Making something illegal is the prerequisite to enforcement. These are separate parts of the government. You can't build enforcement infrastructure around something that isn't yet illegal! You don't even know what that would look like until you know what the laws you're enforcing are. Enforcement is the goal of these processes, the laws are the foundation from which enforcement stems.

It is true that simply putting a law down doesn't mean the problem is solved. But solving these problems doesn't happen all at once, so there's no reason to criticize the first step for not being a leap to the finish line.

The thesis as given - "The real aliens are the Chinese people" (note the 'real') - is saying that, to an American reading the book, the portrayal of the humans feels more alien than the extraterrestrial aliens, while the extraterrestrial aliens are closer to familiar western culture.

Points: 1

# Comments: 1

(it is only extension support -- not scripting -- but the extension system is such that it can be used for any game logic AFAIK)

I don't understand what you mean by this -- Defold has a graphical editor?

> If Defold developers had produced a fraction of the libraries that Godot has, it might have had a chance.

What do you mean by libraries in this context? It has a robust plugin system with a reasonably active ecosystem, if that's the sort of thing you're talking about: https://defold.com/assets/

And it covers all the systems one would expect in a 2D game engine natively -- tilemaps, physics etc.

> As of now, it's worse than other abandoned engines like Solar2D (was CoronaSDK) for people entering the space.

I definitely disagree with this -- it's certainly not abandoned, and though it does have a slightly steeper learning curve than Godot or other popular engines, that's also how it gets such impressive performance and slim builds; feature, not a bug.

Jev (and similar) is more for data processing and sentiment analysis. Moderation, search engines, that sort of thing. Jev has a page of proposed use cases where you can get an idea of what they're going for: https://docs.typesafe.ai/concepts/use-case-map

I think this change is just adding the toggle to the standalone settings app.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49680428

Points: 74

# Comments: 31

Yes, it is: https://www.autismspeaks.org/autism-diagnostic-criteria-dsm-...

Though, to be more specific, it's even moreso about high-level behavior that has a negative impact, which is highly variable, particularly with environment. I think most would agree that this is extremely messy. But is there a better option?

For practical purposes, it makes some sense to diagnose based on high-level behavior and negative impact on one's life. Describing the relevant what rather than the currently-unknown why.

I do think a more granular approach would have benefits as far as treatment and such goes, though. I know a lot of folks with Asperger's diagnoses were upset when that was rolled into autism. I don't think that was the best distinction to be made, but I think it does show that the people with these conditions often aren't opposed to more granularity (myself included).

Say Bob pays a $5 subscription and listens exclusively to artist Foo, 100 song plays. Alice pays a $5 subscription and listens exclusively to artist Baz, but plays their songs a whopping 300 times.

If it was paid out per user, Foo and Baz would both get $5. But paying out based on overall listener numbers, Foo would get $2.50 and Baz would get $7.50.

Essentially, it's a zero sum game, and one artist getting a play takes away revenue from every other artist. Even if you exclusively listen to your favorite artists, the vast majority of your subscription money is going towards the top artists.

This is why Spotify is always pushing their own playlists, smart shuffle, and encouraging background listening with ambient / sleep playlists and such; the more they can shift listeners toward music they've produced themselves or have special license agreements with, the less they have to pay out to typical (i.e. smaller) artists using their platform.

The hypothesis is really only supported by the fact that we have adaptations that make it theoretically possible, but the times and places those adaptations came about doesn't really match up with the times and places it would have been effective (i.e. woodland where the ground would be too hard for effective tracking [0]).

There are some other things that point away from it, too; it's worth doing some googling.

It's certainly possible that persistence hunting happened to some degree, and it's a fun idea so it really caught on in popular consciousness, but the actual evidence is limited.

[0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00472...