I find the best review system for books/media is the amount of effort fans put into their wiki or tvtropes entries.
Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
421–430 of 493 posts
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#422Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elo/Trueskill sounds like a solid idea. When you go to rate a book the system asks you if it was better or worse (maybe same) then a book of you previously read closest in rating or some hidden matchmaking rating (MMR). I think having books having both a personal and global score would be nice as well. I don't think it would be possible for someone to change their rating but that may be a feature. I also don't think…
> I don't think it would be possible for someone to change their rating but that may be a feature. It should definitely be possible. Take films. I had a friend who would go see a film. On the day he saw it: "OMG THE BEST THING EVER". Next Week: "Yeah, that was a good film". A month later: "Yeah it was okay I guess". Six months later: "A bit ordinary really" In 1990 if you'd asked me to rank the Alien films, I would h…
Yeah, I think what was meant is that the Elo rating system might make it difficult to account for changes in the rating.
People change their minds all the time (and it's a good thing), I agree.
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#423Earlier quoted context omitted.
Next time just refuse to dance and end the interview on the spot. I do that and it feels great to see the light dying in their eyes when they realize you're the one "dumping" them.
Feels good for 15 minutes while you burn a bridge and don't proceed at the interview. Presumably they have other candidates, they probably don't even remember you a couple of days later.
It's a matter of not wasting each other's time and energy on futile things. If it's not going well for one reason or another, better to politely end it and let each other do something else with their day.
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#424Eh, Goodreads has always suffered from the same problem that plagues every other review system which uses "score out of X" ranking. Humans just aren't very good at ranking things on a normal distribution, so you invariably end up with every item (books in this case) being ranked somewhere in the 3.5-4.5 range (since Goodreads is out of 5). For IMDB the rankings all hover around 8ish. When in reality the average book…
First only IMDb TV shows hover around 8, films hover around 6.
And it is still useful. For example, from my perspective I can quickly judge a movie from an imdb score.
Anything less than 6.1 is bad. 6.1-6.3, ok, 6.3-6.8 good, 6.8+ excellent.
Apart from movies starring star trek characters, add one to all those scores.
Goodreads is similar but tighter, anything less than 3.9 is a red flag, over 4.2 and you start getting into excellent.
Though in my opinion steam seems to have got it done best with "overwhelminly positive", "very positive", "positive", "mixed", "mostly negative", etc. but occasionally gets review bombed.
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#425Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Dehumanising is Dehumanising, nothing to do with my skin, I'm not Russian or Ukrainian. Regardless of what your background is saying someone making light of fascists invaders is dehumanising requires you to have a super thin skin. If they didn’t want to be called orcs maybe they should stop acting like them.
You really believe that's how it works? that russians can just choose not to be involved. Like the east Ukrainians can just choose to be autonomous?
> You really believe that's how it works? that russians can just choose not to be involved.
Yes. The Russians chose to invade, they choose to continue to occupy Ukraine and they choose to both commit terrible war crimes and act like idiots.
> Like the east Ukrainians can just choose to be autonomous?
This is a false equivalency.
Do you think it was wrong to call the Nazis monsters?, a Orc is merely a monster, calling someone a Orc is no less dehumanising than saying someones particularly heinous actions were monstrous.
What do you think of the Russian talking points that dehumanise the entire country of Ukraine and talks about them in a way that pretty much precludes that they are fake people and should be genocide'd if need be?.
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#426Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is nothing different between how NSDAP whipped up a nation to go on a 6 year rampage across Europe than what's happening now. An excellent analogy, as applies to the current Russian state having dragged its population into a senseless, expansionist war against its southern neighbor (and erstwhile "brother" nation). And its skill at turning ordinary citizens into instruments of genocide.
Really, so the russians are referring to Ukrainians as some dehumanising term as orc?
Yes? they refer to them in ways that says there people, culture and history don't even exist.
Thats way more dehumanising than referring them as monsters because they continually act like monsters.
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#427Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately that's exactly why so many startups get bought. Not to become part of the parent company's business, no, just not to become a competitor later. Would stronger (and enforced) anti trust laws be a solution? I believe businesses would just lie and say they are going to be part of the business but then just bury them anyway.
> I believe businesses would just lie and say they are going to be part of the business but then just bury them anyway. That's where my pet antitrust solution succeeds where others fail: ban all M&A. Companies only engage in mergers to consolidate market share, but their market share consolidation (i.e. monopolization) not only decreases competition, but also comes at the expense of employees and customers of the acq…
> That's where my pet antitrust solution succeeds where others fail: ban all M&A.
Such a weird take. Most of the acquisition the big tech does is acquihires. Basically, a way to keep a team employed and return some of the money to the investors and make the team's stock worth something at least.
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#428Earlier quoted context omitted.
Next time just refuse to dance and end the interview on the spot. I do that and it feels great to see the light dying in their eyes when they realize you're the one "dumping" them.
Feels good for 15 minutes while you burn a bridge and don't proceed at the interview. Presumably they have other candidates, they probably don't even remember you a couple of days later.
If terminating an interview early 'burns a bridge', then I've 'dodged a bullet'.
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s your reading speed like? I can easily read 2 books a day if I’ve got nothing better to do. Averaging just 2 per week hits 3k books in 29 years which doesn’t sound far fetched to me. Call it ~14 hours a week reading, plenty of people spend more than that playing video games or watching Netflix etc.
It’s unimaginable to me that anyone can read two books in a day and retain any significant amount of its information. Not calling you a liar, I just literally can’t understand how. Is this a skill you developed over time, did you learn some particular tricks, were you just born that way? How long have you been reading adult literature? Are you skimming or painting images in your mind? What kinds of books? I have so m…
I started reading adult literature at about 14 or so and just read a lot. I find I retain more if I read faster where if I slow down I tend to drift off more.
Now this is just novels, technical information is a lot more dense and it can take me weeks to read a new programming language book cover to cover because I need to set it down after a while and think about it then go back and reread sections etc.
Speed reading is an entirely different thing, but I did spend a little while learning to read faster. The average person speaks about 180 words per minute at that pace a 120,000 word novel takes 11 hours. If you want to read a little faster don’t sub vocalize individual words just hear them in your head.
I will often set YouTube videos to 2x speed which is easily understandable and about the pace I tend to read. It’s bizarre but if you change the YouTube settings from 2x/1.5x to 1.0x it suddenly feels like most people are incredibly slow but those same videos feel fine when you start at 1.0x speed.
Re: Goodreads was the future of book reviews, then Amazon bought it
#430Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't come at the expense of the employees of the acquired business. They often get rich, or at least land a well-paying and career-enhancing gig at the acquiring company. This is important, because it means that new companies that compete with the monopolies have many paths to success. If the only possible outcomes are "beat Amazon" and "fail hard", you won't get many attempts; it's better to get an entry-level…
> If the only possible outcomes are "beat Amazon" and "fail hard", If you start a car company, are your only two options 'beat Wolkwagen" and fail hard? How many car companies do we have?
No, because M&A isn't banned. I don't know how many car companies we have, but I do notice that there are a bunch of new ones recently. Just off the top of my head: Tesla, Lucid, Rivian, Cruise.