I used to suffer from pretty chronic eye pain when I was looking at the computer every day for work for 5+ hours. Consciously taking a breaks every 20 minutes has completely the symptoms altogether. Just being aware of how long it’s been without resting my eyes was eye opening (pun intended)
It's being released on November 19th, you need a box so it can go on a shelf in walmart so your relative can buy it, wrap it up and put it under the christmas tree.
No disks large enough probably (100 gig for PS5). And still if they manage to squeeze some form of the game on it, a large day one patch would render it obsolete.
A nice box with artwork like a map and other goodies is still great. I always found those maps useful and aesthetically pleasing.
Having a playable version of a game physically is great and I’d buy a version with some physical storage medium if it ever hits the shelves. Maybe the game needs more time for that. Or a different data carrier.
Edit: added PS5 disk size and preference of a physical game
Also so that it can make the retailer money. The studio might not want to piss off the retailer, which they would do by pulling the physical copy (or selling it at the OEM price directly). There are cases where retailers will de-list some products in retaliation.
What's interesting to me is that game studios have less to loose here than other OEMs. With equipment like shoes, outdoor gear, or cars, having the physical product out in stores does a lot to sell it: you have to try on shoes, driving a car builds attachment, it's also nice to check the build quality of your tent or whatever.
With games, you generally just have to play it / read the reviews, and you can trial it directly at home in a lot of cases.
If it didn't have a utility in taking the shelf space they wouldn't bother making them as it'd be a net loss. If it's not a net loss, people must be finding value such products being there as that's where they are choosing to buy them. That could be anything from gifting to collecting to lack of awareness otherwise, but it doesn't really matter what - there's no inherently shit reason for a product to be on the shelf other than if it actually doesn't have demand in that form.
It is seen constantly with a wide variety of products: the presence and visibility make the sale. You even have boxes that are much larger so that they get more visibility on shelves.
I think it's just that some people really like having a physical object to put in their bookshelf or whatever. I don't personally see the point, but I also don't need any more clutter in my house.
Selling empty useless packaging should be illegal. If they want to use physical chain they should come up with a physical product that has some utility.
Physical store space, promotional contracts with vendors, special editions, bundles, etc.
I find it very silly, utterly unnecessary, but it is far from unprecedented [0] for this industry. I think it's very problematic for preservation and will only lead to more interest from groups trying to bypass their DRM because of this.
I started this project because at my company, we're still relying on ancient Makefiles as our build system and build tool versioning. I initially looked at using other task runners but they all use some sort of DSL that I think limits their functionality and/or doesn't allow for sharing and extending templates across repos. Nix-tasks lets you use Nix flakes to share common configuration - like your company-wide build scripts - and then import it and add repo specific tasks on top of them.
The project is still very much in alpha but I am using it every day and trying to find any annoyances or bugs before I share it further.
Two months ago I posted an update that I had begun work on my Chrome extension [1] for Relevant. Relevant is a crowdsourcing website where users can categorize the channels they watch into a defined hierarchy of categories ranging from broad topics like "Science" and "Gaming" to more specific ones like "Phone Reviews" or "Speedrunning".
Although I had a little bit of engagement on the website, I found myself looking for something that could bring the experience onto YouTube, so I began work on a Chrome extension. It turns out there's a lot more complexity in building a Chrome extension than I realised. It's basically like building a website for the popup window, a javascript server for the background service workers and a message bus for the service worker.
After 2 months' of working weekends, I finally released a version of it that lets users see the categories of the content on the page, discover more channels matching those categories and contribute to the categorisation effort!
Working on a browser extension to make it easier to find content on YouTube that fits your interests.
I watch a lot of YouTube videos and have found it very annoying that YouTube latches onto one or two topics that you've watched and only recommends that type of content over and over again. Even if you use their "Not Interested" tool, not a whole lot changes in your recommendations.
At the end of last year I launched Relevant - a crowdsourcing website where users can categorize the channels they watch into a defined hierarchy of categories ranging from broad topics like "Science" and "Gaming" to more specific ones like "Phone Reviews" or "Speedrunning".
Although I've had good feedback on the website, engagement has been relatively low and I think that's because it's a big ask to have someone navigate to the website to find the content. This year I decided that I'd bring the content to them by making a Chrome extension that lets users interact with Relevant directly from within YouTube.
It's still a work in progress but I'd love to get a first version out within a month or so to start spreading the idea and gathering feedback. If this is of any interest to the people here on HN then please let me know what you'd like to see most on your feeds.
Hm, I tried to contribute, but it asked me to categorize a channel I've never heard of (DefendTheHouse) and no matter how many times I click “skip” it keeps going back to the same one.
I also notice that you first said “browser extension” but later you said “Chrome extension”. Are Firefox users going to be out of luck?
Hmm that's strange. Perhaps you have two Google accounts with different subscriptions? When you sign in I grab your subscribed channels and that's what I send when you categorise. You can check the "Subscriptions" page to see exactly what data we pulled.
I did say Chrome browser because with the deprecation of manifest v2, I had to make a choice about which to support. I decided given Chrome's larger market share that it would benefit the most people sooner. However I'm building it in such a way that porting to Firefox shouldn't require much additional work.
I do have multiple YouTube accounts (channels) under one Google account. I initially logged in as one YouTube channel of mine that I wanted to categorize. Only then did I find out that it looks at subscriptions. So I logged out and logged back in as my main account which is subscribed to the other one. Then I hit the problem.
Hmm okay. Maybe some wires got crossed in the back end. Perhaps Google OAuth doesn't distinguish between accounts and associated both sets of subscriptions with the same user? Interesting
Yeah absolutely! The category list is meant to be dynamic as the industry changes and new forms of contents crop up. I can't stay on top of it myself, so I'm always looking for suggestions/maintainers from anywhere.
If you have a look at the category tree, where do you think video essays would go in that?
Over the past few years I've been working on a new website called Relevant, and today I'm launching it under a beta!
YouTube has been my primary source of entertainment for many years. However, I've found that with recent iterations of "the algorithm", YouTube continues to serve me the same types of videos every single day. If you watch one video about a new game, YouTube then tries to show you 50 more videos about that game for the next week. I was frustrated with this experience and wanted a way to find new types of content on YouTube without waiting for it to be surfaced organically by the algorithm.
Relevant is a crowdsourcing website aiming to catalogue all of YouTube. We represent every possible category of content available on YouTube as a DAG, starting from the most vague like "Science" and "Gaming" down to the most specific like "Laptop Reviews" or "Car Mechanics". After logging in, users can iterate through a list of their subscriptions and vote for which category best represents the content for each channel. After enough users have voted for a channel, we assign that category to the channel. These channels are then discoverable through the explore page, with a separate trending page to highlight notable hot or new categories.
On Relevant I hope that people can find new areas of YouTube by seeing what other people have been watching, or by browsing through the tree of categories. Once we have collected enough data, I plan on introducing a recommendation system that can even recommend other channel categories that may be interesting to you. For now, though, I've written a blog post [1] for the beta launch that goes into more detail about the rationale behind the website and the limitations during the beta launch.
I hope other YouTube fans find value in Relevant and I look forward to learning more about what YouTube has to offer from all of you!
First off I just wanted to say I think it's great that you're attempting to tackle the problem that is Kubernetes package management. I work at a Kubernetes SaaS startup and spend many hours working with YAML and Helm charts every day, so I absolutely feel the pain that comes with it.
That being said, I'm confused as to where Glasskube is positioned in solving this problem. In the title of this post, you are claiming Glasskube is an "alternative to Helm"; although in your documentation you have a "Glasskube vs Helm" guide that explicitly states that "Glasskube is not a full replacement of Helm". I'm trying to understand how these two statements can be true. To make things more confusing, under the hood Glasskube repositories appear to be a repackaging of a Helm repository, albiet with a nicer UI.
From what I've gathered after reading the docs, Glasskube is being positioned as an easier way to interact with Helm charts - offering some easy-to-use tooling for upgrades and dependency management. To me, that doesn't exactly feel like it replaces Helm, but simply supplements my use of it, because it doesn't actually combat the real problems of using Helm.
My biggest pain points, some of which I don't think Glasskube is addressing, that I think are at the crux of switching off Helm:
- The arbitrary nature of how value files are laid out - every chart appears to have its own standards for which fields should be exposed and the nomenclature for exposing them
- Helm releases frequently get stuck when updating or rolling back, from which they can't be fixed without needing to be uninstalled and reinstalled
- I need to reference the Helm chart values file to know what is exposed and what values and types are accepted (Glasskube schema'd values files does address this! Yay!)
Apart from the Helm chart values schema, I don't think Glasskube solves these fundamental problems. So I'm not sure why I would spend the large amount of effort to migrate to this new paradigm if the same problems could still cause headaches.
Lastly, I would also concur with @llama052's comment, that an "update all" button will always be forbidden in my, and probably most other, companies. Considering the serious lack of standardisation that comes with Helm chart versioning (whether the app version changes between charts, whether roles or role bindings need to be updated, whether values have been deprecated or their defaults have changed, etc.), it's incredibly risky to update a Helm chart without understanding the implications that come with it. Typically our engineers have to review the release notes for the application between the two Helm chart versions, at least test in dev and staging for a few days, and only then can we feel comfortable releasing the changes - one chart at a time. Not to mention that if you are in charge of running a system with multiple applications, you probably want to use GitOps, and in that case a version upgrade would require a commit to the Git repository and not just a push of a button on the infra IDP.
