Just FYI, I was mildly confused by the name, as "ulti" is the name of a traditional Hungarian card game. I doubt this will ever confuse anyone else but I thought it was a fun name clash.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulti

I think this opens a huge can of further questions: what is a Stephen King? Is it a best selling author who's a house name, a very successful genre author, one who spans genres and is successful in all of them, one whose' books get regularly translated to TV, a very good craftman of books that people actually read...

My feeling is that there isn't and _won't be_ a new Stephen King that checks all the boxes, due to declining readership and reduced barriers to independent publishing.

"Apt Pupil" was also adapted as a movie tho not as good as the other two, imvho.

Fun fact Apt pupil has a reference to Shawshank where the main character says he lives off stocks that a banker setup named Dufresne who went to prison for murdering his wife.

King does this all the time in his stories having character connections across different novels, making them set in the same universe. Fun, adds some depth to all of it. Like Randal Flagg being the same villain in the Stand and the Dark tower and Eyes of the Dragon.

And the MC from 11/22/63 meeting the characters from It, and feeling Pennywise's presence.

He took it a bit too far with Harry Potter, Spiderman, and Star Wars

the italian dubbing was named "le ali della libertà" (the wings of freedom), which is one of the rare cases where I agree with using a different name than the original, since nobody would have clue what "Shawshank" means.

No one in the US knows, either. It’s a fictional prison and its name means nothing except to people already familiar with the story.

“The Shawshank Redemption” is a nonsense phrase in English.

“Shawshank” sounds like a place name, but why a specific place would be the source of redemption is mysterious.

The name of the source text, “Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption” is even more mysterious and unclear.

The EU had wind + solar overtake fossil fuels last year too.

Fossil fuels are now less than 30% of electricity generation.

Alas, there's a ton more burning which is not electricity, but progress is undeniable

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/european-electricit...

The US did too, despite Trump trying to block it.

What does "wasted" mean in this context?

It means that it doesn't generate any mechanical work, it's wasted as heat not captured for any other productive purpose (since waste heat can be useful in some contexts).

It's a measure of efficiency.

i assume heat since most energy in an ICE engine is wasted to heat (~60% wasted iirc)

Neuromancer is currently in development at Apple+ :)

FWIW, Amazon made a show based on "The Peripheral" by Gibson which is way more bleak than Neuromancer, and it was crazy good, but they canceled it after one season.

Oh I saw that one. It was good, too bad they canceled it

When pugs (a perl6 implementation in Haskell) was a thing, you gained commit access by asking and it was immediately granted to everyone. It was insane and awesome.

This has been my experience in the early 2000 with sourceforge. You went to the related irc channel, introduced yourself, asked for access and they would add you to the project. You could work on a game that you liked, a jabber client, and even code::blocks at some point. Boost (c++ libraries ) was more serious, you'd have to create the implementation and documentation according to their format and post it to the forum, then they would ask you to defend certain parts or reject due to bloat/DRY/unnecessary.

Everything felt more like a community effort back then.

I haven't watched it, but I seem to recall "Mr Robot" was widely praised by techies too.

Yes, I've watched that TV show through twice and will probably do it again.

Great on the technicals and also a complete mind fuck.

Yes! Forgot about Mr Robot, which was absolutely fantastic.

This is insightful. But I'm not sure it's completely true, I think people just have shifted their perception of what selling out means.

Content creators on YouTube, for example, get criticized when they literally sell their brand to a larger conglomerate. It seems people do not complain if they do sponsorizations tho.

> Content creators

I'd argue the very words creating "content" implies something commercial is already in mind and is a driver, rather than just doing your own thing online and not caring (such showing a video of your band/hobby on YouTube in case anybody is interested).

To a Gen-X'er, the former sounds like they are already a sell out :-)

I certainly agree with you that perceptions have shifted.

I agree with you and I find the term "creating content" awful, even though I'm forced to use it because it's something people immediately understand.

"Content creator"... what happened to artist, playwright, painter, hobbyist, etc? It makes it seem as if they were making stuff for a corporation to sell.

That is what is happening though. It's an accurate description. These are cases of making content for corporations to sell ads against.

It is what's happening in some cases, not all. Also, language shapes thought, so we encourage this to happen if we frame it as "content creation". It's something to push against.

Note it's not even relevant whether something is commercial. Art can be commercial and not be just "content". A musician is not a "content creator" which happens to create content in the shape of music. "Content" implies it doesn't really matters, what matters is engagement and the platform (and advertisers, etc). It's not healthy to think of hobbies, art, and entertainment as exclusively about this. Imagine if Oscar Wilde, Herman Melville, Alan Moore, etc had been thought of merely as "content creators".

This is not a new idea. Stallman was already pushing back against this "content" term decades ago.

Content is the filler in the limited space between ads.

Content is an intentionally chosen word in order to make "feeding from the corporate trough" not seem so repulsive.

Imagine Davinci putting ads for the Medici money lending services into his paintings. That's where we're at now.