Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No Billionares at FOSDEM

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 213 posts

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#111

Post by throw5959 »

rybosworld wrote: post #108
throw5959 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does he lie about a video game? Maybe he has someone boost his level. Did he say it's not true? Just doing that can have many reasons - maybe he likes a shiny number there, wants a bigger challenge, more fun because of higher level and more items or whatever. Just playing on an account that I didn't level up myself is not lying. I know that some competitive amateur players think it's the end of the world but no…

> Where does he lie about a video game? He stated on Joe Rogan he was one of the best Diablo players in the world (top 20 or thereabouts). The only way to do that is to grind the game with long hours, because it gets exponentially more difficult to level up. I don't remember exactly how many hours of playtime he'd need to achieve the level he was at, but it was excessive. Something like 14+ hours a day. Then he recen…

Thank you, if he really said that he is one of the best players, that would be a lie. I don't think just streaming a leveled up account is a lie, though.

Why do you talk about hours per day? Does it matter if you play less hours per day, but more days?

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#112

Post by AnimalMuppet »

michaelt wrote: post #101
throw5959 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but no, this is absolutely not what happened. I am watching it closely ever since SpaceX was founded in 2002. There is an incredible gap between the tech demo you're speaking about, and actually landing a heavy orbital rocket, and then doing it 100 times in a row without a hiccup. Mars is completely off topic, as they didn't land the booster there. We had Space Shuttle before and it didn't say much about landin…

> There is an incredible gap between the tech demo you're speaking about, Didn't Apollo 11 land on the moon using a rocket, then take off from the moon again, back in the 1960s? Not exactly a tech demo. And the Apollo missions had the additional challenges of being crewed, and targeting an atmosphere and gravity they couldn't reproduce on earth for test purposes. The SpaceX stuff is neat though, compared to the defen…

Apollo 11 was crewed, though.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#113

Post by rybosworld »

throw5959 wrote: post #111
rybosworld wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where does he lie about a video game? He stated on Joe Rogan he was one of the best Diablo players in the world (top 20 or thereabouts). The only way to do that is to grind the game with long hours, because it gets exponentially more difficult to level up. I don't remember exactly how many hours of playtime he'd need to achieve the level he was at, but it was excessive. Something like 14+ hours a day. Then he recen…

Thank you, if he really said that he is one of the best players, that would be a lie. I don't think just streaming a leveled up account is a lie, though. Why do you talk about hours per day? Does it matter if you play less hours per day, but more days?

> Why do you talk about hours per day? Does it matter if you play less hours per day, but more days?

Because the only way to level up your character is to grind through a dungeon. You'll get experience for doing so. Every time you level up your character, it takes exponentially more experience to hit the next level.

I don't remember the exact number of hours per day that are required to hit the levels his characters are at, but it's in excess of 14+ hours/day.

Combine that with the evidence from his live streaming that he doesn't actually know how to play these games, and it's clear that he can't have achieved the character levels he has on his own.

This youtube video has a decent breakdown of the whole thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6N-WW0UDrVQ

To be clear, I don't think anyone really cares that he's paying for a leveled up account. What people care about is that he's taking credit for achieving the high level on his own, when that's obviously not true.

Q: Why would a person with $300 billion feel the need to lie about being good at a video game?

A: Likely because deception has become habitual/reflexive for them.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#114

Post by taylodl »

throw5959 wrote: post #92
wormlord wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

The point is Elon lies about the most trivial things where it's easy to show he's lying. Elon is a habitual liar. His continual lying is starting to hurt business.

When will Tesla FSD be fully functional? Why would you believe anything Elon has to say on the matter since he's a habitual liar?

Elon faked the Optimus robot demo. Which has called into question the entirety of the Robotaxi reveal.

Tesla's new DumpsterTruck doesn't have many of the capabilities he promised years ago.

Maybe you don't care that people habitually lie to you, even about the most trivial of things, but I care. It tells me a lot about a person's honor and integrity, or in Elon's case, his utter and complete lack of those virtues.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#115

Post by debo_ »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #99
debo_ wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disrupting access with your physical presence is not a use of force. Without peaceful protests, people will resort to violence more often.

You're importing protest tactics developed for use against governments and large corporations into a context where they don't make any sense. There, this legalistic distinction between "force" and "disruption" is quite important, because ensuring you don't cross the line to "force" greatly decreases the legitimacy of any violent response. It doesn't matter at FOSDEM, because FOSDEM is not going to hire goons to beat…

I don't fully understand your reply. Peaceful protests have existed for a long while before corporations did, for many different causes. They weren't always existential, nor were they always directed at the state.

I have participated in community events where venue security decided they had to forcibly remove protesters from the premises, and in one case they contacted police for help. I qualify those as peaceful protests, and I believe security / police took reasonable measures to respond. No one was hurt, and everyone got the message, whether they agreed with it or not.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#116

Post by lamontcg »

throw5959 wrote: post #54
wormlord wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What other person started a rocket company from scratch and got them landing? I'd rather listen to Lars Blackmore (the engineer who is largely responsible for SpaceX powered descent). Or Gwynne Shotwell who actually oversees the business day-to-day. I'm really not interested in what the money guy has to say, especially since he is primarily interested in cultivating his public image-- how can you trust anything he…

Sure, I'm not saying Musk is the only person who has interesting things to say about it. You're absolutely correct about these other people and I listen to them too. But you're not giving Musk enough credit. All engineers and other professionals told him that landing rockets is bullshit, and what is interesting here is that he went and made it happen anyways. I'm not talking just about the engineering, everything is…

> All engineers and other professionals told him that landing rockets is bullshit

You literally responded to a guy citing Lars Blackmore, who is the engineer that designed their landing algorithm--which was developed at NASA's JPL lab (before SpaceX existed).

Musk bet on landing rockets _because_ engineers told him that it was possible.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#117

Post by lamontcg »

Yizahi wrote: post #110
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is? Like, this sounds like a pretty silly claim: > All engineers and other professionals told him that landing rockets is bullshit Where did you hear that?

Arianespace director literally laughed in public over that idea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W676Kk9LSYw

Okay, that is one down. You've got to get through literally all the rest of the engineers and professionals. At some point, you'll hit the engineers at NASA that were working on this problem before SpaceX existed.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#118

Post by rmgk »

baggy_trough wrote: post #20
hshshshshsh wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From your POV yes. But obviously not from Drew's POV. Now that we established everyone have different POV and a sense of what is right and wrong how do we proceed from here?

By listening to different points of view and deciding what best makes sense to us. That is why suppressing speech(es) is wrong.

So we should give Drew the other half of the keynote to make an informed decision afterward?

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#119

Post by duxup »

bambax wrote: post #105
duxup wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People with not as much wealth are more reasonable or something? I don't buy it. We're talking about a conference that apparently puts itself up for sale in a way ... that's the problem. The other stuff is a silly distraction. You're not solving anything with a personal wreath rule, conference is still for sale. Dude with slightly less wealth is going to just buy in...

> People with not as much wealth are more reasonable Oh, no. But they have less power and less influence, and are more likely to fly commercial when they come talk to a conference, so have lower emissions. Also, I'm talking more in general: we should absolutely not listen to billionaires, even those few who, unlike Musk, haven't yet gone completely insane.

Do they have less power?

The conference is for sale ... whomever pays apparently makes that call.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#120

Post by aoeusnth1 »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #64

There are two things that don't sit right with me: 1. "the FOSS community shouldered the burden – both with our labor and our wallets – of a massive exodus onto our volunteer-operated servers" -- this implies that users actually using decentralized services is a burden, a bad thing. Or rather, that a) it would be much better if Twitter was better and people just continued using Twitter rather than FOSS platforms b) t…

1. I agree, and stopped reading at that point. If you don't want users on your site, disable the sign up field. New FOSS tool users are not your enemy, and if you don't want them taking up your resources then you should scope your resources to a limited audience. I have a hard time taking anything Drew is saying seriously here.
Post reply on HN