Leading with "most accurate heart rate sensor" is a choice

The main cost of two engineering teams shipping identical products in my opinion isn't the cost of those extra engineers, it is in the product and organizational challenges of keeping those two products that need to be identical in sync. I am very bullish on coding agents but would be wary of this turning into a mess.

This is a great point that I wish the Shopify article went into in more depth! Would love to hear if they considered this

It always seemed a missed opportunity that Microsoft Flight Simulator doesn't have a UFO mode or something where you don't need to worry about the physics of keeping the plane in the air and could just stop and look at things.

Maybe you don't need real-ish physics for the glider here. Does the user really need to fall?

sad it got recently archived/deprecated but MS also had this for early ML https://microsoft.github.io/AirSim/

MSFS? Y key doesn't work?

It's an artifact of the reasoning process I think. Setting reasoning effort to none works better when trying to change writing style ime

This just seems like "well ackshually" pedantry that is ironically incorrect. The supply and demand curve as a specific mathematical model describes commodity markets which housing isn't.

Supply and demand are still useful concepts to understand prices in other markets, but the main insight is simple: that higher supply generally leads to lower prices given fixed demand and higher demand generally leads to higher prices given fixed supply.

i read this before the article and thought “alright it can’t be that bad”… honestly, you are letting them off easy. it’s like pedantry, but the dunning-kreuger kind.

tbh it read mostly like gibberish to me, but seemed possible there might be some poorly-articulated but otherwise coherent point about the difference between the technical difference of a supply or demand curve "shifting" vs the turbulence of a market finding equilibrium when the curves are steady.

Either way it doesn't matter bc housing isn't a commodity, and what Noah Smith said wasn't incorrect.

Noam Chomsky has been wrong about LLMs for longer

The word subjective is not itself subjective. People understand the definition of the word subjective.

What people deem to be subjective is very often subjective. You disagreeing simply proves the point.

There is no perfect word. Ticket and pass imply a fixed duration lease, not an indefinite one. Membership implies continual payments.

If someone goes to the playstation store to buy a playstation game, you don't think it's clear that they can only play the game on playstation? I think consumers understand what they are buying even if they don't think in terms like revocable licenses and drm. They aren't ignorant just because they don't care about these abstract issues that don't affect their lives at all, practically speaking.

Yes, but first sale doctrine on physical goods means that I can take my Playstation game, which only works on Playstations, and sell it to.a friend after I'm done playing it, or pick up a copy 5-10 years after the game was originally published for cheap from a second hand store like Goodwill. People do understand that, and are understandably pissed off that those same rights don't transfer to the digital realm. If I paid $60 for a copy of GTA IV when it was new but now I can buy a copy for $5 from the used bin, why shouldn't that be true for GTA VI in 15 years after it comes out?

I am understandably pissed that Apple no longer makes small 5-inch iphones because I like them. But other consumers like the bigger phones, so Apple discontinued the mini line.

Is Apple doing me an injustice by not selling me the good that I want?

Is this a question of rights or consumer preferences?

Geez man. I've seen your replies in this thread multiple times. At this point, I have to wonder: why are you so against legislating the actual sale of ownership of video games? How could enacting this theoretical legislation, that you believe is a consumer "preference" (hard disagree, but I'll allow for argument) be in any way detrimental to you? What compels you to lick the boot to a polished shine?

The vast majority of consumers don't care or think about this at all. It's a loud and tiny minority who imagine this great injustice will lead to some groundswell of rallied consumer support if they just write more blog posts about it.

In reality, if people get continual access to a digital game, the hypothetical case where they might lose access to it isn't all that troubling. And even if the license was specifically a year-term rental or something, most people wouldn't flinch because they go on with their lives after finishing a game.

It's also so convenient to ignore all the reasons the current system is the way it is.

1. Digital goods are just bits and free to copy and distribute online. Publishers use DRM because piracy is otherwise prevent, and they have a right to protect their IP.

2. Publishers can distribute the content that they develop however they see fit. Gamers who didn't make the game aren't owed something by right. Don't purchase the game if the license terms aren't amenable to you. It's a game, not a vital good.

3. Disk drives are a pointless pain-in-the-ass to manufacture if most people don't want them anyway.

> Don't purchase the game if the license terms aren't amenable to you

Unfortunately, terms can change. Publisher can promise 10-year support for the game and then drop it after 1 year. So when we purchase the game, we don't know what will happen in the future.