The challenge is that the level of complexity with rules interactions in MtG is absolutely enormous, especially if you want to allow the freeform format, which allows all sets and cards.
Oh I didn't implement a rules engine, that would be impractical. It's a freeform platform that gives you all the tools needed to use every mechanic in the game, but it's up to you to actually follow the rules. No different from playing in person with real cards. It's sort of like a drag and drop sandbox with a lot of extra features around the edges. It's a vastly improved version of Untap.in.
If you do not implement the actual rules, then it can probably be made to support many other kind of card games too.
However, I would be interested to have a FOSS rule engine of Magic: the Gathering, preferably written in C, and licensed by AGPL3 or some compatible license. But, unfortunately there is no official FOSS implementation; if there was (at least of the rule engine; not necessarily the UI) (especially if literate programming is used for the rule engine), I think that it would be better since the rules can be made more precise.
I would want to ensure that the rule engine has no pictures at all (you can easily download pictures separately if you want them, anyways; so the rule engine doesn't need them and shouldn't have them).
Let's not gate keep the word "creator". Writing new software is just as much "creating" as whistling a tune, writing a song, drawing a new piece of art, painting a miniature, carving a stone, or anything else. Something exists now that didn't exist before. It has been created.
You're agreeing with the comment you're replying to. The parent comment is saying the "playbook" doesn't say to give a date, and they've given one so absurdly soon that it's impossible to hit. The "get signups for a fake product" is out of the playbook, promising it 4 months from now when it doesn't exist at all is not out of the playbook.
All of your examples are unique, distinct separate product and problem spaces, whereas Threads is pretty aligned with Instagram as-is. A lot of the plumbing for Instagram is likely reusable for threads, and a lot of the same optimization techniques might apply just as well (or with minor tweaks). I don't think this is as much "launch something new" as it is "instagram with a mask on".
So. multiple attempts at cloning Snap, HouseParty, IRL etc. into standalone products were unique. And this one is just a minor tweak on Instagram?
Let's discuss this in another 6 months.
I can't predict what the future of Twitter is, but Threads would have been shuttered by then.
Snap was cloned extremely effectively within Instagram (stories). So was TikTok (reels). I'm actually surprised they aren't taking the same strategy here. Why create a new app? Why not add Threads to the existing Instagram, in the same way as Stories and Reels?
What apps are you referencing that Meta/Facebook launched and failed to clone Snap/Houseparty/IRL? Their snap competitor is Instagram, and it's still doing very well. Instagram is _also_ their TikTok competitor, and Reels has done a solid job in that space as well.
Thing is, these were intentionally created as experiments with the expectation that they would be eventually shut down, with whatever learnings integrated into the mainline apps.
Since about 2017-18 there has been a unit at Facebook called NPE, New Product Experimentation, tasked with producing these.
NPE was created in 2017.
Facebook had "Labs" in 2011-12.
The same idea keeps showing up again and again every few years thanks to a hugely profitable ads business.
A negligent civil engineer that failed to verify construction details provided by GPT, which later led to a bridge collapse, would lose their license. A negligent doctor that failed to vet a treatment protocol to a patient that later caused them harm would lose their license. Negligence is a fair, reasonable, and valid reason for someone to be determined unqualified to practice their profession in the future.
The average comment is more in-depth because there's a long history of thoughtful moderation by people like dang. The community has learned what the bar is, and now holds itself to it (more or less). The social standards here didn't come for free, and if you were to take a random selection of the HN audience and get their Reddit profiles, I strongly suspect you'd see a notable difference in the quality of the content they post to the different platforms.
Any major changes to gut biome will definitely take more than two weeks. Anyone who has ever had to do an elimination diet will tell you that it can take 4 to 6 weeks for things to normalize when making dietary changes.
The benefit of buttons isn't in the response time, it's in the tactile feedback that makes it so you don't need 16ms response time. I heard it click, I felt it click, it clicked. If the thing I wanted to happen doesn't, it's because it's broken and not because I can't tell if I clicked the right spot on my iPad. Not having to take your eyes off the road in these cases is the benefit of buttons, and no improvement to response time in touch screens will fully solve that.
This isn't how tactile buttons in modern cars work. You're doing the same thing as pushing keys on a keyboard. The software can still be slow.
Turn the physical volume dial on a car with a slow Apple CarPlay interface and tell me how that works out for you.
Oh, it's too loud? But it takes 2 seconds for the software to respond due to lag and now you're fiddling with the volume button trying to not make it worse?
It does fix that because I dont have to look at it while I wait the 2 seconds. On a touch screen my finger will be slipping as the car is moving and have to constantly divert my eyes as I wait for the lag - even if its the same lag as a physical button.
You turn the physical dial, and regardless of the outcome, you know that your input was received by the HCI, so you don't need to wonder if you should try again.
If it worked, great; if not, oh well; no need to look at it and try again though. That's the benefit.
My Android phone has a similar issue while operating over Bluetooth. While holding "volume up", it takes several seconds for the volume change to register. So I have no feedback for how long I need to hold "volume up". If I wait until the volume is loud enough -- it keeps going up for another two seconds, to the point that it is painful and possibly damaging my hearing.
Most rotary encoders are programmed to have "acceleration", so it's not quite that simple. And the amount you need to turn it may vary nonlinearly based on the volume and ambient conditions (sound perception is complex!).
What if I'm switching air vent direction? There's only 5 positions in most cars.
I know the one it was on, and I know how far to turn it to get to the one I want.
This removes the necessity of looking at it.
Same for steering wheel buttons (e.g. Up - next track, down - previous track, same for volume)
Same for wipers - only 3 positions and you can tell by their speed which position it's in.
The problem is when manufacturers take existing solved problems and move it to a strictly worse system like touchscreen. That's an inexcusable regression.
True, but dealing with the consequences of laggy response even in this case does not result in taking your eyes off the road. Rather, the troubleshooting feedback loop can happen entirely using your hand and ears.
When using a touch screen, if you don't know whether the lack of feedback is due to its lag or your bad aim, you would likely take your eyes off the road in order to aim better, given that bad aim is a likely culprit.
I’ve used car stereos where the physical volume knob was so laggy and buggy that sometimes it would misread its own input and change the volume in the wrong direction unless you turned it very slowly while watching the display to see if it was registering. People will absolutely find a way to fuck it up.
Yeah it's less bad, but it's still an inferior UX to pretty much everything that came before bloated infotainment systems. Both factors are important, an intuitive physical control and responsive feedback.
My car has this problem, only sometimes it takes a lot longer than two seconds.
The car when started always turns on the radio at the last volume the radio was on at, regardless of whether it was on when the car was turned off.
More than once, I have turned it on, and it was playing at full volume the Sirius FM ads, and would not lower the volume or turn off ( via the other physical buttons) for at least half a minute. I've done some damage to the volume button after that, and I have taken to just getting out of the car until the stereo responds.
We have a Renault and it is similar. I don't listen to the radio. If I have any audio, it's either something from my phone or navigation (also phone, usually off).
The default on the car is to turn on the radio on engine start. No way to change it. No way to make it remember that the last time the car was used it was set to Bluetooth audio. Switching back to Bluetooth requires navigating through 3-4 layers of menus. Even when you turn it off, it randomly turns back on for no reason. :/
My 10+ year old VW: remembers which audio source was last used. Phone autoconnects via Bluetooth every time with no hassle. Volume is never an issue (real buttons that respond in a timely manner on the steering wheel). Off is off until you turn it on again (with a physical button).
I can operate physical buttons without taking my eyes off the road.
I know where the volume knob is and I can easily grab it and turn it without looking away. If it's slow to respond I can go again and dial it back down, without looking away. Or I can just keep my hand on the dial and spin it back a bit.
With a digital screen I can't leave my hand on it without continually pressing the input, and if I want to put the volume down I have to look and see where that button is.
I don't think it's CarPlay specific. I occasionally get similar erratic results for both volume and speed control on my Model 3 if I spin the steering wheel dials too quickly (and in the case of speed control, it's actually intended to be a supported function, spin it fast enough and go up in 5-mph increments instead of 1). I suspect it's just an artifact of that sort of infinite dial technology.
If only it was possible to adjust the volume without talking to the phone - heresy, I know.
Having your phone decide how loud or quiet it should be playing is rather stupid anyway.
A lot the knobs and buttons these days are digital anyways. So there is no real tactile feedback, since they are just activating some digital function anyways.
The knob still exists as a physical thing between in your fingers. You can feel it turn, you feel how much you've turned it, you feel the little clicks if it has those, you feel if you turn it into an extreme position.
That's what tactile feedback is. It doesn't matter if the knob is connected to a digital or analog circuit. It has tactile feedback either way.
You don’t get resistance when you turn the knob all the way up or down. You don’t get confirmation that the button you pressed did something. It’s tactile in the sense that they are physical, but otherwise not a great experience.
Note: You can see all the rules here: https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Comprehensive_Rules