It doesn't do anything(other than spy on you)

Good news, they just divided the estimated amount of wealth by the estimated number of people in two scenarios.

Unfortunately, my tendency is to view it as bullshit, not because of the climate science, but because of the economic models, where mitigated climate change is depicted as a simple differential equation of reduced exponential growth and unmitigated climate change is rendered as the same thing but with a new factor in the form of supply chain disruption estimation, which is essentially derived from averaging 14 other published models that were designed to measure other economic impacts of climate change, but not exactly the ones this paper is assuming.

Basically, my objection is that supply chain disruptions are not exponential in nature, and there's an adaptive dimension to them such that their effects on the flow of economies is dampened by planning.

No, as far as users are concerned, AIs all run through websites or dumb apps on their phones.

What's unfriendly about it now?

On the other hand, it's important to understand that GDP itself is a stupid measure of anything these days and represents predominantly "paper value" and not real productivity because of the technical details of how it's calculated. With that in mind, it seems quite reasonable to assume something stupid and almost entirely existing only on paper like AI might shift and upset it.

That's not even hyperbole. Gaming makes up like a fifth of their revenue or less these days. NVidia without the bubble is dead.

1k for a professional conference with networking opportunities is very typical.

That's the cost of a 1 day pass at GDC these days, and I've seen similar prices in the professional author space when publishers are attending and soliciting work(I'm not an author). As a programmer, things have historically been a bit cheaper, mostly because there doesn't seem to be One Big Name in the software industry, so they have to compete.

That sounds like a problem for another quarter.

Things like that happening don't have happy parallels in history.

Calling a deer a horse was a famous scene in the collapse of the Qin dynasty in China. The breakdown of reality as secondary to the compliance with power and allegiance to faction is a death knell for a society.

I get what you're going for, but of course researchers think of this and check on it before publishing their findings. It's even directly in the abstract.

Subgroup analyses show no strong evidence for increased vulnerability by sociodemographic factors. These findings provide insights into the biological underpinnings linking heat to aging-related morbidity and mortality risks.

Nobody mentioned the climate. This is strictly an association of current average temperatures and markers of aging.

I think you're maybe just allergic to science.

Look, I don't let my kid play Roblox. I understand why it's bad for kids and am perfectly capable of acting on my own in that regard.

That said, this fucker is saying this to cover for the fact that his company knowingly and intentionally markets exploitive business models at children. Young children. There's no regulation around purposefully addictive design decisions, and there's no regulation around marketing video games to children, and there's relatively little regulation around selling worthless bits on a server to people, but there's definitely something fucky about the intersection of those 3 things that maybe ought to be regulated.

Technically I know how to use Torch. I probably ought to put that on my resume, even though I know it to be completely useless for anything I actually do.

Leonardo Da Vinci probably had artistic influences. It's not transitive.

Genre-defining
Technology-defining
Aesthetic-standard

Doom has a lot going for it.

It has a few competitors whose legacies are also clear as day:
1. Minecraft has had more players than Doom, and is also a bit of a genre definer, with a great many survive-craft-build games sharing its dna
2. Mario has the legacy as the series with the most staying power. Not really reinventing itself as much as iterating in a way that never seems to die.
3. Tetris has an unusual place as a genuinely timeless, totally re-playable game that can hold its place, mostly unchanged, forever

None of those quite reach doom as the right game at the right time doing new things in just the right way, but those are probably the only other contenders