There is no record of this bio

  • 0 Posts
  • 98 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle





  • Computer code is very complicated, so when humans write code we write in a way we can understand. We name functions and variables with names that make sense, and we put comments in the code so we can understand how it works.

    Compliers don’t care about any of those things. Variable names are turned into numbers, and comments are ignored.

    You can convert machine code back to source code, it will be missing all those human readable labels and explanations. You can recreate them, but its a major process. Reverse engineering is done sometimes, but there’s a reason is not common.

    There’s also the issue of licensing. An important part of free and/or open source software is that you have permission to modify the source code. You probably don’t have a license to use the code if its closed source. There are ways to do this legally but it adds extra hurdles and inconvenience to an already major process.



  • Make sure you vote so you can get a say in how enthusiastically the federal government implements the same policy on the southern border.

    If you want an easier path to legal status in the us to disincentivise illegal crossings, you can get fucked. If you want a north american schengen agreement, you can get fucked. If you want any change in policy related to the southern boarder, get fucked.

    If you care about whether the president leads chants about border policy, then american style democracy is for you.





  • It works for the Cirrus because that plane is tiny. A parachute big enough to safely land a commercial jet is not feasible.

    If a commercial plane has a failure, say an engine failure as in the news story, the pilots with fly the plane with the other engine to a safe landing.

    If the Cirrus has an engine failure it becomes a glider. If there’s no airports nearby you’ll have to ditch in a field somewhere. There is a lot less redundancy in general aviation.

    If you’re a new pilot buying your first plane, having a parachute on the plane is a nice feature.





  • If you look at this from an entirely cynical lens, backing Kojima is the sensible choice. Kojima wasn’t leaving the industry. He would have a high level, influential job wherever he ended up.

    At the same time, Konami was publicly backing out of the games industry. Konami is a multimedia company with many divisions. Their casinos are far more profitable than their games, so they were making major cuts to their gaming division.

    Backing the major industry figure against the company that doesn’t want to make games anymore is what anyone running a show like the game awards would optimally do. That’s why you shouldn’t consider it a principled stance.


  • Keighly has a history of working in games media to publicise games. He was never an investigative reporter publishing things the industry didn’t want talked about. If you read his writing from before starting the game awards, it was like most gaming media, little more than third party advertising for upcoming games.

    The thing with Kojima wasn’t some principled stance against injustice. He gave the award he was scheduled despite konami’s decision. That’s showbusiness. The awards are the result of a vote. Had konami allowed Kojima to attend, he wouldn’t have mentioned the firing.

    Many asked Keighly to mention the layoffs at his show. Those familiar with his work knew not to expect it. The show is funded by games publishers. Calling out one publisher is fine in some circumstances. Calling out the industry as a whole is a good way to make this show your last.