DDLC is available on many different major platforms, including iOS, Nintendo Switch, PlayStation, and more.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/698780/Doki_Doki_Literature_Club/

In the indirect sense that an engine might impact a game’s visual appearance, hardware compatibility, or performance, sure. But I don’t care about the engine specifically as an engine. That’s just an implementation detail. It’s just “does the game look appealing” or “does the game run well on my hardware”?

There are some cases where I can look at an engine and know that it’s very likely that some feature that I want is or isn’t there. For example, the (open-source) Twine engine supports interactive fiction multiple-choice Web-based games, usually written in a language called Sugarcube.

There’s a similar proprietary engine and language, Choicescript, which runs in a proprietary viewer. This is used by Choice of Games LLC, which has published a large number of commercial text-based games.

The developers of the Choicescript engine decided that an “undo/go back/save” feature would be undesirable, probably because it reduced the gravity of a player making choices; they basically require a player to play the game in “ironman mode”, where if anything happens that the player doesn’t like, the player has to go back and play a new game from scratch to avoid it. The Twine developers decided that “undo/go back/save” was a good idea and enabled it by default (and even if a game disables it, there are typically ways to modify a Twine game to re-enable this feature). I very strongly disagree with “undo” being disabled; I feel that it’s not respectful of my time, so when I purchase a Choicescript game, I know that I’m probably going to have to live with this particular decision that I do not like.

https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/List_of_games_that_support_PlayStation_light_bar

I’m waiting for release, myself, since I want to get the full experience all at once, so I’m not the best person to advise there.

• California is relatively-wealthy.

• I would say pretty confidently, without digging up figures, that Californians have a higher rate of using fuel-efficient vehicles. I know that they have the highest rate of BEV usage in the US. A lot of the fuel-inefficient vehicles are (large) pickup trucks, and California has a relatively low share of pickup truck ownership, whereas Wyoming has the highest.

Can use engine braking.

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

Gasoline engines

The term “engine braking” refers to the braking effect that occurs in gasoline engines when the accelerator pedal is released. This causes fuel injection to cease and the throttle valve to close almost completely, greatly restricting forced airflow from, for example, a turbocharger. The restriction causes a strong manifold vacuum which the cylinders have to work against, sapping much of the potential energy out of the system over time and producing the majority of the engine-braking effect.[1] This vacuum manifold effect can often be amplified by a down-shift, which induces a faster spinning drivetrain to engage with the engine.

Engine braking is a viable method of controlling the speed at which a vehicle travels downhill. By shifting to a lower gear in a manual transmission, or applying “low” mode on an automatic transmission, engine braking reduces the need to repeatedly apply the foot brake, lowering the risk of the brakes overheating.[2]

California also treats capital gains at the (higher) rate of regular income, which is somewhat unusual, whereas Texas has no state-level capital gains tax, which is also somewhat unusual.

I’d point out, for those not aware, that there’s a spiritual successor in the form of Kitten Space Agency.

Every time I get an Android update, my first reaction is “what workflows that had been working am I going to need to relearn?”

I’ve had some similar comments about Windows in the past. Like, a lot of the lock-in value that Microsoft enjoys isn’t anything special that they’ve done — it’s because people are expert in using their platform. If you make them change their workflow, you throw that out. And people profoundly dislike changing their workflow, once they’ve put the effort in to become accustomed to one.

Not happening until after the next Elder Scrolls game is out.

Yup!

Shortage Likely

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

OpenWrt (from open wireless router) is an open-source project for embedded operating systems based on Linux, primarily used on embedded devices to route network traffic.

OpenWrt can run on various types of devices, including CPE routers, residential gateways, smartphones, pocket computers (e.g., Ben NanoNote). It is also possible to run OpenWrt on personal computers and laptops.

OpenWrt also recommends choosing a device with a minimum of 16 MB of flash and 128 MB of RAM, preferably higher amounts.[77]

If you can install OpenWrt, you can probably get ahold of hardware that can run OpenWrt.

OpenWrt provides regular bug fixes and security updates even for devices that are no longer supported by their manufacturers.

You’ll probably also have a longer device lifetime.

So, I’d agree that he’s probably not doing a fantastic job of running Tesla as an auto company these days. However, if you consider Tesla to just be an auto company, its valuation is way too high. I think I heard someone put it along these lines a while back, that “Tesla is a solid auto company, but one valued at ten times what it’s worth.” The only way its present-day valuation can really be justified by an investor is if they think that the bulk of the company’s value is going to come from new things that it is doing and that those things will all be wildly successful, like robotaxi service and humanoid robots and all that. The value that would have to come to those for Tesla valuation not to already be wildly out of whack would have to be so large that what Tesla does as an auto company wouldn’t matter that much.

EDIT:

https://money.usnews.com/investing/stocks/tm-toyota-motor-corporation-adr

Toyota: Market Cap: $264.50B, P/E 11.08

https://money.usnews.com/investing/stocks/tsla-tesla-inc

Tesla: Market Cap: $1333.16B, P/E 354.33

https://money.usnews.com/investing/stocks/gm-general-motors-company

General Motors: Market Cap: $65.77B, P/E 24.93

Elon Musk’s xAI and SpaceX merged in February, valuing the company at over $1.25 trillion. SpaceX is now preparing for an initial public offering (IPO).

One of the things that Musk has to do to get his trillion dollar pay package fully paid out from Tesla as CEO is to crank up Tesla’s market capitalization. Many people, including myself, would say that this is a pretty wildly unreasonable payout, that Musk, via the aid of a friendly board, is transferring a lot of shareholder assets to himself that a company acting in the interests of its shareholders probably would not. I’ve wondered if this is a gyration to advance that.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2025/09/05/tesla-proposes-compensation-plan-for-musk-that-could-be-worth-as-much-as-1-trillion/

Elon Musk Threatened To Quit Tesla Before $1 Trillion Compensation Deal

To receive his full compensation reward, Musk will need to meet the ambitious goal of raising Tesla’s market cap from around $1 trillion at present to $8.5 trillion within a ten-year period.

Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2026

Just saying.

https://xkcd.com/2347/

The guy in Nebraska probably has fewer resources to protect against you than the sum total of all of the downstream companies that you’re trying to attack.

It’s just an Apple fanboy

checks article history

Almost all of their articles are about Linux.

I use “mono-9” in all my terminals, including for emacs. On my Debian trixie system, that maps to DejaVu Sans Mono in the fonts-dejavu-mono package.

$ cat ~/.config/foot/foot.ini
[main]
font=mono-9
$ fc-match mono-9
DejaVuSansMono.ttf: "DejaVu Sans Mono" "Book"
$ fc-list|grep DejaVuSansMono.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono.ttf: DejaVu Sans Mono:style=Book
$ dpkg -S /usr/share/fonts/truetype/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono.ttf
fonts-dejavu-mono: /usr/share/fonts/truetype/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono.ttf
$

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

The DejaVu fonts are a superfamily of fonts designed for broad coverage of the Unicode Universal Character Set. The fonts are derived from Bitstream Vera (sans-serif) and Bitstream Charter (serif), two fonts released by Bitstream under a free license that allowed derivative works based upon them; the Vera and Charter families were limited mainly to the characters in the Basic Latin and Latin-1 Supplement portions of Unicode, roughly equivalent to ISO/IEC 8859-15, and Bitstream’s licensing terms allowed the fonts to be expanded upon without explicit authorization.

The full project incorporates the Bitstream Vera license, an extended MIT License, which restricts naming of modified distributions and prohibits individual sale of the typefaces, although they may be embedded within a larger commercial software package (terms also found in the later Open Font License); to the extent that the DejaVu fonts’ changes can be separated from the original Bitstream Vera and Charter fonts, these changes have been deeded to the public domain.[1]

There are some memory latency benefits to putting memory on a single chip, but to date, that’s largely been handled by adding cache memory to the CPU, and later adding multiple tiers of it, rather than eliminating discrete memory.

The first personal computer I used had 4kB of main memory.

My current desktop has a CPU with 1MB of L1 cache, 16MB of L2 cache, 128MB of L3 cache, and then the system as a whole has 128GB of discrete main memory.

Most of the time, the cache just does the right thing, and for software that is highly performance-sensitive, one might go use something like Valgrind’s cachegrind or something like that to profile and optimize the critical bits of software to minimize cache misses.

I could believe that maybe, say, one could provide on-core memory that the OS could be more-aware of, say, let it have more control over the tiered storage. Maybe restructure the present system. But I’m more dubious that we’ll say “there’s no reason to have a tier of expandable, volatile storage off-CPU at all on desktops”.

EDIT: That argument is mostly a technical one, but another, this one from a business standpoint. I expect PC builders have a pretty substantial business reason to not want to move to SoCs. Right now, PC builders can, to some degree, use price discrimination to convert consumer surplus to producer surplus. A consumer will typically pay disproportionately more for a computer with more memory, for example, when they purchase from a given vendor. If the system is instead sized at the CPU vendor, then the CPU vendor is going to do the same thing, probably more effectively, as there’s less competition in the CPU market, and it’ll be the PC builder seeing money head over to the CPU vendor — they’ll pay a premium for high-end SoCs.

In Apple’s case, that’s not a factor, because Apple has vertically-integrated production. They make their own CPUs. Apple’s PC builder guys aren’t concerned about Apple’s CPU guys extracting money from them. But Dell or HP or suchlike don’t manufacture their own CPUs, and thus have a business incentive to maintain a modular system. Unless one thinks that the PC market as a whole is going to transition to a small number of vertically-integrated businesses that look like Apple, I guess, where you have one or two giant PC makers who basically own their supply chain, but I haven’t heard about anything like that happening.

You don’t need to as long as you’re getting sufficient speeds from non-soldered DIMMs, and desktops are generally still using non-soldered DIMMs.