I don't see the issue with making a social network that's more focused on real-time, current irl connections. Snapchat has already used a similar model with decaying content to great success.
I think you're likely of a generation that's attached to the Facebook model where a social network is an ever-growing photobook/history of interactions with all your friends. Maybe that has a place, but I think it's worth being open to other ideas. And yes, maybe when someone dies, they're no longer part of this network in the same way they are no longer part of many other things in your life. I don't think that's inherently bad.
You move to dismiss what I have to say by framing me as closed to new ideas because of how you infer my age, in a roundabout way -- what an ugly, uncouth, and mean-spirited rhetorical move.
Either way, you badly mischaracterize generational differences in grieving and digital life. Gen Z and younger millenials are vastly more inclined towards memorialization of deceased loved ones and (physically & digitally) archiving their content than any generation. See also the uptrending of stated preference in burials over cremations in the same generation. There are many reasons for this but at least in part it is probably a reaction to the ephemeralization of both digital and physical life.
Also, my post was largely motivated by how OP brands their product. From their app store page and the blog post, it seems they will support photos, longer form content, and DMs. In such a setting, ephemerality needs to be in your face, otherwise you are setting up users for unpleasant surprises. It's common sense.
I don't think I've ever heard of Demon's Souls being categorized as a puzzle game. I suppose some of the bosses have a trick to figure out? But I'd still think it falls into the action RPG genre by a wide margin.
Perhaps modern AAA games have become so handholdy that any game that shuts up long enough to allow the player to experience a sense of genuine exploration and wonder counts as a puzzle game, in which case I'd recommend the rich genre of indie Kings Field-likes, e.g. Lunacid. A bit further out would be something like Moonring (Ultima-like) or Caves of Qud.
I miss the live presentations too, there's no tension or humanity watching a polished prerecorded video compared to someone having to demo live. It would also discourage them from pulling another Apple Intelligence fiasco and announcing a bunch of features they don't have developed yet. Though I'm sure they're more wary of that than anyone for the time being.
Maybe I'm being too hopeful but the MacBook Neo was announced at live presentations in a few cities around the world, and Ternus did the presentation at their New York event. Perhaps the guy is also partial to live presentations? It's not impossible that Apple mostly stuck with the prerecorded presentations because Cook didn't like the old way. I wouldn't say he's the most natural presenter, he always seemed a bit uncomfortable on stage.
I'm curious how you ended up creating an account on Hacker News if you don't see why people would be interested in major news regarding the biggest computer maker on the planet.
Now if only they'd open up iOS development so we can get AppCode back.
The primary thing keeping me away from trying it again is I have to use Xcode instead of my beloved JetBrains IDEs where I know all the keyboard shortcuts.
Obviously a very unpopular opinion, but I guess for my own sake it's hard to write commit messages, because for me it's that I have never really even found use of other people commit messages, and I rarely even attempt to. Ultimately code is code and I don't care about how it got to how it is. I got same issue with documentation and comments or really anything that isn't building stuff. I don't like writing it, don't like reading it either... ADHD?
So, before AI came and saved me from writing commit messages I had alias that ran the whole git add . && git commit -m ... && git push with a fixed commit message. But of course we had squashing so PR title was the one to eventually go there, so maybe that part is fine. But all my side projects had just that.
> Ultimately code is code and I don't care about how it got to how it is.
That's fine until you come up against something like a subscription system that's been built over 15 years by at least 20 different developers, none of whom are currently at the company, half of whom appear to have been clinically insane, each of whom had their own unique approach to code, with almost zero code commentary, zero external documentation, and abstractions layered like geological strata where you need 15 files open to understand one API endpoint.
As long as there’s some record, whether it’s PR or commit. At Google and Meta there’s no distinction, each commit is a PR (approximately) and has a description and discussion linked to it. I’ve found this really valuable for understanding a piece of code, maybe it’s just five lines but of there’s 200 words of discussion giving you more context on why it is that way.
Yeah I also don't really write commit messages. If your pull request becomes associated with that commit, and the history gets squashed, then that one commit becomes a link to the pull request where all the necessary info is. I just write "commit" for all my messages.
On my local copy of the repo, commits are notes to myself. I don't use the `--message` switch. I let git bring up my $EDITOR where I type what I did since the last commit. This helps when I'm writing the PR description and when I'm rebasing the branch on top of the main trunk. And then some time, I need to do a bit of git-fu and split the changes into different PRs. Hard to do this with generic messages.
But I use magit and I can commit specific lines and hunks as easily as files. That helps with managing changes to meaningfully group them.
I think you're likely of a generation that's attached to the Facebook model where a social network is an ever-growing photobook/history of interactions with all your friends. Maybe that has a place, but I think it's worth being open to other ideas. And yes, maybe when someone dies, they're no longer part of this network in the same way they are no longer part of many other things in your life. I don't think that's inherently bad.
reply