Epic chose to spend it's money buying exclusivity deals for games and pissing off consumers, rather than using it to build an actual competitor to Steam as a storefront/game launcher/mod manager/chat application.
HarkMahlberg
Your point about pokemon disobeying your orders is given more structure in the games, where if you don't have the required gym badges, your higher-leveled pokemon don't see you as a person worth obeying. Then when you get that badge, they fall in line. The point being... might makes right? You command authority only through fighting and defeating enough trainers and their pokemon? That's a pretty problematic conclusion you could draw from that game mechanic.
Sounds like a product they're gonna kill off soon.
I wish network effects weren't a self fulfilling prophecy.
I wish I could find the article, but when Musk first started breaking shit and locking everything down, local meteorological accounts realized people could start missing important public information like tsunami and earthquake warnings, and they had no other way to reach the public than through Twitter.
Twitter being accessible only via direct links to tweets is still not an acceptable solution, because how would I know what the URL is for the latest Icelandic volcano warning (for example)?
Of course he does, he quotes Marcus Aurelius in his profile. May as well just block him and move on.
Yikes.
Your comment is entirely fact-free, it's almost impressive. There's no point refuting anything because it's clear nothing will change your mind, and I don't have to anyway because it's all been dismantled piece by piece already.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YQ_xWvX1n9g
https://vivaldi.com/blog/why-vivaldi-will-never-create-thinkcoin
I know it's hard to admit you've gambled big on a losing horse, but the solution is not to gamble bigger, it's to quit gambling.
Edited links for clarity.
people who don’t understand technology always seem to do this. They did it with Crypto, did it with NFTs
😬
If they're smart they'll call it the Switch 64.
I doubt they deprioritize websites, but if they over-prioritize sites that conform to their SEO guidelines and host their ads, then the net effect is the same.
And I don’t see why a quality website wouldn’t keep a viewer on site as long as a poor quality website.
Say you ask a question looking for a definitive answer (meaning it's a question that has one). You find a website that tells you that answer right up front. No fluff, no scrolling, no ads, you're in, you're out. You find another site loaded with a introduction that talks a lot and says little, then you scroll past some ads, then you find another paragraph of text, and somewhere buried in between wishy washy word salad, you find your answer.
To Google, the second website is better, because you were "engaged" for a longer amount of time, and maybe you clicked their ad as you scrolled. That page is gonna rank higher in their results. The former page, by consequence, is gonna come second.
Now let's say you have 10 websites like the latter, and 1 like the former. What rank is the former website gonna come in Google search?
And fuck the rest of the world?
Where do you think every website in the entire world is hosted? It's America, obviously. We're the only country with a Constitution after all!
Always happy to see Simon Stalenhag's work lol