Whoa, this post is actually really inspiring! It gives me a better understanding for why Echo Chess has more replayability than other lil' games I've toyed with. It makes me want to poke at new ideas now. Thanks for sharing this crazy journey of yours!
I guess I also want to ask: are you making money on this? Like, how do you have this much time to spend on this project?
All these comments saying merely "S3 has no concept of directories" without an explanation (or at least a link to an explanation) are pretty unhelpful, IMO. I dismissed your comment, but then I came upon this later one explaining why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39660445
After reading that, I now understand your comment.
> Squashing makes the diffs much more painful, such as by burying an important change in a sea of mechanical ones when they were originally in separate commits.
Can you give an example? I don't even think I understand what you're saying. You control your overall summary, so it's up to you to make it useful.
I would cite clarity as my reason for squashing! I think most people are just bad at organizing (& naming) their commits, so they make A LOT of vacuous ones, crowding out the forest for the trees. It's never helpful to see the git blame saying things like "Addressed PR comments" or "Resolved merge conflict", etc.
I do prefer a merge commit when the author has done a good job with their own commits, but that's rare. In all other cases, squashing is greatly preferable to me.
Regarding Python: Really? Obviously v2-to-v3 was an absolute fiasco, but since then, it's been great in my personal experience.
Don't get me wrong: Python hasn't overcome its tooling problem, so there's still that barrier. But once your team agrees on a standardized tool set, you should be able to coast A-OK.
> What else would you do? Play video games, watch tv, “party”?
Sorry, but this is such a sad statement to me. I mean, unless you absolutely love the field you work in, in which case that's amazing, go for it! But if you're like the rest of us, there's so much to see & do in life besides work! As an example, I'm reading, learning to cook, traveling, and trying to get fit. These provide their own satisfaction & meaning in ways that work doesn't.
Maybe you're really good at working with uncertainty?
This article focuses on the number of new things overwhelming our working memory, but I'd argue another big problem is the difficulty of leveraging abstractions even if you don't understand them.
In this exercise, both myself and the article get sidetracked in understanding the basis of all the abstractions as well, rather than just letting the abstractions be, with all of their uncertainty. But if I were better at the latter, I could see this approach working.
Love it! I refer to these kinds of puzzles as "state mazes", but maybe that's not quite the right term. Many variations are explored in "logic maze" books like Mad Mazes (https://smile.amazon.com/Mad-Mazes-Intriguing-Twisters-Puzzl...). Most of them use simpler mechanics and look more like mazes, but some toward the end start looking like your puzzle.
Nice! I was having fun with it, but then I got to "divide the segment in half". It's super easy, but it's too zoomed in for me to click on the snaps I want, and I can't find a way to zoom out. Clicking "full screen" gives the same level of zoom. What am I missing?
Edit: I just now tried Euclidea for the 1st time, and even tho its UX is a lot more polished, it starts off with lots of lines & midpoints. I appreciate that Ecocoru starts off with more circle-oriented problems, so that we can get a taste of using a compass. The 1st hexagon problem, though easy, was a joy to discover!
That's certainly important, but again, there's just so many pieces to cooking that experienced cooks don't even think about anymore, but are still uncertain & awkward to noobs.
Btw, your response implies that you deny this point, but I don't understand why that would be. Most activities are this way. People aren't born knowing how to play sports or use computers or make art, whatever. Cooking is no exception.
Anyway, thanks for the rec, I'll definitely check out Adam's recipe vids (I'm more familiar with his non-recipe vids)
I think the language analogy is apt. Your statement that "cooking isn't that hard!" is similar to someone who speaks English fluently saying English isn't that hard. I fully defend OP's problem statement with the iceberg analogy.
Let's take your other comment: "just buy ingredients and follow a recipe". This makes no sense to me. Sure, I could just make the 10-20 guesses required to buy ingredients & get to the end of the recipe, it would probably result in something edible but bad. At that point, I'll have learned how to make it better next time, but not necessarily how to make it half-decent.
So, as OP describes elsewhere, whenever I'm trying to follow a new recipe, I end up looking up an average of 5 vids on prep or technique that I'm unsure about. It gets me something half-decent in the end, but it's a lot of work, and I never feel like I really "get it".
Also, your overall tone is so weird to me. You're talking about cooking like it has no fundamentals and it's just loosey-goosey & based on people's preferences, but there are DEFINITELY wrong ways to cook things, and lots of them. I learn more about those wrong ways every time I try cooking.
No? I'm clearly the prime demographic for this app because your comment makes no sense to me. Most recipe videos skip the tedious (but important) bits, and many ALSO don't give notes about needed techniques. I often find that 1 recipe video results in me watching at least 5 other videos to clarify things that were left out, usually in pairs so I can compare/contrast the info provided. Because, again, I'm new to this whole thing and I can't tell which advice is good/relevant/etc
Just to clarify, I'm not defending their app, I'm defending the problem statement.
100%! My company ineptly stumbled into a scenario like this, so to speak, and the result was as you described. After witnessing how that played out, I would expect a similar outcome in other scenarios.
I like what you tried to do here, but then you got to #3. It's bizarre to me that you feel this process of Apple's constitutes "no artificial obstacles". Phone & laptop batteries used to be easy to replace. A few models still have this feature. It's not a hardware problem, it's a business decision. This process of Apple's is following the letter of the law but not the spirit of the law.
I guess I also want to ask: are you making money on this? Like, how do you have this much time to spend on this project?