It's not one-click, or at least it wasn't for me. I clicked the link in the sentence "If you prefer to opt out of letting Fi use and share your CPNI with Alphabet and Google services, you can do so by replying here", and it took me to the Google Fi homepage. I had to then click on Settings, "Privacy & Security", and finally on "Allow CPNI Sharing". Four clicks total.
4 is still far less effort than having to call Amazon to cancel your account (among the many providers that make opt out / cancel incredibly difficult)
I clicked it from my Fi device too - and it automatically opened the Fi app, which doesn't have this setting.
It took a lot more than 4 clicks to figure out I needed to switch chrome to desktop mode AND needed to open the link in a new tab to make it stop opening the app.
Side rant - Wasn't HTML5 supposed to do away with the need for dedicated apps? Interaction with any corp is now split between web, app, and phone, all with different capabilities.
Huh, I did it yesterday and I clicked the 'here' link in the email and it took me to a page that said I was now opted out. I didn't have to do anything additional.
The signatories on this are not crackpots. Hinton is incredibly influential, and he quit his job at Google so he could "freely speak out about the risks of A.I."
> Subsequent reloads from browser cache it's up barely long enough to notice.
Are you measuring the time on your personal machine, or a machine that represents what your typical visitor is using? If you're using a recent Macbook, that's going to have very different performance characteristics than, say, an old Android phone. Something that's instantaneous on a Macbook could take ages on an old Android.
Sorry I can't judge those, the thing is all the ones I used so far, including boostrap are really basic. You would need a library for a trully complete DataGrid, one for a real dropdown, one for a real listbox, one for a modal manager, one for menus etc.
This widgets appear to be simple but can have more advanced usage, like a dropdown where you can navigate with the keyboard arrows or PgUp/PgDown, you could type a character and the dropdown would instantly jump to the that item , you can specify if the dropdown popup up or down, have many items are visible at once, you can have items with different fonts styles , disabled items.
This classic frameworks are good for doing business apps or apps for working and not for simple apps that need to look cool to sell.
The Youtube Search box has a dropdown thing, sometimes that thing gets stuck open and you have to reload the page, so a giant like google with their expensive developers are not able to do a average complexity widget. But I seen worse, fancy input widgets where you could not use the Delete button (the Skype money amount input)
I just checked the repo[0], and it says Bram has authored 95% of all commits to Vim. To say "the community owns Vim" when they've done ~5% of the work reminds me of group projects in school where one person does all the work and everyone else claims credit.
For a while Bram would copy paste all proposed changes from other peoples branches to his own branches and therefore giving himself the git-blame for the code. I think only recently he started allowing other people to actually maintain the repo.
I'm not sure this is because no one wants to contribute. I think it's more because Moolenar prefers to do the work himself, and doesn't like to accept much in the way of contributions from others. He's certainly allowed to run his project that way, but I can see why it might turn some people off.
Which is yet again contrasted with how NeoVim runs things and the 824 contributors to the repository at time of writing. I believe that justinmk, one of the principal drivers of the project specifically stated that he doesn't want to be something like a BDFL and I assume that's also pretty much a reaction to Vim.
One is not a better parent by controlling their kids for their foreseeable future. One needs to let them join the world and grow on their own, with their own friends.
It’s true that anyone can fork the code. But splitting the user community and plugin ecosystem with forks should be a last resort. This discussion is about how a FOSS community can improve software while avoiding forks that result in incompatible code-bases.
I've been in the same situation, and it's one of the few times I've appreciated the bureaucracy and red tape that come with being at a Fortune 500 company. Whenever the sales team comes to me asking for another tracking pixel, I just say "We'll be happy to add this once you've submitted the necessary paperwork and it undergoes the the company-mandated security, privacy, and legal reviews". 90% of the time, I never hear back from them again.
Everything I've reads says the opposite. Elden Ring has sold at least 13.4 million units so far[1], which is >$800 million in revenue. The only revenue figure I could find for Diablo Immortal is $800k [2]. They're not even in the same ballpark.
Until it doesn't. We're not talking about the same thing here because one is a one-time payment (license) vs on-going (loot boxes / SaaS). I'm highly critical of loot box (p2p) games, but you're on-going payments do pay for content in the future. Companies who charge once have very little incentive to maintain the software (assuming it requires it to).
Because Elden Ring took 4 years to develop, 5 years if you include the DLC release time. You would need to amortize its very front-loaded revenue over those 5 years, because a live-service game like Diablo Immortal would be generating somewhat consistent revenue throughout that entire time.
Let's say ER reaches 20M + 8Mx2 for it's two upcoming DLCs @ $40 each. That's $1.8B lifetime. Pretty amazing! DI would need to make $360M per year to be an equivalent business. So 800k in the first 24 hours is not too far off track to being equivalent.
We should be mindful of the biggest difference between Elden Ring and Diablo Immortal - the latter has a constant revenue stream via its in game microtrasaction capability.
Whereas the former, despite being a good game, may not provide the revenue model desired by its stakeholders.
Elden Ring isn't going to be a standalone game. The publisher (Bandai Namco) says it's the start of a franchise, which fans are almost certain to lap up for a long time to come. Had Elden Ring included microtransactions or other questionable features, it's likely fans would be far less enthusiastic about future installments, which means revenue from the franchise would dry up faster.
Someone made a video that imagined changes a company like EA or Blizzard might make to Elden Ring, charging for extra arrows, fees for questlines, microtransactions for boss assists, and so forth. It made me feel sick. I could totally see a marketing-driven game studio making similar decisions.
ER impressed me so much that I bought three earlier titles from From Software, an additional $120 spent. Regrettably, you show consumer behavior like that to a mercenary games industry exec, and they'll just see "lost opportunity to put the screws to the market" and not "we should make better games."
(This is the first time that I've literally worn out a controller playing a single game).
