Hazzard

Eh, it's because of what Bloodborne is, and the state of it. Improper frame pacing with a 30FPS cap, even if you bought a new PS5 to play it (because it's not available on PS4).

A cleaned up patch for newer gen hardware to unlock it would be enough, but a remaster is more likely to appeal to Sony.

Agreed, the way they can preserve the position of any object, anywhere, with thousands of objects and an obscenely large world, is exceedingly impressive.

What I don't get is why the hell any of that is a priority. It's a neat party trick, but surely 99.9% of the gameplay value of arranging items for fun could be achieved on the player ship alone.

Like... it's neat that I can pick up, interact with, and sell every single pen and fork on every table. But is it useful, with a carry weight system deincentivizing that? Fussing with my inventory to find what random crap I accidentally picked up that's taking up my weight? Is that remarkably better than having a few key obvious and useful pickups? Is it worth giving up 60FPS on console, and having dedicated loading screens for nearly every door and ladder around?

Again, it's cool that they have this massive procedurally generated world, that a player could spend thousands of hours in. But when that area is boring, does it really beat a handcrafted interesting world and narrative? What good is thousands of hours of content when players are bored and gone before 10 hours?

So like... from a tech perspective, I respect what Starfield is, and it's very impressive, but as a game it feels like a waste of a lot of very talented work, suffering from a lack of good direction at the top.

I think it is a problem. Maybe not for people like us, that understand the concept and its limitations, but "formal reasoning" is exactly how this technology is being pitched to the masses. "Take a picture of your homework and OpenAI will solve it", "have it reply to your emails", "have it write code for you". All reasoning-heavy tasks.

On top of that, Google/Bing have it answering user questions directly, it's commonly pitched as a "tutor", or an "assistant", the OpenAI API is being shoved everywhere under the sun for anything you can imagine for all kinds of tasks, and nobody is attempting to clarify it's weaknesses in their marketing.

As it becomes more and more common, more and more users who don't understand it's fundamentally incapable of reliably doing these things will crop up.

30% / 0% / 70%

Dang, this full out fooled me. Concerning, I guess we're here now. Lots to catch once you're aware of it, but totally passed by me while scrolling, even as someone who's well aware of AI Image Generation, even in an image that's intentionally ridiculous.

Yeah, this is the problem with frankensteining two systems together. Giving an LLM a prompt, and giving it a module that can interpret images for it, leads to this.

The image parser goes "a crossword, with the following hints", when what the AI needs to do the job is an actual understanding of the grid. If one singular system understood both images and text, it could hypothetically understand the task well enough to fetch the information it needed from the image. But LLMs aren't really an approach to any true "intelligence", so they'll forever be unable to do that as one piece.

Yeah, I don't think the idea is a total non-starter, but I'd definitely like some details. How will this be limited to ensure it's not being used by investors and house flippers? How will this be ramped down once the housing market settles to avoid it being permanently "priced in"? How will this be paid for and how much will it cost?

Unfortunately American political debates right now are more of a pissing contest about rally turnout than they are about actual policy details, because that's what sways the voters on the fence for some reason.

Honestly I really don't think that's effective either. Giving people more money to buy something generally just means the market will respond by charging more money for that thing. The assistance will effectively get "priced in" given time.

It's honestly the weakest part of the Harris/Walz platform for me. Trump plan is utterly insane top-to-bottom though, and they're just using immigration as a scapegoat here, which is... something.

Ah, he recommends saving 1000$, then tackling your debt, then building to 3-6 months expenses. Which is... fine, I agree with the principle of it, but that number is definitely one of those things I'd consider being more flexible with. The amount I think you should save before tackling your debts depends on a lot of factors.

I also don't necessarily agree with saving that amount in two blocks, we personally saved 1000$, paid the most pressing card off, and then saved another 1000$. I think it makes sense to adjust that minimum emergency fund number as your situation evolves.

Just another case where I find he works fine as a starting point, but where most people shouldn't follow his advice to the letter.

Mmm, excellent addendum to my proposed changes. 1000$ is better than nothing, but it hasn't really kept up with inflation, and circumstances really change things. For example, if you have a house, the potential opportunity and cost of an "emergency" goes up immensely.

But yeah, for us personally we pretty quickly went up to a 2000$ emergency fund, despite the relative stability of renting and driving a fairly new car. We'll be working on our 3-6 month expense emergency fund soon. I definitely think it's better to view the baby steps as flexible guidance on a starting point, rather than the concrete law they frame it as.

I think I have an interesting perspective here, as someone who did kinda get their finances under control thanks to a Dave Ramsey course, and later had the unpleasant experience of discovering how much of a right-wing idiot he is during COVID.

Something I've noticed is that a lot of his advice seems targeted towards people who are crushingly bad at navigating debt. One of the most viral things they do is called "the debt free scream", where people share their stories on his radio show after getting debt free, and just... do a victory scream, essentially. Kinda fun, not really a bad thing, but it shows how most of the people he deals with directly and the ones that make the best marketing are people with hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars of debt despite making very average money. Just absolutely no self-preservation instinct around available credit.

And for these people I think his advice makes sense. Absolutely no debt, debt is the enemy, it will crush you. And stuff like how he pushes you to chase paying debt with high intensity, get multiple jobs, etc. Because otherwise it's impossible to even manage to put money on the principle of a debt that large.

For the average person though? His best advice is basic budgeting, focusing on paying your debts one by one so you can celebrate each victory quickly, and building an emergency fund so you don't need to go backwards as soon as you have a car problem. Also, yeah, ditch the brand new truck, it's burying you in debt you didn't need.

But absolutely, I'd highly recommend modifying his recommendations for most people, and I don't doubt someone out there is doing a better job of teaching this stuff than Ramsey is. My advised tweaks:

• Find a budget you can live with, paying your debts a couple months faster isn't worth being miserable, and makes it more likely you'll be able to stick to a budget for as long as it takes.
• Zero-based budgeting (budgeting every dollar at the start of the month) isn't really necessary, leaving a little loose change that you can allocate later once the month is actually happening is pretty helpful. It's ok to shift things around so long as you aren't spending money you don't have.
• Actually do keep "fun money" or "restaurant money", so long as you're capable of including it in the budget without hamstringing your ability to pay debt. If you're giving more to debt than these things, then you're probably fine.
• Ultimately just... think for yourself, and make your own decisions, based on your own income and expenses. Ramsey is a decent, if aggressive, starting point (and again, not the best person, he seems to have lost the plot somewhere).

Yeah, personally I've always enjoyed playing IRL with people who are better than me. Having a real person gives me that constant measuring stick I'm looking for, and playing with someone better gives me someone to watch and learn from, which helps me improve way more quickly. But that's... not what gets you the big sales numbers and a smooth player onboarding.

For PvP stuff, the experience I enjoyed the most was playing Smash with dorm mates in college. Getting my ass handed to me in 1v1 matches for months by the guy who owned the console, but learning, grinding, letting that guy I wanted to beat motivate me to use the training room, to watch YouTube videos, study techniques, and try to really master my character, learning how to be unpredictable and perform mix ups that needed to fool an experienced player who knew my weaknesses better than anyone, it was so satisfying. And by the end of the year we were on even footing, and I was maybe even a little better, which just felt incredible and so well earned.

That experience is what ranked PvP just completely lacks. Every time you win they just swap in new players who are that little step better than you until you're perfectly even again. Which is great on a game-to-game scale, each battle is hard fought, but just offers nothing on that wider timescale that I need to really care.