zlacker

This take is interesting given we're all here congratulating Jarred for seeing that there was no tool to solve x so made it, and is now enjoying a likely nice payday. Be the change you want to see in the world?

>>morito+(OP)
It kinda reads like a case of survivorship bias. He is the one in a million to reach the good ending, despite starting with the wrong choice; though in this case, the wrong choice brought him on the road to the good ending.

Now the real question is, does the game loads significant better now, or does the performance still suck? In which case it might be more an excessive case of yak-shaving. And if yes, when can we except the release?

>>Purple+Dv
If the output generated by his attempts at making a better game is a much faster node runtime, then even if the game is still not usable does that matter? The end result is still an improvement over something that existed before. The game was just a catalyst.

Isn’t every success story really an example of survivorship bias?

>>Purple+Dv
Using your comment to address overall sentiment in this comment thread.

Builders build. Sometimes it's not about picking the right tools for the job or starting with the right choices. Sometimes it's just about building.

To use your road analogy - sometimes people just go for a drive. Sometimes those people end up right where they are supposed to be.

>>somegu+wz
> Isn’t every success story really an example of survivorship bias?

No, survivorship bias (in this context) means to wrongly see a minor subgroup as the majority. But the successful subgroup is not always a minority, or falsely labelled.