All of these engine releases of late seem to have very reasonable terms. From the Unreal Engine 4 FAQ

I think the reason for this is they all want to become the defacto-standard, they are all very keen to create a developer community around their toolset. Personally I like the UE4 / PhysX sales model since you don't pay until you make money from it. I'm interested in playing with these engines as a hobby but have no interest in writing a commercial game, If I was serious about developing and selling games, the license fees for any of the popular engines would be a very minor concern, it's a great example of a capitalist "win-win".

Selling model content to use in these engines is where the money is for individual devs/artists, kind of like the people who sold shovels during the gold rush. IIRC UE4 has some sort of public marketplace where you can release/sell models you have created.

I'm generally in favor of free market capitalism, but sometimes I'm not sure that's what I'm seeing right now. I also think that problems arise when revenue and profit become the number one goal, especially at the expense of the products and services that are supposedly being sold for that revenue and profit.

What does that really matter? Almost by definition, a demoscene prod involves clever choices in what to make and display on screen in order to achieve an effect. I'm pretty confident the winners of the competitions for the last few years (a) don't have the same flexibility for artists working with their demo engines as Square-Enix does and (b) would never be able to assemble enough assets and people to do the facial expression stuff with anywhere near the same quality (an area in which, AFAIK, Nvidia has been almost entirely pioneering.) The achievement of this video isn't diminished by the achievements of the scene, nor vice-versa.

If you find that interesting, you may also be interested in the VMWare install script, which starts as a shell script but has a compressed binary attached to the end.

It's hard to believe that page is not satire.

How can you possibly know without reading the actual review, and also at least skimming the paper?

Too many offers is a result of more demand for programmers than supply of programmers. This can happen because of a bubble, or it can happen for other reasons. You can't automatically conclude it's a bubble.

Look for valuations to become unreasonable, that is the true sign of a bubble.

Then say what is going while also being technically accurate. To do otherwise makes you look ignorant.

Oh. In your initial comment I interpreted your writing to mean that they were targeting science. Whereas I interpret their actions to be targeting the EPA.

I have a polite canned reply, which basically says that unless the recruiter's client is looking for developers to work 100% remotely, AND that their pay scales are likely to exceed Google's by a significant margin, AND that they do really cool stuff, then I'm not interested. Oh, and I don't do referrals of friends (they get plenty of spam themselves).

I don't actually mind the recruiter spam. It only takes a couple of keystrokes to fire the canned response, and there's always the possibility that someone will have an opportunity that meets my criteria. Not likely, but possible. I'm not looking for a new job, but if an opportunity satisfies my interest requirements, I'm always open to a discussion.

However, when they keep pushing even when they know their job doesn't fit my requirements, then I get pissed and blackhole their agency. That also takes only a couple of keystrokes :-)

I think you're saying the same thing with different words. Yes the target is the EPA, and the method employed is to put (inconvenient) Science on a short leash.

I suspect the article is full of half-truths, for example, legal aid for nutjobs to sue the government is nothing new, nor are the funds limited to green groups.

That seems like a better metric, but anything under 6% is 'full employment.' You don't want 100% employment because there will always be people who quit to look for new jobs, etc.

Instead of merely looking at the unemployment number, also look at the number of people who have been searching for over six months, and how many have dropped out of the workforce completely (although to get a clear picture, you should also try to determine why they dropped out).

oh? You can go innovate your buzzword into the cloud!

Men are constantly portrayed in both advertising and entertainment as buffoons and simpletons when they are anywhere near the kitchen, the kids, or the laundry. Everyone laughs when a man is kicked in the balls by a woman in a TV show/commercial. Where's the fake outrage about that violent sexisim in the name of humour?

I strongly suspect the paper was a "joke", and the reviewer was sarcastically reflecting the paper's bias back at the authors.

That's one way. There are always other options. The key is to hook in at the layer that you're debugging. The wire is almost never that layer, unless you're debugging the network card driver. Or the hardware, but in that case Wireshark (or Ethereal, as I still think of it in my head) is usually too high-level.