ryan

How long until someone discovers an arbitrary code execution exploit in the simulation?

@ISometimesAdmin@the.coolest.zone Let me know if you need rehab.

But seriously… yeah, I get it. Especially this part about the workplace:

Nevertheless, [addicted programmers] can also pose significant risks, especially because they frequently deviate from the planned course. They follow their own agenda, introducing challenges where none were necessary, or dedicating hours to minor, tangential aspects of a project. In the process, they diverge from the project plan, programming what they believe is necessary rather than what the project itself requires.

I have been that person before, and now I’m in a position where I have to keep those folks on a tight leash and remind them “our goal is to deliver a product right now, and we can enhance it in future sprints. Let’s just focus on what our primary goal was right now.” It’s easy to fall down rabbit holes, and that’s where having proper planning and a ticketing system to backlog and prioritize future enhancements is so critical.

Let him play in the legacy code. You can just hose him off later before letting him back into the office so he doesn’t track it everywhere.

I’m just looking at Wikipedia here but their net income in 2022 was US$ –921 million. Granted I’m not a financial wizard but I am at least somewhat confident that a negative number for net income is bad, like they’re not actually making money after their expenses.

IMPORTANT EDIT: I have learned that Unity is going to charge for games already released now. This is a scummy move. I have still not found info on whether devs will be back-charged, like suddenly a huge bill will show up for games which already have a million downloads and a lot of revenue. I was previously in tentative favor of this change only so long as:

1. it would apply to newly-released games after the change (no longer valid)
2. the first 200,000 installs would not be back-charged even after the change over (still unknown to me)

Scummy move, Unity.

ORIGINAL POST:

I’m seeing a couple pieces of misinformation in here so I just wanted to clarify:

• This applies to the free Unity and Unity Plus - the enterprise version has different thresholds.
• The fee will apply to games that have made $200,000 USD or more in the last 12 months AND have at least 200,000 per-game lifetime installs.
• Even then, the costs are different depending on which country you are in - “emerging market” is only $0.02 vs $0.20 for other countries.

Essentially it looks to me like you have to have made a significant amount of money already to be charged these fees - someone releasing a free game that goes viral won’t be charged. One thing I haven’t found is whether those first 200,000 installs will or won’t be back-charged. If the initial installs aren’t back-charged then I would consider this very reasonable, frankly, and cheaper than Unreal provided the game you release costs more than $4.00 (since Unreal takes a flat 5% of revenue I believe).

Unity does need to make money to be able to keep developing their engine, and right now as far as I understand it they aren’t making money.

Access logs, sure, but I’m thinking of like federated user logs. Because for example, you’re not accessing the.coolest.zone, you’re on lemmy.world. I wouldn’t have your IP address, and even if you dipped over to the .zone I’d not be able to associate it with your account.

I assume what they mean by IP address collection is in fact access logs, as opposed to everything else which comes thru standard ActivityPub protocols. And, Meta being Meta, they probably have enough info and tracking pixels on us all to be able to correlate all that data together.

I realize we’re all on the “fuck Meta” train (and yes, fuck 'em), but I will note that my kbin instance is also collecting all of that from y’all just due to how federation works (except for IP address I believe).

Ricardo’s just out here doing his best. Good job, Ricardo. Your notification test was successful.

Jira is a customizable ticketing platform. I manage a different ticketing platform at my company (ServiceNow), and I see a lot of crossover in system complaints.

• People ask for a tightly controlled workflow and then get mad when they can’t freely move between states. There will always be exception cases so don’t lock down your states in Jira unless it’s for some audit reason.
• Too many custom mandatory fields to enforce some sort of process compliance. If you have a process you want people to follow, do your job and educate and have recurring trainings on the damn process. The system can’t do the educating for you, and if everything is locked down and mandatory all the time it means the ticket can’t even be worked on in phases, or the requester responded to quickly, without having to spend five minutes on data entry - for every ticket.
• People try to use a particular ticket type for something it’s not meant to be used for and get mad when it doesn’t work. This seems to be less of a concern on Jira than ServiceNow but use the correct ticket types for what you’re doing and you won’t have a problem.
• People hate the underlying processes put in place, and blame the system. This is what the article is addressing.

I do have to agree with this article as a whole. There are a lot of managers who see what Jira can do and expect employees to do it all without considering whether it will be worthwhile. Especially if you’re not running agile and sprints, Jira isn’t the tool for everyone. Most companies have a Microsoft 365 license and Planner works well for team task tracking in general (and it’s integrated with Teams).

At the same time, some employees just hate the idea of ticketing at all and rage against the idea of being held accountable for their tasks, and sucks to be them I guess.