And my absolutely favorite thing was when it itself came in the way of seeing the 2FA code for a modal entry and you had the option on the screen to hide the modal for 10 seconds in order to remember the number underneath…

See screenshot here: https://ibb.co/5Wh05rsd

But this was a few days ago and I can’t remember exactly which video it was mentioned in.

Just for comparisons sake, our 8.6kwP setup with a 10kwH battery cost us (after subsidies from governemnt) appr. ~€11.5k. Haven't received all the subsidies yet, so the total will be lower by about 1.5k (I think). Everything was done through installers, we didn't lift a finger (also couldn't, because when it comes to electricity I have as much experience as the dog next door).

If I had more due diligence before I would have scaled up the panels up to at least 10kwP, for future proofing probably to 12kwP. This is mostly just to make sure winter is covered better, as our production is really low as we have a 10° flat roof installation.

“Ich bin seit zwei Tagen hier.”

At first I was determined I would purchase the ad-free version (I think the price difference was like ~20€), but after talking to my friend they kind of convinced me that the ad version is not so bad.

2 points on this: 1. The ad appears only on the lockscreen of the device, so you see it once and then never again until you reopen it. The ad is also only for a book in the Kindle store, never anything else (this might seem trivial, but I think one of the negative aspects of advertising is being blasted with stimuli about so many different things you don't care for)

2. The ads are personalized on books you bought and therefor a sort of recommendation engine. Both my friend and my partner told me they got some inspiration from those ads to find books they liked.

So all in all while I despise ads, I gave this one a try. Personally (and yeah, I know – subconciously) I have never looked at the lockscreen apart from the first time I launched it. It's a relatively non-intrusive ad about a book that I don't even need to engage with. And in case something relevant is on there, it leads to a good outcome for me.

This is advertising done well for me at least.

If it weren't for the insanely good driving experience (coming from a VW Polo before), the software would have definitely convinced us to go for another car.

TL;DR: do you know of any examples of a good documentation of a specific game and its mechanics? And do you think these are necessary/valuable?

I've just come into a discussion with a user on Reddit, because I was asking for a relative basic simple fact about a game (namely, Valorant – I will use this as a baseline example for here on out). The question was "How much damage does a player need to afflict onto an enemy to get an assist?"

I can't say if it is a "core" mechanic of the game, but it's very visible information right in the scoreboard and features into the "ranking" of the player after the game (which some might consider a valuable reward system). Now I don't really care for assists themselves, hence why I have never paid close attention to it. I know it's somewhat in the area of 40-50. Counter-Strike has 40, I'm pretty sure, which is why I was hesitant about 50 being the right number. So unless I wanted to play for a few hours and check out my damage numbers and rule out every possible combination, I searched for the number online. And I couldn't find anything on it. The official website has only the most basic information about agents, maps and guns. But no underlying mechanics. There is a fandom wiki, which, AFAIK also doesn't expose this information. I'm 100% sure the number is mentioned within a video, but I can't randomly try to find the right info out of hours of material, right?

So I was stumped and went to the subreddit to ask for the answer (it seems to be 50, btw) and vent about how we don't have any official documentation of the game mechanics of the games we play. More specifically I would say the mechanics of a highly competitive FPS, where variables are tweaked in the realm of milliseconds to make sure it is balanced.

And the user kind of went on a tangent on how I couldn't tell this just purely by playing and why I would need every bit of information spoonfed as it is done "nowadays".

Do you agree with that assessment? So professionally I come from a Design Systems background, which relies heavily on documentation and making sure everyone has access to the same information/status quo. Am I somehow wrong to want companies (that specifically work on heavily competitive games) to be transparent about how the mechanics of the game work? That don't rely on very specific circumstances to happen in-game so I can store this information somewhere?

My go to example for how "lazy" these companies are was this description of a skill ingame. The first one is the official description from the website. The second one is from the Fandom wiki. We rely on third-party providers to gather this information, rather than it being presented directly from the source.

> Valorant website:

NULL/CMD Instantly overload with polarized radianite energy that empowers KAY/O and causes large energy pulses to emit from his location. Enemies hit with these pulses are suppressed for a short duration.

> Fandom Wiki

NULL/CMD Instantly overload with polarized radianite energy that pulses from KAY/O in a massive radius. Enemies hit with pulses are suppressed for a short duration. While overloaded, KAY/O gains combat stim and can be re-stabilized if downed.

Required Ult points: 8

Windup Stabilization: 3 s

Revive: 1.55 s

Duration Overload: 12 s

Downed: 15 s Health: 850 HP (Downed)

Buff: +15% Fire rate, +10% Reload speed, +10% Recovery speed

Debuff: 4 s Suppression per pulse

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35093017

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

https://twitter.com/jaredsinclair/status/633407338347634688?...

Temple of Doom was nowhere near the quality of Raiders or Last Crusade, but it was still a good Indy movie. They should have never touched the franchise again after the trilogy. Harrison Ford is Indy. And Indy without his charisma & agility is just really plain…

> If it's not obvious, it's probably not a critical feature, just a nicety for those who discover it.

There is a huge difference between discoverability and hierarchy. If the user can't distinguish between an interactive element and a static label, the UI has failed. But there is definitely nuance in the degrees of hierarchy and importance. If every button looks the same with every affordance necessary for a user to recognise it as such, it might be great in terms of discoverability, but in most cases it would still be bad design because as a user I can't easily distinguish between primary, secondary or tertiary actions.

This is of course also highly dependent on the business goals and overall context of the design. If you have a marketing page you might want to clearly distinguish actions that lead to the sign up or download of your product (this – in most cases – is what you would like your users to do and also what your users eventually want to do themselves). If you have enterprise software that is highly customizable and completely different for each and every individual, you might want to shy away from opinionated hierarchy of importance. In this case, it would be very much dependent on the user and therefor their choice.

Typically the context is – at scale – more on the former side than the latter. If I have, for example, a notes app I would say the hierarchy favors the creation of new notes rather than going into settings to change the appearance of my notes. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be discoverable, only that the design should clearly dictate what's more important (especially on a temporal dimension: I'll add notes more often than I would edit the style) and therefor influence the appearance of both actions.

Let me know what you think.

The only good thing about it is video calling. Without testing this, I always feel it's much faster/smoother and has better screen sharing quality. Also the launch screen does a great job (in comparison to Zoom for example)

Don't take this the wrong way. I'm happy for the designer to have been so successful. I'm merely pointing out that the price is relatively steep in comparison with other icon kits of the same craft. But good for him that he was so bold to go with the price and get rewarded for it!