> Suppose two players notice each other at the same time (e.g. as would naturally happen when walking around a corner in a shooter)
This is not true for third person games. Depending on a left sided or right sided peek and your angle or approach, players see asymmetrically.
For example, Fortnite is a right side peek game. Peeking right is safer than peeking left as less of your body is exposed before your camera turns the corner.
I believe distance also plays a part in the angles.
Yeah, network latency and client side prediction and accuracy will also play huge roles. The actual distributions will be very complex, but in general reacting faster is going to be better.
I don't think the Twitter choice of 140 was anything to do with this though and is just a coincidence. Back during dumbphones the only way to receive tweets while mobile was via the texting interface, and it would want to prepend the username. I don't think reserving 20 for the username has anything to do with how many bits are used to represent the alphabet.
This used to not be safe though, in the age of landlines.
I forget the details, but most of the country was wired in a manner that both parties of a call had to hang up to end the connection.
You might hang up, go find the official phone number, but when you pick the phone off the cradle you would still be in the previous call. They could fake the dial tone and you would be none the wiser.
I remember pranking friends with this back when I was young. Harmless stuff.
I think this was in crossbar switches. The initiator of the call had to hang up for something like 8 seconds.
This was useful if they called you and you answered in the kitchen, but wanted to run to another room to talk. Not that I think it was designed to be a feature! But I used it that way.
If you didn't trust the caller, you could hang up, wait 10 seconds, then get a good clean real dial tone. Remember dial tones?
Anyway none of this is relevant in modern switching systems, much less cellular networks.
Thanks for that bit of history. I seem to remember form previous conversations with people that this was not the standard for all of America. Probably something related to east cost vs west coast.
More likely population density/growth in the region. Most of the US was all Bell System at the time.
If the area was urban, or growing quickly (adding new phone subscribers), they'd get the newer electronic (ESS) switches first, starting around the early 1970s.
If the area was suburban and population-stable, the electromechanical crossbar switches would live on for another 20+ years.
There were some rural parts of the US using even older Strowger/SxS switches until the mid 1980s at least, probably later!
There's a great story about the development, by a Mr. Strowger, of the first electromechanical telephone exchange switch. Previously, calls were connected manually, by operators. Mr. Strowger was an undertaker, and he believed that the operators were sending callers to his competition unfairly. So he invented an automatic switch to remove the human element.
> There's a great story about the development, by a Mr. Strowger, of the first electromechanical telephone exchange switch. Previously, calls were connected manually, by operators. Mr. Strowger was an undertaker, and he believed that the operators were sending callers to his competition unfairly. So he invented an automatic switch to remove the human element.
I’ve heard this one before. Wasn’t the wife of one of his competitors actually the operator in question?
Look up HATEOS. The initial endpoint will you give you the next set of resources - maybe the user list and then the post list. Then as you navigate to say, the post list, it will have embedded pagination links. Once you have resource urls from this list you can post/put/delete as usual.
Yes, I thought it was an interesting blend of past and present. If this were a scene in a show or movie it could be edited beautifully - the reader, sitting alone in a corner, looks up and in a lucid, almost psychedelic way, the past comes to life with Ulbrict sitting in front of him, that unfold as he continues reading.
I got online in about 98 and had many many friends in online games or on AIM / AOL and it took until many years, maybe even a decade, after FB for me to even discover what some of these people looked like. The standard "ASL?" and just chatting about life was what happened, so I agree with the comment you replying to.
Corporate isn't an AOL chatroom. I remember those childhood days, and you're right. But the corporate environment I worked in was nothing like that. From about 2014 or so, identity was front and center.
This post [1] mentions a couple of the most salient anecdotes about my experience, but I've got so many more.
I was told I couldn't hire or refer white people on numerous occasions, certain groups (mostly the "WomEng" group) were given nice lunches and off sites and I had to take their oncall or interviews, I was told to cover for the work of underperforming engineers for well over a year before anything was done about it (a couple of non-special friends were simply let go), we all had to sit and watch other engineers get awards for their race (exactly what it sounds like), we had our walls painted with caricatures of our special identity groups. Every bit of it felt like an HR gimmick.
And that's barely scratching the surface.
It was one of the weirdest things I've experienced. And it carried on for years.
I tried to participate. I was an early proponent of this stuff. But when it started turning into favoritism, inauthentic gestures, and began feeling more like policing than something uplifting, it demoralized me and made me feel shitty.
Sibling comment mentioned Zelda but really this reminds me of the Zelda Randomizers.
Fixed set of items in a fixed set of locations. Certain locations need certain items to access. So therefore randomize which items are in which rooms while still being able to complete the game.
Then they have a door randomizer which changes where doors warp you to - effectively changing the map and potentially the order of items needed.
> Fixed set of items in a fixed set of locations. Certain locations need certain items to access. So therefore randomize which items are in which rooms while still being able to complete the game.
So this part of the puzzle generation isn't that bad, you also need to make sure you can't make it unsolvable by destroying/wasting items or making them inaccessible (or allow this and call it "Sierra mode"). Making the item usage interesting is the hard part, but that's not as much as an issue for a Zelda game.
Yeah, it's essentially https://grumpygamer.com/rtmi_pdc/ where the items are nodes and the edges are item interactions, and you're trying to carve out a subgraph for whatever your definition is of a good adventure game.
> I have no issue with American companies trying to change American policies.
For me that's a naive stance that ignores the problem of corporate influence on politics.
Apart from that, how is US corporate influence necessarily better than foreign corporate influence? Neither care about the US general public. Some US companies knowingly harm their own citizens (Philip Morris, Exxon, Purdue, etc.)
One can argue the problem with TikTook is that it's controlled by the government of an adversary nation (from the viewpoint of the US), but it's not just the fact that the company resides in a foreign country.
Corporations and their wealthy owners have an outsized influence on policies to the near total exclusion of everyday people. Not sure what future you're envisioning here but you might want to consider where you fall in the pecking order before bending the knee to blatant oligarchy.
I mean it might just be a matter of the right UK person filing a case; I suppose my main understanding is UK Libel/Slander laws but if my US brain goes with that my head says the burden of proof is on non-infringement.
> Suppose two players notice each other at the same time (e.g. as would naturally happen when walking around a corner in a shooter)
This is not true for third person games. Depending on a left sided or right sided peek and your angle or approach, players see asymmetrically.
For example, Fortnite is a right side peek game. Peeking right is safer than peeking left as less of your body is exposed before your camera turns the corner.
I believe distance also plays a part in the angles.
reply