I'm not entirely sure why they're running linters on every available platform to begin with, it seems like a massive waste of compute to me when surely the output will be identical because it's analysing source code, not behaviour.
From a starting point of having dabbled in making 2D games in the past it took me a few days of working through tutorials and documentation for producing assets to be the bottleneck in building a game in Unreal. In Godot I was at the point of being able to make terrible games within a few hours. The amount of lifting that modern game engines do for you is phenomenal, and I think anyone claiming they can write an engine from scratch quicker than they can implement a game with an existing engine is deluding themselves.
I can have an engine ready for you that allows you to render arbitrary 2D sprites, levels of them, etc. or whatever in a day. People gamejam more interesting and advanced stuff than you're talking about. The mechanics of just shoving together some 2D sprites is not some big undertaking even if you write your engine from scratch, it's making something actually fun and interesting from it that takes time and effort.
> The amount of lifting that modern game engines do for you is phenomenal, and I think anyone claiming they can write an engine from scratch quicker than they can implement a game with an existing engine is deluding themselves.
If the game fits a rather "standardized" template, this is likely true. But the more you move away from these "mainstream structures", the less true the second part of your claim becomes.
I think reaching for the delusion card without considering people's preferences, experiences, expertise and philosophy is completely disingenuous and shows that you don't look at game development holistically. Yes, existing engines do a lot of lifting, especially in 3D rendering and physics. But what about games that don't have physics? Or have completely different physics than you would expect? You mentioned assets being the bottleneck, but what about games that don't use any assets at all? It's nice to have 3D solved, but what if your game attempts to emulate 4D? What if you just hate GUI and it slows you down?
For a more concrete argument. You also said learning Unreal using tutorials took a few days, which is certainly not possible, unless we are talking only about a very basic understanding. In the same vein, it also takes a few days to make a very basic engine built on top of OpenGL.
Here's the thing: you try to counter someone arguing against a patently false statement about development speed with a bunch of preferences and what-abouts that do not necessarily make your stance true anyway - for instance if my game attempts to emulate 4D, my own engine STILL needs to do everything else too, we're not talking dev time for 4D in, say, Godot vs 4D in foo engine, we're talking 4D in Godot vs 4D and graphics and input and audio and physics and... in foo engine.
Often it'll even apologise and correct it's own answer despite the original answer being correct, because you just primed it's model to believe it was wrong.
I'd really love an alternative broadcast which shows the set changes rather than the postcards, I'm sure the people making the postcards are very good at what they do but they're almost designed to be as bland as possible, I'd much rather see a well oiled team perform crazy feats to get the stage set.
> I'd much rather see a well oiled team perform crazy feats to get the stage set
Not quite the same, but I witnessed a performance of Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds where there was a complete failure of the stage systems about 15 minutes before the end. All the audio-visuals died and the mics cut off, screens died, animatronics went still, complete silence on the stage and only ambient light.
For about 10-15 seconds there was stunned silence on the stage and then one of the drummers in the orchestra started drumming his part again. A couple of the other musicians joined and quickly there was music. From our seat we could see the stage's equivalent of mission control - three people who'd been quietly sipping their coffee while the playlists unfolded. They went into overdrive like movie hackers trying to enter some system before the corporation goons reached them. They quickly got the audio side back and then worked on the lights and screens. They left the giant Martian war tripod to last but even that was moving within a few minutes. It was one of the most impressive system recoveries I've seen.
> whole pieces of dialog that are painfully redundant, restating things or adding nothing to either plot or character
Modern TV is made to be consumed (I use that word intentionally, not watched) by people who aren't really paying attention to what's happening, so you need to restate any major plot point several times to make sure it sticks.
You've got 30 seconds you shot that, when the editor sits down to put it all together, definitely needs to be trimmed. But if you do that, it's 30 fewer seconds of "content". Your business measures output in terms of minutes of content, finished or watched. If you leave it in, the scene's worse, but how many viewers will stop watching because of it? Fewer than what it's worth to have that extra half-minute of "content". So it stays.
And operating this way, you can shoot 7 minutes of dialog that'd be trimmed to 4.5 minutes in a good edit (it's many individual shots, and most have at least a little on the beginning or end that need to go), instead trimming only what's absolutely necessary and get 5 or maybe 5.5 minutes out of it; do that over an entire 40 minute episode and you've saved yourself an entire longish scene that you'd have had to set up for otherwise, to fill the same time. Each set-up is expensive, so that's also saving you money despite being the same amount of "content".
Are streaming services really measuring value in terms of minutes watched? I would have thought they’d have better methods of tracking which shows generate subscriptions and retention.
Cost-per-minute and total minutes delivered being key metrics for their production folks would have a similar effect, and is kinda the same thing (how many minutes of viewing will be experienced by someone who watches the show you made for us?) if they don't also have effective controls in place to keep the editing tight—and, from what they put out, I think they do not.
I think there's a degree to which this is true, I wouldn't walk into an interview and immediately start slagging off my old employer, but if you're interviewing me and get all worked up when I say bad things about them in answer to the question "why are you leaving your current job" that's on you and I won't regret not getting the job.
That's your choice. It's not a bad idea to answer "why are you leaving your current job" with "i'm looking for greater opportunities to [the opposite of why you are leaving your job]" and people can read between the lines AND have less of the concerns they would if you went guns blazing on the bridges behind you
You can be honest about why your previous employer wasn’t the right fit without burning bridges. I really dislike all of this “reading between the lines” aren’t Americans supposed to be direct?
No, American big business talking heads are supposed to be direct. American workers are supposed to be demure, grateful to have health insurance, and slot perfectly into the cog slot they've been assigned. Someone who openly criticizes their former employer is showing they have opinions and will resist being mistreated. I mean, showing they're not a team player.
Companies would much rather miss out on growth than have employees who have any kind of leverage over them.
> I really dislike all of this “reading between the lines” aren’t Americans supposed to be direct?
You're talking about a culture in which the standard greeting is "How are you?", and the standard response to said greeting is, "I'm fine!" - even when you're obviously not fine.
So, no, it's very much not direct. If you want to see what a "direct" software engineering culture looks like, look at Eastern Europe. There, people will routinely say things like "this code is crap", and no-one (including the author of said code!) bats an eye at it because it's supposed to be taken at face value, not as an insult.
Similar to goblin mode in dating you should 100% be yourself but only if you already have money and don't particularly need a given job. This works best when you already have a job.
You want the shitty PHB megacorps to reject you so you don't win to lose by getting a job you are going to hate.
It's a Tuesday. You crawl out of bed. You don't brush your teeth, you don't take a shower, you don't do your hair, you don't even really get dressed. You grab a piece of cake or a pretzel or something from the fridge, climb under a blanket in whatever room your TV is in, and binge Star Wars content for the next 5 hours. Your boyfriend watches a portion of this from the kitchen table, sipping his coffee. Goblin mode.
Goblin mode as a consultant is charging whatever high price will make you want to work on a project, not doing sales, only answering the phone when and for whom you want, and letting your work speak for itself.
Well, it's family name, too. You're just forgiven somewhat if you're outside the community and don't know which family is supposed to be given deference. Unless you're talking to a family of cops or the family that owns everything in the area, in which case you immediately agree with whatever political opinion they share (loudly).
From Philly to Boston, you got a lot of direct Americans, but the rest of the country? No, not really. West Coasters might be the most passive-aggressive people in the world.
This is the part of the interview where they seeking to understand your maturity and discretion. The actual reason for leaving is not the right answer. An answer showing that you understand social norms and have great self restraint is the right answer.
That part of the interview is a bunch of bullshit questions and socially acceptable answers from both sides. It is simply to check is candidate agrees to play the game by the rules.
Why are you looking for a new job? Because I have a dickhead manager and looking for a higher salary. But my answer will be I'm looking for new challenges, for opportunity to grow.
Pretty sure if a teacher in a school is found to be scrolling TikTok when they're meant to be teaching a lesson they're going to lose their job pretty quickly.
Have you interacted with humans anytime in the last five years?
People scroll TikTok or equivalent scrolly things as they drive, eat, poop, cook, as they "talk", as they walk, as they queue, as they "watch" movies and tv shows, during their down time, up time, in the bed until the small hours of the morning, people wake up on their day off and have a big plan and then... scroll the whole day. People go to the beach and scroll, they climb a mountain and scroll. They cycle and scroll, I've seen them do it.
If they can't hold it - showering, exercise, love-making (sometimes) - they get the thing to pump audio and/or visuals in their general direction, sometimes propped up, sometimes just strewn there. It's a riot.
And yes - people also scroll on these devices, if you can possibly imagine it, when they work. In schools, even! And in post offices, betting parlors, nail salons, cafes, while they do their only fans performance, you name it.
I've never been to Finland, don't speak a word of Finnish, and don't know much about Finnish culture, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if I had a 20c coin for every time a teacher in Finland scrolled TikTok for a minute or two during work hours, I'd have, roughly, a completely ridonculously large bag of 20c coins.
Yes, you're right, we should ban smart phones (or at least certain types of apps) for adults, too. But sadly there is no political majority in favor of that opinion, in Finland or elsewhere. (Wait, maybe they're banned in North Korea or somewhere? Not sure.)
(This is irony/sarcasm, please don't downvote. Haha only serious.)
I think the point here is that for something like Python the default behaviour should be an assumed return type of `Any` rather than throwing an error. Maybe that is the case and the GP had configured it otherwise.
No it shouldn't because then you can easily miss places where you should have added a type annotation, and also your lazy colleagues won't bother adding them at all.
The worst of both worlds is colleagues who insert type annotations but they're wrong. And there's no CI pipe to verify the types before check-in.
Working with these things makes me often think that people who want to write high quality software should just use a better language. But, well, real world is real.
Yeah unfortunately Python is crazy popular so a lot of the time you don't get a choice.
If fairness if you set up uv and Ruff and Pyright it's kind of ok. Still have to deal with the general noobness of the ecosystem and the horrific performance, but I've seen worse.
I regularly do scan as you shop and have started to notice some patterns in auditing. If I change my mind on a product and remove it from the basket while shopping I'll get audited almost every time, similarly if I add a single onion (which is a weighed product) to my basket. I do enjoy the company line of asking "did you have trouble scanning anything" just before they do the check, which is blatantly a get out of jail free card to say "oh, yes, I did in fact have some trouble scanning that 42" TV that doesn't appear in the basket currently".
Even if someone can transfer from lamp lighter to street light technician people will have lost their jobs, because you no longer need enough people to make sure all the lamps get lit within a reasonable space of time, you just need maybe a dozen people covering maintenance and repairs on a city full of streetlights.
reply