Second hand from other members of the dev team, apparently Nintendo lawyers approached the lead dev at his home with a Cease and Desist. Apparently they reached an agreement, as his fork went private and the Ryujinx organization went private.
So basically they got to the dev that controlled its online presence, and pressured him into removing it and abandoning the project. Naturally this scared off the other devs. So it's dead in the sense that no one is maintaining it and it was deplatformed.
While nothing is stopping anyone from continuing the project, the community is fragmented (there's a bunch of mirrors/forks but no primary fork), and there was zero knowledge transfer - anyone picking this up has to build their experience with both the code base and switch internals from scratch.
But really, this isn't about overruling software, it's about overruling yourself.
Past self has implemented a mandate that future self get up at this time. Future self is a sleepy, lazy, point of sale that can't be trusted.
Sample size of 1. I used to "wake up" and turn off my alarm and have zero recollection of it. I got the most annoying mechanical clock and packed it in a box that I had to unpack before I could turn it off. It got louder as I removed the packaging. The prolonged activity in order to shut off the alarm is ultimately what helped me fully wake up.
> Is it because sports betting gives you quick feedback as oppose to lotteries making you wait or maybe the ease it is to drop your whole bank account as a bet?
I suspect it's because unlike the lotto and games of chance, people can delude themselves into thinking they "know" the sport. It's not a gambling if they know better. It's also easy to externalize the blame for your loses "they would have won if not for <bad call, bad play, bad management, injury, weather, etc... Or combination thereof>"
You can dip your toe in betting on the obvious mismatched, where it's pretty clear who will win. This is priced into the bookmaking, so the payout is little, but this helps people convince themselves they do know the sport and chase longer odds with better payouts.
And then you get sunk cost fallacy, as they lose, they convince themselves they can win it back because they learned from before and their system will work this time.
I also don't think people realize how much money, effort, time, very smart (and well-funded) individuals are working on making those odds. They have access to decades worth of data, all the stats, and are entirely un-emotional or clinical about the data they are trawling through. Even if they miss something or get it wrong, it's usually minute and you as the gambler barely make any money out of it. Short of some black-swan like event or insider knowledge, you as a single individual would not be able to come up with a system that on average does better than the book makers.
At least (very loosely) with the lottery it's kinda random and your odds are "set" or rather your payout is not proportionate to your chance of winning. It's a happy surprise kind of thing as long as you don't overdo it.
You don't need to beat the bookies, you need to beat the odds. The bookies win either way. All they need to do is make sure bets on each side net out, minus their take.
If you have a reliable way to beat the odds (ie. Inefficient betting markets that get the odds of success wrong) you can theoretically make money - but its a similar scenario to daytrading, where you need to do extremely well because you have to overcome the negative drag from the booky take too.
It's not just the bookmakers either - there are syndicates, much like hedge funds, whose entire 9-5 job is trying to make money out of this stuff too, which forces the bookies into line and makes the prices on markets like Betfair fairly efficient.
Basically, as a guy on the street, you don't have a clue and you're up against MIT-tier brains trying to beat you.
It's interesting to me that more people don't realise this is intuitively obvious, though. No-one would look at the Olympics and think, oh yeah, I can run faster than Usain Bolt.
That's a good point about being easy to externalize the blame. I'd also add on that likely a reason is the emotion of it. People are already emotional about sports and their team. With money on the line, that ramps up even more. The emotional aspect with highs and lows helps people crave more of that excitement.
It's actually the opposite. People don't really take no for an answer anymore, and that's doubly true of anyone trying to sell you stuff, so instead of saying "no/ will not", we try to justify why we "cannot/are physically unable to" to stop the onslaught.
Like canceling cable, home internet. It's not that we're using something else, not using it at all, don't want it. It's "we're moving/going to jail for 5 years/dying Thursday and thus cannot continue using this service"
I had a door to door salesman ask if I was racist after I told him I wasn't interested, as if to try to pressure me into proving I wasn't a racist by listening to his pitch/buying into whatever he was selling. It's gotten to the point where I have a video door bell so know when I can skip it all by not answering//pretending I'm not home.
If they don't take the polite "no", immediately reach for insults. People who intentionally annoy you don't deserve civility - they're not showing any themselves.
My personal favorites is along the lines of: "Are you hard of hearing, you stupid clown?" - no overly foul language and safe to use in most company.
Few will try selling stuff to someone hurling nothing but insults at them. There's really only one group of people this doesn't work on, and they're the bottom of the barrel trying to find victims on public transport and the like. If you figure out a way to reliably get rid of them, let me know!
Funnily enough, this reminds me of my Dad's approach years back. After he said no and they'd start again, he'd say "oh sorry, are ya deaf or dumb, boy?" in a way you couldn't tell if he was joking or not.
They'd usually be speechless or say 'neither', and he'd explain that he already said no, so they must either be hard of hearing or their brain's not processing it. Always caught them off guard. I don't remember if it was effective or not in getting them to go away, oddly enough.
Indeed. Even if this worked 95% of the time, that 5% where it escalates things just isn't worth it IMO. Also, pissing people off that know where you live isn't a great idea.
It's basically WarGames. The only winning move is not to play. I don't answer the door when I'm certain it's a salesman. I don't make eye contact/respond to the ones that are setup outside of a store. Same with the ones setup in malls/stores (looking at you, Costco).
Read the room and maybe don't do it to that unhinged looking guy from the subway.
Personally I enjoy a bit of excitement, but most people don't want confrontation, which is why appearing confrontational before they're committed works for making them do a u-turn quickly.
The internet companies have mobile offerings now to push on you when you move. I thought while recently moving it would be a quick call to disconnect and still got a retention sales pitch...
It's been a few years and I can't recall. Probably renting solar panels? That was a popular one for a while. Not that it matters, he could have been offering me free money. What matters is he didn't respect my right to say no. That's an extreme accusation to lob just to prevent the conversation from ending.
To qualify my previous comment, it's not that saying no is seen as rude, it's that salesmen are beyond rude if you try to say no. I have to hide in my home, pretend I'm renting/house sitting, etc because it's less hassle than opening the door and saying no.
I think the idea is as a growth hacking strategy, people lost their way. The space is crowded and now it usually means people are posting positive numbers go up charts. What value is in that? Why is my chart more engaging than other people's charts?
It's not interesting, engaging, or educational. So as an growth strategy, it sharply slumps off after the initial launch post, and there's zero value to the reader aside from knowing it exists (again, initial launch post).
So it's a call to arms to reevaluate what you're doing. If you're posting number goes up, it's really no different from building in private, it's likely a wasted effort on your part and unnecessary noise to the community. Or maybe return to the old meaning of building in public. Create value for people, actually have a dialogue, and that'll pay dividends (that's the hope anyways) .
I found keeping it in docker makes it less of a nightmare, but it's definitely not something I'd trust with anything important.
There's like dozen scenarios where you end up with 0 byte files with no warning, error, etc. Sometimes it's an uploading issue, sometimes it's a syncing issue, etc. And they are still open, mutli-year, issues.
I ran into a version of it where existing uploads were replaced with zero byte versions, so I had to manually run a script to find them and I restore a pervious version. If it tried to do other things, like photos, document editing, collab, etc and did those poorly that would be fine. Failing at the most central task of just storing the data is not. It's still alpha quality, and if one intends to use it, it's critical you setup monitoring infrastructure to ensure file integrity (backups should go without saying).
I was thinking more along the lines of the API auth//access control getting messed up. But a third party service linked to the accounts is more likely.
Unfortunately Twitter doesn't do post mortems of events/outages, so we probably won't know the real story.
I'm optimistic about it, but probably won't switch over my home lab for a while. I've had quirks with my (now legacy) zsys + zfs on root for Ubuntu, but since it's a common config//widely used for years it's pretty easy to find support.
I probably won't use bcachefs until a similar level of adoption/community support exists.
So basically they got to the dev that controlled its online presence, and pressured him into removing it and abandoning the project. Naturally this scared off the other devs. So it's dead in the sense that no one is maintaining it and it was deplatformed.
While nothing is stopping anyone from continuing the project, the community is fragmented (there's a bunch of mirrors/forks but no primary fork), and there was zero knowledge transfer - anyone picking this up has to build their experience with both the code base and switch internals from scratch.
reply