Spzi

https://www.youtube.com/@Brackeys/about

Text version, thanks to @[email protected]:

Image Text

BRACKEYS

Hello everyone!

It’s been a while. I hope you are all well.

Unity has recently taken some actions to change their pricing policy that I - like most of the community - do not condone in any way.

I have been using Unity for more than 10 years and the product has been very important to me. However, Unity is a public company. Unfortunately that means that it has to serve shareholder interests. Sometimes those interests align with what is best for the developers and sometimes they do not. While this has been the case for a while, these recent developments have made it increasingly clear.

Unity has pulled back on the first version of their new pricing policy and made some changes to make it less harmful to small studios, but it is important to remember that the realities of a public company are not going to change.

Luckily, there are other ways of structuring the development of software. Instead of a company owning and controlling software with a private code base, software can be open source (with a public code base that anyone can contribute to) and publicly owned. Blender - a stable 3D modelling software in the game dev community - is free and open source. In fact some of the largest and most advanced software in the world is built on top of open source technology like Linux.

The purpose of this post is not to denounce Unity because of a misstep, to criticise any of its employees or to tell anyone to “jump ship”. Instead I want to highlight the systematic issue of organizing large software projects under a public company and to let you know that there are alternatives.

I believe that the way to a stronger and more healthy game dev community is through software created by the community for the community. Software that is open source, democratically owned and community funded.

Many of you have been asking for us to produce new tutorial series on alternative engines such as Godot, which is currently the most advanced open source and community funded game engine. I don’t know yet if this is something that we can realise and when.

I can only say that I have started learning Godot.

Best of luck to all of you with your games, no matter what engine they might be built on!

Sincerely,

Asbjern Thirslund - Brackeys

• https://piped.video/watch?v=4Stzj2_Rlo4
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Stzj2_Rlo4

Absolutely everything you think about yourself and the universe could be an illusion. As far as you know, you are real and exist in a universe that was born 14 billion years ago and that gave rise to galaxies, stars, the Earth, and finally you. Except, maybe not.

Other explanations for Boltzmann Brains did not require an 'inside-out black hole', for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain, so this inclusion came as a surprise to me. Not sure if it's necessary.

What baffles me about the theory: If it's true, and reality is (mostly, statistically speaking) imagined ... the physical reality could be anything. It could be very different from the reality we live in. But we created our models of the universe in this one reality we know, and the theory of Boltzmann Brains emerged from that.

So based on these physical models we arrive at the idea of BBs. But if this idea is true, the physical reality could be completely different.

Or what do you think?

The strange science experiment that blew a worm’s head off… and blew our minds.

This interview is an episode from /channel/UCz7Gx6wLCiPw3F-AmXUvH8w, our publication about ideas that inspire a life well-lived, created with the /channel/UCMJ6QeJUbCUuhOSYZadF7sA.

Michael Levin, a developmental biologist at Tufts University, challenges conventional notions of intelligence, arguing that it is inherently collective rather than individual.

Levin explains that we are collections of cells, with each cell possessing competencies developed from their evolution from unicellular organisms. This forms a multi-scale competency architecture, where each level, from cells to tissues to organs, is solving problems within their unique spaces.

Levin emphasizes that properly recognizing intelligence, which spans different scales of existence, is vital for understanding life's complexities. And this perspective suggests a radical shift in understanding ourselves and the world around us, acknowledging the cognitive abilities present at every level of our existence.

Read the video transcript ► https://bigthink.com/the-well/intelligence-can-cells-think/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=youtube_description

• https://piped.video/watch?v=U93x9AWeuOA
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U93x9AWeuOA

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/4915484

In this video, I talk briefly about a few interesting discoveries and experiments made over the years concerning evolution and natural selection in modern animals with the hope of convincing some people that evolution is indeed real and visible in the real world and that animals can change and evolve over time and in response to environmental conditions entirely naturally. Hope you enjoy!

Chapters:

1. Intro
2. Big Bird: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bird_(bird)
3. Italian Wall Lizards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_wall_lizard
4. Stickleback: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stickleback

• https://piped.video/watch?v=NArlXzSFt2Y
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NArlXzSFt2Y

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/4915484

In this video, I talk briefly about a few interesting discoveries and experiments made over the years concerning evolution and natural selection in modern animals with the hope of convincing some people that evolution is indeed real and visible in the real world and that animals can change and evolve over time and in response to environmental conditions entirely naturally. Hope you enjoy!

Chapters:

1. Intro
2. Big Bird: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bird_(bird)
3. Italian Wall Lizards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_wall_lizard
4. Stickleback: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stickleback

• https://piped.video/watch?v=NArlXzSFt2Y
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NArlXzSFt2Y

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/4333257

Professor Philip Moriarty takes issue with a paper by scientists claiming to achieve room temperature superconductivity.

The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12008

Key critique points:

• Team has little to no background in superconductivity
• Evidence of levitation can be explained without superconductivity
• Graph showing drop in resistance uses a scale which is orders of magnitude off the scale
• Graph showing drop in resistance shows it does not drop (close) to zero

Phil regrets this bad publication which received so much attention could have a negative impact on credibility of science as a whole.

• https://piped.video/watch?v=zl-AgmoZ5mo
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl-AgmoZ5mo

The relevancy for 'Science Communication' is: This video claims to focus on why this was bad science, how safety checks failed, and what negative impact this communication failure might have.

Professor Philip Moriarty takes issue with a paper by scientists claiming to achieve room temperature superconductivity.

The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12008

Key critique points:

• Team has little to no background in superconductivity
• Evidence of levitation can be explained without superconductivity
• Graph showing drop in resistance uses a scale which is orders of magnitude off the scale
• Graph showing drop in resistance shows it does not drop (close) to zero

Phil regrets this bad publication which received so much attention could have a negative impact on credibility of science as a whole.

• https://piped.video/watch?v=zl-AgmoZ5mo
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl-AgmoZ5mo