkable to me about V., GR, Mason & Dixon, and to a lesser extent, ATD. They all exude an empathy with their characters, that is remarkable anywhere. I'm not sure what happened with Vineland, Inherent Vice, or The Bleeding Edge, except to say that though the plot devices and Pynchonian character names, which are frequently even more omnisciently specific than anyone since Dickens, can be entertaining, the characters themselves prompted zero interest or engagement with me. They are as pure a mechanical constructs. I felt with the first group, that it was clear and emotionally satisfying to me when Pynchon demonstrated that he cared for a given character, and it made reading them a transporting experience the first time around. I kept working to get myself emotionally invested in the characters of the second group only to fail for lack of purchase. I recall reading the DFW thought Pynchon a failed genius because he tended to trivialize his own work and never really betray any emotional engagement to the reader. I wonder if he was responding to the same thing I am describing.
Anyway, Gravity's Rainbow, way worth the hype, as well as the effort to complete it.
Stripe
CRISPR
Wifi
Computers, the Internet, 3D Computer Graphics - all exceeded their hype.
JavaScript. Here’s the press release announcing it in 1995: https://tech-insider.org/java/research/1995/1204.html
The Bornless Rite. Damn.
Space X and the Falcon 9
Popeyes Chicken Sandwich
As far as recent video games go - Sekiro, DMC5 and Doom Eternal.
[deleted]
[deleted]
SideKick, Turbo Pascal 7.0, GIT, SSD drives, Moore's Law
Breaking Bad. Refused to watch it for years due to the hype.
Air Fryers and Costco.
Ah yes, this brings to mind modern/fast pressure cookers! Really revolutionizing delicious, fast cooking!
Air fryers are freaking awesome! We use it for 1/2 of our meals these days!
Doom eternal, it build up on everything Doom 2016 did well
I have not read reviews, but I did complete Cyberpunk 2077, and it was awesome. Easily best game I played in years. I don't know what did you expect from the game, but my expectations were exceeded.
[deleted]
Interstellar.
Tool's Fear Inoculum.
The Expanse.
Tool's Fear Inoculum.
The Expanse.
I looovvveee Interstellar. That "No Time for Caution" sequence is the exact point in time that I granted Christopher Nolan apotheosis. Doesn't hurt that I'm a bit of a space geek too. It's as if Interstellar was made with marketing crosshairs aimed at me.
However, I think it's still in that "only time will tell" phase. Like Cameron's Avatar---mindblowing during it's time and for a few years after but now just mostly remembered for the implications of Na'vi anatomy and the lazily named unobtanium---Interstellar might yet be remembered more for the cheesy bits than its storytelling.
I still have very high hopes for it though! But I'm giving it maybe five more years, at least a decade. Fingers crossed!
However, I think it's still in that "only time will tell" phase. Like Cameron's Avatar---mindblowing during it's time and for a few years after but now just mostly remembered for the implications of Na'vi anatomy and the lazily named unobtanium---Interstellar might yet be remembered more for the cheesy bits than its storytelling.
I still have very high hopes for it though! But I'm giving it maybe five more years, at least a decade. Fingers crossed!
Mozart's and Beethoven's careers
Counter Strike, MacBook Pro 2014, Alaska.
I see lots of TV/Movies but no music, so I’ll throw in Deadmau5.
He combines thoughtful chords and composition, innovative and quirky showmanship, and deep personal care in mixing, mastering, and general sound crafting. He’s about as original as they come in the electronic scene and probably a major inspiration to the last decade of new artists. His album titles are things like “while(1<2)” and “W:/2016Album/“ and he’s stuck to that theme for as long as I can remember.
He combines thoughtful chords and composition, innovative and quirky showmanship, and deep personal care in mixing, mastering, and general sound crafting. He’s about as original as they come in the electronic scene and probably a major inspiration to the last decade of new artists. His album titles are things like “while(1<2)” and “W:/2016Album/“ and he’s stuck to that theme for as long as I can remember.
The Spectacle, an idea from the Situationist International, it viewed the collective experience that we have in our society as a Spectacle(a reality simulacrum with images).
"All that once was directly lived has become mere representation. The decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing." Guy Debord
This inspired the Matrix, most recently also demonstrated and inspired Black Mirrors episodes, exploring capitalism and participation in hyperreality.
"All that once was directly lived has become mere representation. The decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing." Guy Debord
This inspired the Matrix, most recently also demonstrated and inspired Black Mirrors episodes, exploring capitalism and participation in hyperreality.
Illmatic, Nas' debut album.
DMT - jesus christ did it ever.
- Half Life 2, Ep1 & Ep2, Alyx
- Empire Strikes Back
- Tumbbad
- Empire Strikes Back
- Tumbbad
Bitcoin
Apple
AWS
New Zealand
Animal Crossing - New Horizon
Avengers
Starlink
Zelda Breadth of the wild
Final fantasy 7 remake.
The Iphone. Nuff said
mRNA and the vaccines that speedily came from it.
[deleted]
The Aeropress.
Cameron’s Avatar
Avengers finale
Avengers finale
SpaceX, Tesla.
uzumaki naruto had fantastic ending.
Lebron james.
Lebron James.
[deleted]
Lebron James.
[deleted]
The Internet
FTTH
VoWiFi
Covid19
AirPods.
Computers
Hamilton.
The McRib
Tesla. Or rather, TSLA. (So far)
LeBron James.
mRNA vaccines. Note that the COVID vaccine is Moderna’s first approved product. Moderna was founded in 2010.
Rust
A very old example, but Quake 1 did. It came out at the time when everyone was thrilled by DooM 2, the game that took the world by storm. Quake 1 was the second game in the row from the same developer that did so.
Diablo 2 was hotly anticipated and it did deliver.
Diablo 2 was hotly anticipated and it did deliver.
Half Life Alyx did, and in my opinion exceeded it.
Was there hype for this? As far as I remember this only turned out to be impressive after reviews started rolling in.
(not contesting thr experience itself, I just don't remember the pre-release hype)
(not contesting thr experience itself, I just don't remember the pre-release hype)
It came out of nowhere and nobody ever expected Valve to come back to the Half-Life series.
It is technically a sequel to Half Life 2 so I'd say there was some hype to it.
There absolutely was hype for HLVR in the community, and to be clear any successor to Half Life 2 Episode 2.
I was a VR buff and a Half Life fan but I was blown away by how good it was and it’s ending.
I was a VR buff and a Half Life fan but I was blown away by how good it was and it’s ending.
Avengers end game lived up to the hype.
Covid 19
Mad Men. Solid to the end. Last few seasons answered a lot of questions. Don's devolution accelerated into a spectacular finale.
Donald Trump. Love him or hate him, he did actually deliver on many of his promises. Some speculate he followed through because he views relationships as transactional.
Donald Trump. Love him or hate him, he did actually deliver on many of his promises. Some speculate he followed through because he views relationships as transactional.
Wait, what promises did he deliver on that were his headliners? I am legitimately curious.
Wall? Nope, been assigned far less money, very ineffective. Jobs? The trend that started with Obama worsened and got obliterated by the pandemic.
Global respect? Nope.
Wall? Nope, been assigned far less money, very ineffective. Jobs? The trend that started with Obama worsened and got obliterated by the pandemic.
Global respect? Nope.
This piece has a list of about 60 things he signed off on. Not sure which were promises and which were carryovers. Maybe you can explain them all as not his doing, or too insignificant to give him credit:
https://medium.com/@DavisJames/making-the-decision-from-a-st...
https://medium.com/@DavisJames/making-the-decision-from-a-st...
I'm sorry but the list of 'accomishments' is laughable. Marking the creation of a Covid task force as an accomplishment is about the bare minimum I expect from anyone in office. Much more important is the fact that such task force was not heard from by the executive, given the testimony of, well, everyone on it.
TESLA
Gxtaillon(2)
the cronut, i will not elaborate further
Overpopulation and ecological collapse scare.
TSLA stock forged many new millionaires this year. Unbelievable price action.
This, just found out that it was released a few days ago... saves so much time - https://www.unitmeasure.xyz/vatcalculator.html
Shameless plug
Why Israel?
Why Israel?
There are many examples of overhyped releases: Duke Nukem Forever, the Matrix sequels, etc. What got hyped and actually delivered?