Hacker News: scott_w

New comment by scott_w in "Xbox Turns Down Netflix $500M Offer"

scott_w — Sun, 25 Oct 2026 11:49:44 +0000

True though I suspect it being, essentially, the first instance of it happening meant developers were playing catchup until it became the norm.

New comment by scott_w in "Xbox Turns Down Netflix $500M Offer"

scott_w — Sun, 25 Oct 2026 07:50:31 +0000

You said “they’re similar” and I’m refuting that by pointing out that they operate very differently. One is a retailer and one is a developer/publisher. Their operating models are different, so you can’t point at two percentages and say “they’re similar” in any way.

New comment by scott_w in "Xbox Turns Down Netflix $500M Offer"

scott_w — Sun, 25 Oct 2026 06:04:36 +0000

You’re mostly correct but there’s truth to the original statement. Back in the PlayStation/N64 through to PS3/Xbox 360, consoles were so different to each other and PCs that porting games was a major task that resulted in very different outcomes.

Since the PS4/Xbox One, they’ve been similar enough in underlying architecture that engines like Unreal have been able to smooth over the differences enough to make multiplatform technically viable. It’s meant companies like Capcom with RE Engine have made a huge success out of selling across all platforms, including PC. That freedom for publishers is a problem for console manufacturers who have fewer 3rd party exclusives as a result.

New comment by scott_w in "Xbox Turns Down Netflix $500M Offer"

scott_w — Sun, 25 Oct 2026 05:57:07 +0000

No, they’re not even remotely the same. The retailer keeps 30% of the retail price and, out of that, they pay for the upkeep of the store. It’s not 30% pure profit, it’s not even gross profit given they need to pay the card processing fees out of that 30%.

New comment by scott_w in "Xbox Turns Down Netflix $500M Offer"

scott_w — Sun, 25 Oct 2026 04:32:22 +0000

You’re confusing 2 different things. Microsoft isn’t demanding a “cut,” it’s demanding its business units achieve a 30% profit margin on its investment. I think industry standard is closer to 10% once you factor in games that don’t make a return on their investment.

New comment by scott_w in "Bringing uv and ty together"

scott_w — Sat, 24 Oct 2026 21:51:06 +0000

And the article says it won’t be automatically installed, so it’s only there for people that want it.

New comment by scott_w in "Bringing uv and ty together"

scott_w — Sat, 24 Oct 2026 21:50:00 +0000

Once you’ve installed uv, adding ruff and ty is trivial. Installing uv is the only hoop you need to jump.

New comment by scott_w in "High Diesel Prices Bankrupted 16 Trucking Companies in Just 30 Days"

scott_w — Tue, 06 Oct 2026 05:43:22 +0000

It does need to be paired with investment in train infrastructure, usually led by governments.

Obviously, that would be a very good thing, just pointing it out!

New comment by scott_w in "Powerless F1 drivers frustrated by Bahrain F1 software glitch"

scott_w — Mon, 05 Oct 2026 05:59:04 +0000

Because that’s also not desirable all the time either. There are lots of one make series out there but they can be pretty mixed in how fun they are to watch. I was at Croft a few weeks ago and the BTCC rounds were incredible, close racing with overtakes and near miss crashes.

The Porsche GT and GT Sprint Cups (911 and Cayman respectively) were a lot more like a procession where the faster drivers quickly ordered themselves and drove away from the rest of the grid. Granted there were fewer cars starting, which didn’t help, but it still didn’t make for exciting viewing.

New comment by scott_w in "AWS says it can't restore some data from mideast facilities struck by Iran"

scott_w — Thu, 17 Sep 2026 09:37:06 +0000

The customer CEO never watched that presentation.

New comment by scott_w in "The Return of Sail Power: Cargo Ships Are Turning Back to the Wind"

scott_w — Thu, 17 Sep 2026 06:46:13 +0000

That’s exactly what they’re doing to reduce fuel usage by up to 6%.

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 15:26:12 +0000

Yep, you’re right. I was mixing it up with Groom of the Stool.

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 11:02:29 +0000

I just checked and you’re right! I’m mixing it up with Groom of the Stool, which was a separate but also honourable position.

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 10:19:26 +0000

Not to mention the Privy Council, so named because they were trusted to speak to the King while he was on the toilet!

I don’t think the modern day Privy Council ever met with Elizabeth II in such a way!

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 10:16:51 +0000

I do think it’s fair to point out that both of these postage Matilda by a few hundred years. I’m actually struggling to think of many Christian European kingdoms that would have at this point.

France only had kings at that point (in fact, Matilda’s son Henry II’s marriage to Eleanor of Acquitaine comes about because she didn’t give the king of France a son!)

Germany (HRE) selected their emperor so didn’t have succession problems in that sense.

Italy was a collection of city states, Naples was yet to form a kingdom.

Maybe Poland had an earlier queen? But then I don’t know if English nobles paid much attention to Poland, to be honest!

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 07:28:15 +0000

The substance of your objection is “these criticisms are regularly levelled at men today,” and you skip the part that 900 years have passed since they were levelled at Matilda. You then demand the article provide evidence to overcome this comparison you have been 12th century norms and 21st century norms? Really?

Let me repeat: this is not intended as a thesis. It’s a small historical tale to explain the background of a period of time in early mediaeval England. It assumes you know how women were viewed during that time period and the example provides flavour. If you want to contradict its claims, just post the articles that shows differently.

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 06:17:19 +0000

So there were some texts later discussing the problems of Elizabeth I being Queen Regnant when all laws and customs referred to a “King.” We also see a lot of her father’s behaviour (Henry VIII) being driven by his need for a male heir. It’s why he tries to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon.

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 06:13:05 +0000

Er… no it didn’t? It just said the criticism being based on her womanhood was evident because of , it never promised to prove it, it was just a rhetorical device and they expect the reader to know the information already.

If you want to learn more about early medieval attitudes to women and power in England, it’s on you to learn, not on the article to triple its length to prove every minor claim.

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 05:22:53 +0000

I’m struggling to follow your point. The article isn’t giving a major thesis on why medieval people thought Matilda couldn’t rule England. From the perspective of the barons at the time, Matilda couldn’t be queen in her own right because women can’t rule. They didn’t think any deeper than that.

New comment by scott_w in "A succession crisis that tore England apart (2023)"

scott_w — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 05:17:46 +0000

More importantly: a king was expected to embody the traits a queen was hammered for.