That's literally what it's for. Forth is the simplest language to get running on hardware which you have no idea how to program directly. Much easier than doing it for C.
That's just not true. All but a handful of the smallest LAN parties I attended I the 90's and early 00's included console gaming. It was pretty much assumed there would be consoles at a LAN.
Halo, which was arguably the first professionally competitive game, had it's entire birth at LAN parties as it did not support online play at all and had to be done with a LAN.
Smash brothers had a similar Genesis story at LAN parties I attended. LAN continues to be the preferred competitive environment for every game due to latency.
I'll tell you what killed LAN parties I attend, it was the year steam became standard. To get everyone at the LAN to play the same game no longer meant passing the CD around, but in /socially pressuring your peers to make a digital purchase/ That was the death of LAN.
> That's just not true. All but a handful of the smallest LAN parties I attended I the 90's and early 00's included console gaming. It was pretty much assumed there would be consoles at a LAN.
> The reason why lan parties stopped was because it was hard to move a tower around.
No, no. The effort played itself. As OP said, it was a cultural change with companies piggy-backing on it. Split screen is not a major reason, no, I don't think so. But luggaging towers? That's not the reason.
Agree with your 1st statement, I dont think split screen had anything to do with LAN parties. There was no network with split screen.
However I don't think LAN died because of tower size. Maybe towers got a tad bigger at some point, but monitors got way thinner. I've done a few LAN parties on laptop even. I think they just died because it was easier to play over global network, and subsequently LAN mode disappear from games.
One of the greatest gaming experiences of my life is when I and my three younger brothers hooked up two original Xboxes with a network crossover cable and played the original Halo 2v2 split screen in separate rooms.
Split screen LAN may not have been the norm but it is fantastic.
We had four on a projector in a room, and then another couple down the corridor on a TV. Glorious. Lots of yelling between rooms.
After each game, the stats screen would motivate all sorts of trash talking. 20 years later, we still talk about the time someone called out at the friend with the lowest shots fired count: "You know the bullets don't cost anything, right?"
I can never understand why modern CoD lacks so many great post-game stats they could otherwise be showing.
There was a lanshop that had a T1 of their own (this was '99) that had their machines (two dozen - there were a dozen in each room that had a partition so that people could play against each other).
The "clan tag" that they used was [LPB] standing for Low Ping Bastards as this was the time when people often were in the middling three digit pings - they were regularly in the low two digits. Human Head even had a release party of Rune there and they hosted one of the servers that was consistently up - it was a fairly popular one because it was always up (this is back in the days when many game servers were at the other end of an ISDN line that the owner would power down when not playing) and it had good ping times. It was a shock to some to find that not only did they have good ping times, but also there were some people with [LPB] that had ping times in the single digits. When asked about it the response was "I can touch the server."
It was a nice place to hang out and play games. This was also in the days before voice chat across the net was practical. It was a game changer to have a group of three or four people all coordinate a tank in Tribes - or a spotter and a mortar working together where they could talk rather than needing to pause and type to communicate.
The thing that killed the lan shop was that the college dorms started getting wired with acceptable networks and a good chunk of the player base could play on their own machines. There was still some "get a dozen people together to play" but not enough to pay the bills.
When I lived in Eau Claire, I knew people who went to https://www.lanreg.org/winlan/winlanxi (noting that it was a thing last year, but doesn't appear to have been scheduled for this year - would have been last month).
In addition to the argument that "I can just play online with my friends", I'd also add that many games started to require internet in order to play. Around that same time, many host venues did not have enough bandwidth to support everyone playing online reliably at once.
>I'm a writer and I'm really good at punctuation and spelling, do I really need to learn how to write a good story?
Vim is a text editor, emacs is a text manipulator. If you never want to do more than copy a rectangle of text from region a to region b then you don't need more than vim. If you want to write tools that fit your workflow you need to know elisp.
For readers, don't think this means you need to be an elisp hacker to benefit from emacs. You don't need to write tools -- there are hundreds already written, and installable as packages. I use emacs to edit code, organize projects, and read my email but I rarely touch elisp.
To anyone reading: don't just be a consumer. There are enough projects made for people who just consume. Emacs is still a project run for people who make stuff with it. Please go somewhere else if you have no interest in building anything.
Imo, no harm in being a consumer. I think every hacker is at some level a consumer. But you will get the most out of emacs if you have a habit of becoming less of a consumer.
Emacs is a lisp interpreter whose dialect of lisp is specialized for text manipulation. In emacs the user interface is incidental to the main goal of programmatic text manipulation.
In vim the user interface is the be all and end all. Which is why vim is now a specialized emacs mode when you need character based text manipulation.
Vim has its own script and vim can have its lisp mode. emacs never got it too many 3 keys ops. Vi (I started from ICL … is always I can associate with. Hence different poison.
Btw If you try to learn emacs in iphone or ipad, iSH and a-shell both give you an escape key and control-key. Hence no emacs default key mode. Guess I can try boon or evil. But you know just 3 keys or basically 4 is not that user-friendly for newbie.
It's a solved problem, and has been since the first bitcoin paper. That no one read that and just heard "magic internet gold I can get rich from" is their problem and not mine.
You don't get rich quick off the bitcoin protocol however so we have people run places like FTX: centralize and get the big bucks because they provide convenience. Then act surprised when it goes tits up like every other centralized system.
Same thing with people not encrypting their emails or not using tor as a bridge to the internet. In short: if you're the type of person who doesn't have their own key, yeah, prepare to get wrenched. The rest of us can manage our exposure quite easily.
> > Hur hur, street smarts better than smart smarts.
I never said that, all I said was that this is not the BGP problem, it's the $5 wrench problem.
And it's not a solved problem, governments seize crypto all the time and people get tortured for their keys regularly. Just a few days ago the US picked up 50,000BTC.
All of crypto is a get rich quick scheme, but people want their winnings denominated in fiat which is why exchanges exist. It's hard to reconcile "best performing asset in history!!" with "you can't get rich off bitcoin."
> In short: if you're the type of person who doesn't have their own key, yeah, prepare to get wrenched. The rest of us can manage our exposure quite easily.
You have this completely reversed. If you're the type of person who does have their own keys prepare to get wrenched.
>Look Mr. Government, we're not a monopoly. We have a competitor! *
*Who were funding and have neutered to the point where they've lost 90% of their market share in the last 10 years. Have fired all their developers and are spending the money on spending that looks a lot like what GFX did.
Mozilla is a dead weight around the neck of the internet. The best thing that can happen is that it dies and something new, run by people who actually make things, is created again.
When was the last time anyone was excited about a firefox update?
The people you are imagining that can make things exist wether it not Mozilla exists. And no one is successfully making a browser project to rival Firefox. So no, I think that isn't the best thing
They spend far more than that on Firefox. You're suggesting a dozen companies could split the amount Mozilla makes in donations and develop better projects, which is silly as each one would have roughly 1/500th the budget of Mozilla.
