‘Braid’ creator sacrifices his fortune to build his next game

Post by Mikeb85 » Sat, Feb 07, 2015, 4:08 AM UTC

kelukelugames wrote: post #14

I've followed Jonathan Blow for a while. He has a reputation for being condescending. If you follow him a Twitter then you might come to the same conclusion. But he has given some amazing talks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxFzf6yIfcc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1Fg76c4Zfg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqFu5O-oPmU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjDsP5n2kSM

Post by quanticle » Sat, Feb 07, 2015, 4:18 AM UTC

seanflyon wrote: post #94

vortizz wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, money is fictitious and meaningless once you've moved into the f-you echelon. By definition. Perhaps for that segment piping it into creative endeavors is fulfilling and worthwhile. For everyone else for whom money is a meal, rent, or essential good instead of an expletive, who cannot afford to take an ethereally long-term view, this advice is out of touch with reality if not plain dangerous.

You and I read his advice quite differently. Once you quite your job to pursue your dream you have a finite runway determined by your savings and minimum expenses. He is suggesting you use that runway to build you dream instead of using it to try to get funding for a longer runway.

Post by ap3 » Sat, Feb 07, 2015, 4:45 AM UTC

quanticle wrote: post #134

seanflyon wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You and I read his advice quite differently. Once you quite your job to pursue your dream you have a finite runway determined by your savings and minimum expenses. He is suggesting you use that runway to build you dream instead of using it to try to get funding for a longer runway.

But what if your dream isn't profitable?

Post by JamesSwift » Sat, Feb 07, 2015, 4:52 AM UTC

vortizz wrote: post #69

footpath wrote: post #61

Here's a nice thread about Jonathan Blow's view on investing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2198255 you are better off taking the mental energy you would have expended on "investing" and subsequently worrying about your money, and instead funneling it into your creative endeavors. You will make more money that way, especially when you take a long-term view. ... If creative endeavors are profitable, you can use…

Sure, money is fictitious and meaningless once you've moved into the f-you echelon. By definition. Perhaps for that segment piping it into creative endeavors is fulfilling and worthwhile. For everyone else for whom money is a meal, rent, or essential good instead of an expletive, who cannot afford to take an ethereally long-term view, this advice is out of touch with reality if not plain dangerous.

Post by O____________O » Sat, Feb 07, 2015, 5:37 AM UTC

gamegoblin wrote: post #93

breckinloggins wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really like his attitude on the turing-complete compile time metaprogramming feature: 'Yes you can shoot yourself in the foot, hang the compiler, and launch missiles at the same time. You're a good programmer or you wouldn't be using this language. So don't do that. If you do, don't do it again.' That's not always a good attitude to have in software development, but a modern language that backs away from the "wrap…

Are there any common languages that allow you to do compile time metaprogramming in the language itself? I'd like to write little miniprograms which output source code and get evaluated at compile time. For example: #include #include #COMPILETIME int fib(int n) { if(n and then at compile time that would get run and the source could generated would be: int fib(int n) { switch(n) { case 0: return 0; case 1: return 1; c…