GOG is hardly a toy and is the platform I look to purchase tons of games on instead of Steam (which I really like) and definitely over Epic (which I've never even installed)
Only drm free steam games. The ones with the steam drm require steam client to be running to launch (steam itself can be in offline mode but it still needs to be running)
Games using things like steam input might also require steam to be running so there is some drm free games that might not run also. Some of those will if you move them outside the steam folder / rename Steam.exe. If you leave them in the steam folder the game will start steam for you if when you launch it.
I think that's the point. The GP post basically said, "Gamers can't be messed with." A child post gave a ton of examples of how gamers are messed with, and this comment helps cement that. It does beg the question as to why Steam isn't as evil as it could be but does choose to be as evil as they are. To me (a very casual gamer) they do seem like the least evil.
Also don't knock those zip files purchased off of itch.io. Sometimes it's good to visit a cottage industry to see what's passing under the radar of the big guys.
They should be, but I also rarely see roofers in harnesses around here on the other side of the country. It's one thing when it's a roofer himself making the (stupid) decision, but a lot of the guys I see actually on the roofs are non-English-speaking laborers basically told to get the job done and not ask questions.
There are a few fully automated wet labs and many semi-autonomous. They are called "Cloud Labs", and they will only become more plentiful. AI can identify and execute the physical experiments after using simulations to filter and score the candidate hypotheses.
They're actually right in that there are several attempts to create automated labs to speed up the physical part. But in reality there are only a handful and they are very very narrowly scoped.
But yes, potentially in some narrow domains this will be possible, but it still only automates a part of the whole process when it comes to drugs. How a drug operates on a molecular test chip is often very different than how it works in the body.
It's funny you ask, I had this exact idea back during the NFT craze. I have an unlimited supply of rocks thanks to the creek in my back yard. Well not unlimited, but there are more rocks back there than people willing to buy them as a joke.
Frontier AI models and Coding agents are contributing to this calcification.
My preferred stack is SvelteKit, and I just maintain a markdown file of all the context needed to steer the AI towards the happy path with Svelte 5 runes, the Svelte flavor, etc.
The biggest bottlenecks are raw ingredients, power, and factories. Once the automated manufacturing flywheel gets started, units can be produced very rapidly. Specialized machines produce low-level components, while more generalized machines assemble higher-level components as well as products like themselves and other robots.
People don't factor a human's total compensation beyond an hourly wage.
Machines don't need as much breathing room as humans.
Humanoid robots are notable worse than humans in many aspects that impact productivity. If a humanoid robot is ultimately 33% as productive as a worker in a developing country who gets a wage of $10k USD annually and works 8 hours per day every day, then then robot has to cost less than $10k annually all in to be a good replacement. Assuming a 5 year useful lifespan and $2k in maintenance per year, results in the robot needing to cost ~$40k before it can replace a human's productivity. And that is inclusive of training and setup, and I doubt we'll have robots that are capable of learning as quickly as average humans without dedicated specialists training them... which raises the cost.
In general, you can get a dedicated machine for most human tasks that is easily 10-1000x productivity if you have a few million in capital. There are tasks on the margin where human flexibility and dexterity that having a human operate a $10k sewing machine is going to be very very hard to replace.
Can't machines work a 7-day, 24-hour schedule? That said, humanoid robots strike me as a jack-of-all-trades tool, our environment is full of things that are optimized for human-sized and -shaped users, but if you can purpose-build your robot for a factory, it's going to be more efficient at a narrow set of tasks there.
That is the humanoid robot use case with time for charging, maintenance, and offline during repair. This is just a rough estimate of amortizing those costs and comparing them against a 7-day work week.
Isn't the biggest bottleneck just that they need to adequately and reliably be able to do useful work at a better price-performance ratio than a human ?
The biggest bottlenecks are hardware design and software design. Materials science to an extent, particularly battery materials, but we could build robots with currently-available materials and power density if only we knew how to make them work usefully enough.
I'm not against the concept and I agree the manufacturing can be scaled. There just isn't a product yet.
And it is a dumb take. As with any new technology, it has a chicken and an egg problem to overcome. Humanoid robots are developing very rapidly now that AI is progressing the way it is. It is in the same vane as 32k should be enough for anybody.
reply