I believe I have played for at least a few minutes every single game ever commercially released for the BBC Micro, a British 8-bit home computer.
I got slightly obsessed with playing all of them, a few years ago.
About 10-20% of them are pretty good. A small percentage are genuinely shockingly good, for such an old system.
The vast majority are pretty awful, with many of them being horrible BBC BASIC “conversions” of at the time current popular arcade games, with names and icons changed to avoid copyright problems.
I don’t feel particularly enlightened by my short-lived obsession.
Difficult question, I think. The "famous" ones are indeed very good - Elite, Exile. SimCity works amazingly well considering it's running on a 6502 with less than 32K of RAM.
Chuckie Egg is famous in the UK but I found it to be overrated.
Plan B and Starship Command take good advantage of the high-res 1-bit screen modes and look great.
Thrust has amazingly realistic feeling physics, very satisfying to play.
Revs is a very dry simulation of car racing, but well produced if that's your thing.
Firetrack has probably the smoothest vertical scolling on the system, which until that game came out was thought to be impossible.
- keep pressing 'home' on your keyboard (home key brings the focus to top left icon) and then left mouse button (changes the focus to the icon you're over)
- do it faster and faster (home, lmb, home, lmb, ...), focus will jump between top icon and the icon under the mouse pointer
- when you reach the double-click speed, the icon will be launched
but it will not be the icon under the mouse pointer, but the top left corner icon.
Bicarbonate of soda works as a deodorant. I have a small pot by my bathroom sink. Dab in two damp fingers, under the arms, no smell. It's more effective than any deodorant I've tried, doesn't give me an allergic reaction, is better for the environment, and is very cheap.
Is this quora now?
I'd prefer if we don't have this kind of question here.
How can anyone even know that they are the only people that know a piece of information, it's not like they're going around asking people if they know it or not.
My private key :) On a more serious note, and not revealing anything that I really shouldn’t be telling people: I’m sure many people know that there used to be a feature on macOS where you could hold down the shift key while minimizing windows (among other things) and it would slow down the animation comically. This feature seems like it was removed a couple of years ago, but it wasn’t: I was poking around the Dock binary one day and discovered that it’s still secretly there, hidden behind a preference key. You can reenable it with
$ defaults write com.apple.dock slow-motion-allowed -bool YES && killall Dock
Economics and related industrial, business, and commercial activities are designed to systematically control and subjugate individuals by imposing a way and manner of thinking that effectively short-circuits individual thought and responsibility - one feels obligated to deliver arbitrary end-goals because of a misplaced sense of "responsibility" despite having limited (in some cases, zero) real/effective ownership in the created output, while still feeling the brunt of "production support" and sometimes even the product decisions in and of themselves.
In spite of this, the owners of capital still reap all the reward, in spite of their distance from the actual decision making that actually shapes and molds the end-result.
I think capitalism can work but we don't have pure capitalism - corporatocratic bailouts have been normalized since the 1990s, and as a result, all systemically important losses are socialized, while the gains are always split across a handful of criminals that exploit a system they partially mold to their own liking in order to propagate the toxicity that enables them to further their own interests.
I predict that the Federal Reserve will gain new powers within the next quarter that will enable them to indefinitely prop up equity markets through large-scale asset purchases in the equity markets through some novel facility (I'm sure it'll have some super cool new vernacular as well) that changes all the rules and allows for unilateral action without any covenants - awesome!
For any speculators out there - just buy calls, nothing can go down anymore. Easiest outlook EVER.
again, this isn't new, Just look at the collapse of the east india company.
basically a few people treated it as a way to live like a king, and it collapsed. The state stepped in and took it over, because it was too big to fail.
It feels like a religious chant. Invisible hand will self regulate and everything will be great as long as you submit.
In all recorded history there has been no case where due to lack of regulation society 'self regulated' itself into some idyllic dream state.
The less oversight the more rule of the strongest/most selfish prevails.
Looking back at history of European nations, the struggle between classes: Ruling class, aristocracy (wealthy class) and others (people with low on no power), always gives the same outcome when one class out-powers others. In Russia ruling class took all power (to this day really), Poland and Hungary the wealthy took power and gouged kings rights to the point where they ruled. And as they ruled they drained their respective countries of wealth and future.
Then we have Britain with Magna Carta that regulated and prevented each class from winning over others. I don't think I need to explain how that worked out for Britain.
Pure capitalism is actually happening right now, what you point to is nothing but outcome of the wealthy controlling government to do their bidding.
USA where harsh capitalism is for poor, and socialism is for the richest.
Bailouts are nothing less then socialism is for the richest. It was the banks that coined the term 'too big to fail' not some leftwing nutjob.
Gangrene is not bad but because you are trying to heal it your leg will rot.
- JS code-golfing... I'm not alone but we're a small community, who enjoy making JS programs / art / games with the smallest possible amount of code (js1k.com, js13kgames.com, dwitter.net, ...)
- Unicode, its quirks, its updates (not only emoji), its encodings and its predecessors charsets
- Regexes (everyone hates them but I enjoy using them)
- Browsers hacks and polyfills (remember IE6? Firefox 3? Chrome 1? With enough effort, you could make them do almost everything that modern browsers can do today. My job has been to do exactly that for many years, and it was actually pretty fun)
QM math is bunk!
Randall Mills of brilliantlightpower.com has figured out a classical model of the atom that works far better than the Schroedinger electron is everywhere at once model. Theory has many astonishing consequences - oscillating universe, unlimited energy (working prototypes exist) from atomic hydrogen transition to smaller hydrinos, dark matter is hydrogen in form of hydrinos, etc. Wikipedia says it is nonsense, but Wikipedia is policed by uber skeptics that won't even allow pro-hydrino rebuttal to be added to the page so is not an unbiased source. Proof is in the experimental videos and accompanying verification paper by independent scientists.
OK I'll risk it by saying things I think I know about quantum mechanics that have proved useful in dispelling/illuminating/clarifying popular accounts, that lots of people probably don't get.
Bear in mind that someone quite famous and rather clever once said "if you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics", and I think he surely wasn't joking!
- There's no such thing as an independent 'observation'. To observe quantum particles you must interact with them. 'You' might be just a particle.
- All the things you've interacted with look different to the things you haven't.
"There's no such thing as an independent 'observation'." It's not as if you can see macro objects without bouncing photons off them, either. Does this point have to do with QM specifically? At large enough scales the amount of interaction needed to observe something is incidental to the thing itself. At small enough QM scales the interaction needed for observation is non-trivial. But is this a difference of kind, or just a difference of quantity?
The laws of physics are time-symmetrical. This is true for both classical dynamics and quantum mechanics.
Various attempts have been made over the decades to try to come up with a deeper understanding. Examples include String Theory, Loop quantum gravity, and computational models such as those espoused by Stephen Wolfram.
What they all seem to lack however is a recognition of the intrinsic reversibility of the universe we live in.
In my opinion, the most promising research in this realm is actually around Quantum computation. By necessity, it accepts the reversibility at the heart of things, otherwise you couldn't have the sorts of logic gates you need to do Quantum computation.
By way of an entrance into this rabbit hole, look up the Ffredkin gate.
I got slightly obsessed with playing all of them, a few years ago.
About 10-20% of them are pretty good. A small percentage are genuinely shockingly good, for such an old system.
The vast majority are pretty awful, with many of them being horrible BBC BASIC “conversions” of at the time current popular arcade games, with names and icons changed to avoid copyright problems.
I don’t feel particularly enlightened by my short-lived obsession.