I think engines like Unreal, Unity, and Godot will remain popular with people who are more interested in creating a game than creating a game engine.
> if yes what are the things that raylib is missing that these engines have?
Asset management and import pipelines, rendering pipeline, loads of ready-to-go features like environments, baked lighting and global illumination, AO, reflections, particle systems, input mapping and event propagation, scripting, audio systems, GUI systems, and lots more.
Raylib is a library that you could use to build all that stuff, but otherwise it's a useful library, not a fully-featured game engine.
If you don't want a game engine and know exactly what you features you need and want to build only that, then Raylib is a great option.
If you don't want to write a global illumination system or asset management pipeline but would rather focus on creating gameplay, then a game engine is a good choice.
> The expert, former cop turned criminal justice professor Michael Alcazar, said Giovansanti should face “serious discipline.” But that’s not happening — an NYPD spokesperson shrugged off the suggestion of punishment because Giovansanti’s tickets are “not related to his job or his duties in the department.”
This angers me. Police officers are granted special privileges that ordinary citizens are not, and should be held to higher standards of conduct both on the job and off. In a just world, police officers would be exemplar citizens while wearing the uniform and while not. If they are not, how can we trust them to wield special privileges and authority over us?
What that spokesperson is saying isn't the whole truth. Departments can discipline or terminate people who dont meet their character clause, including being a scofflaw. They only apply it in whatever way they feel benefits them.
This kind of thing is egregious, but they get away with stuff like this all the time. I live a few blocks from an NYPD precinct house and they park all their personal vehicles on the sidewalk all the time every day. It's less dangerous than speeding, but it's a quality of life issue as well as simple fairness. They are in charge of ticketing parking violations but explicitly ignore their own violations.
The same way we can trust an overweight doctor, a depressed therapist, a housecleaner who doesn't make their bed, or me to verify code I push to corporate repos even while I vibecode apps at home for fun without paying attention. I don't understand the basis for applying this standard to cops.
If I don't trust my doctor, I can ignore them and find a new doctor.
If I don't trust my therapist, I can ignore them and find a new therapist.
If I don't trust my housekeeper, I can fire them and hire a new housekeeper.
If I don't trust a police officer, it doesn't matter. If they detain me and order me to step out of my vehicle, I have to comply under threat of the law and violence. I don't get to only listen to police officers whom I trust.
That is why they must be held to a higher standard, because they wield elevated authority not granted to ordinary citizens.
A police officer who has demonstrated such a reckless disregard for the law and safety can not be trusted as a police officer to uphold the law.
Are you saying you don't trust the people I mentioned for the reasons I mentioned? That a doctor who has demostrated a reckless disregard for his health outside of the law etc. etc.? Like, I get why trust is more important in this context, but I don't think it's at all normal to assume someone can't do their job because of decisions they make in their personal life.
It was, and I was pretty clear that I understood that. It dodges my point, though, and I've asked that they acknowledge it: should you distrust unhealthy doctors, not can you? Is unhealthiness in one's personal life disqualifying for the ability to provide stellar health advice in one's professional life? Should cops be held to the standard of being exemplary citizens who don't even speed? Have you ever sped? Do you know anyone who has never sped?
Maybe! Is their health status directly related to their specialty? Is it a readily curable condition? Is their advice reasonable?
Or are they a lung cancer specialist chain smoking cigarettes at the appointment?
> Should cops be held to the standard of being exemplary citizens who don't even speed?
Yes, cops should be held to a higher standard than the general public. Being a cop while committing a crime should be an aggravating circumstance in the justice system, not a get-out-of-jail card.
Should we expect perfection? No. But 547 speeding tickets is unacceptable.
Yes, the doctor's advice is reasonable and no the doctor is not smoking at a lung cancer appointment. The premise is that they are messing up off the job. If you think an oncologist shouldn't be able to get as good of a job because they smoke cigarettes or eat burgers, that is where we disagree. Apart from calling that illiberal or saying it has negative utility in its consequences, I don't know how to argue that; it's a values difference. I appreciate you actually taking the position, though.
Same for your cop positions. You say they should, I say they shouldn't. If it's clarifying, I can add that I agree that cops should be held to a higher standard while being cops, ie. that things like qualified immunity are working in the wrong direction, and that they shouldn't be held to a lower standard, on- or off-duty.
As far as I'm concerned, speeding tickets in the course of your private life are between you and the ticketing authority. If he's not paying his fines, if he's violating the social contract, sure, escalate. If we want to punish speeders with more than fines because of endangerment, like the article strongly suggests, sure, change the law. But as long as he's compliant with his fines and we're only giving him fines, it's not just to continue to pile on consequences.
Each of those examples varies widely, and I don't think most people would treat each of them the same way.
In general when the stakes are higher and the ambiguity of outcome is less clear, secondary signals become more important.
Concretely: I don't give a shit if my housecleaner doesn't make their own bed as long as they make mine; the outcome I need is easy to verify and the stakes are fairly low so the secondary signal doesn't matter very much. Conversely, I care a lot if the therapist I'm relying on to help me manage my depression is visibly unable to manage their own; the outcome I need has a slow feedback loop and the stakes are high so I'm much more likely to rely on secondary signals like "is this person able to manage their own mood successfully?"
In your version of the therapist example, you don't trust them to do their job because they are failing to do their job. This is fine by me. My issue is with punishing people at their job over actions taken outside of their job, as in the example under discussion.
Huh? Your examples are all people failing at something that merely resembles their job. For the analogy to work, Giovansanti would need to be failing at something in his personal life that resembles traffic enforcement. Instead he's doing the exact thing his job exists to prevent.
> There doesn't need to be a specialist for every group, or worse - some groups.
Why? The struggles different groups generally face are not the same. For a hotline for veterans, wouldn't it make sense to have counselors who are either veterans themselves or have worked extensively with veterans and their specific patterns of issues?
> In my case headaches are usually caused by sleep deprivation causing high sensitivity to external stimuli, muscle tension, dehydration, or some combination of that. So I'll first try to take a nap and/or stick to low-stimuli environments, have a good stretch and/or heated up massage pillow for the neck, and make a quick home-made oral rehydration solution with some salt and sugar. That usually alleviates most if not all of the pain.
Most Americans aren’t allowed to take naps at work or leave for some low-stimuli environment while on the clock. If they take time off to do those things, they aren’t getting paid. So why do Americans take more painkillers? Because they can’t afford to not do so.
So what’s the cultural aspect? That for some reason Americans find this preferable to socialized healthcare.
Naps are fine depending on the white collar work, how much is asynchronous, etc. Reasonable accommodations are usually possible as long as it’s not shift work.
Painkillers are an interesting question since we have direct to consumer ads (uncommon globally as it turns out) and for clearly some reasons, we get sicker than other nations independent of how capable medicine is.
Sicker is doing some work, and I think the US has such a diversity of health cultures and outcomes, you almost need to do it by zip code, but that’s another topic.
>So what’s the cultural aspect? That for some reason Americans find this preferable to socialized healthcare
Alternative universe where WW2-era employer provided healthcare didn’t emerge, would you wager we would be there now?
> Naps are fine depending on the white collar work, how much is asynchronous, etc. Reasonable accommodations are usually possible as long as it’s not shift work.
Yeah, and it’s The people who are on their feet for a 12 hour shift who probably need it most.
> The difference between what people tell you when asked directly and how they actually use your software is actually shocking.
And the difference between what they do and what they want is equally shocking. If what they want isn’t in your app, they can’t do it and it won’t show up in your data.
Quantitative data doesn’t tell you what your users want or care about. It tells you only what they are doing. You can get similar data without spying on your users.
I don’t necessarily think all data gathering is equivalent to spying, but if it’s not entirely opt-in, I think it is effectively spying no matter what you’re collecting, varying only along a dimension of invasiveness.
Depends how you define “technical requirement” but I’d say 404 for example is an indication of a failure to serve a given resource. If you don’t have logging you won’t know unless someone complains which means you’ll only catch the most visible issues. Same goes for performance - everywhere I’ve ever worked serving a resource was tightly coupled to “how fast can the user retrieve that resource”.
The unfamiliar usually is, especially when you aren’t there to experience the less obvious negative aspects of a given culture.
Outside of Japan, Japanese culture often gets put on a pedestal but it of course isn’t without its own issues that aren’t apparent to outsiders viewing from a distance.
reply