---------------------------------------------
Founder of ReadMe (http://readme.com)
We're hiring! http://readme.com/careers
Twitter: https://twitter.com/@gkoberger
Email: greg@readme.io
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/gregory; my proof: https://keybase.io/gregory/sigs/Lv_uFdVcItYvAgvC81QxTUMh-MvIaqKRqaq-SkclmrU ]
- Maybe? It’s broken into chapters, and covers a ton of history. It’s engaging, and more of a journey than a singular answer.
A lot of people in this thread have vouched for Defunctland. Might not be for everyone, but I find the pacing great.
- I know there’s BB-8 toys, but I’m talking about the version meant for the parks: https://youtu.be/RDgZjdZsc6g
Much like Olaf (and many before him… dinosaurs, WALL-E, talking characters, etc), it was implied he’d wander around the parks. But it tends to happen for a short amount of time, mostly for events, and fade away quickly. (The blog post even says that: Olaf will be part of a 15 minute temporary show, and then will visit Hong Kong).
Maybe I’m wrong, but I’ve seen this exact thing happen a dozen times over the past 20+ years. (And watch the video I posted if you want to see more!)
- For anyone who DOES have time, this one is amazing: it combines broadcast history, Disney Channel nostalgia, and a genuinely beautiful storyline.
- The basic gist is that while the tech is cool, it just ends up being impractical for regular use in the parks. (But like the other poster mentioned, with Defunctland it's less about the tldr and more about the journey and fascinating segues he takes)
Totally get it's difficult to make time with kids, but depending on your kids ages... the video shows a LOT of Disney characters talking and doing things and the videos are colorful, so it could work as something you can listen to and they won't mind having play in the background!
- Eh, maybe. I have a less myopic view... I think their Imagineers just like pushing the envelope, and there's a difference between awesome tech vs things that can withstand the wear-and-tear of millions of guests.
Nothing about all that tech makes me think Olaf could withstand a hug from an excited kid.
Disney does a ton of R&D that doesn't directly make it into the parks, such as smokeless fireworks (they donated the patent for this) and their holotile floor (basically an endless VR room you can walk around). I imagine they don't know the practicality at the start, like any good R&D.
- This is cool, but it will almost definitely never end up in a park, outside of some promotional situations.
Disney's been doing awesome work with "Living Characters", like a Mickey that moves his mouth or a BB-8 that can roll around. But for various reasons, they never tend to make it into regular usage.
If you have a few hours over Christmas break and want to watch a 4 hour YouTube video (I promise if you're on HN on a Sunday, you'll be delighted by it), I highly highly recommend this video:
"Disney's Living Characters: A Broken Promise" by Defunctland https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyIgV84fudM
- Here's the argument for/against it: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/ranking-factors/subdomai...
I think the answer likely is quite nuanced, for what it's worth.
- I run a product similar to Mintlify.
We've made different product decisions than them. We don't support this, nor do we request access to codebases for Git sync. Both are security issues waiting to happen, no matter how much customers want them.
The reason people want it, though, is for SEO: whether it's true or outdated voodoo, almost everyone believes having their documentation on a subdomain hurts the parent domain. Google says it's not true, SEO experts say it is.
I wish Mintlify the best here – it's stressful to let customers down like this.
- Agreed, this is why I think they should buy.
- They do work on it. A lot.
But the issue is browsers don't make money. You can't charge for it, you can't add ads to it, etc. You're competing with the biggest companies in the world (Google, Apple), all of whom are happy to subsidize a browser for other reasons.
- Yeah you're right, I said profit in the original post because it was a nice polyptoton, but I did indeed mean revenue. That's on me!
- Well, they have over a billion in the bank. Which is both a ton of money, but also goes away quickly when you're a large company paying lots of money to salaries.
- Depends on how you look at it. They made $653 million in 2023, most coming from their biggest competitor, Google.
They don't need this much money, but it means more layoffs and cutting scope drastically. It's expensive to run a modern browser.
- Having worked at Mozilla a while ago, the CEO role is one I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. Success is oddly defined: it's a non-profit (well, a for-profit owned by a non-profit) that needs to make a big profit in a short amount of time. And anything done to make that profit will annoy the community.
I hope Anthony leans into what makes Mozilla special. The past few years, Mozilla's business model has been to just meekly "us-too!" trends... IoT, Firefox OS, and more recently AI.
What Mozilla is good at, though, is taking complex things the average user doesn't really understand, and making it palpable and safe. They did this with web standards... nobody cared about web standards, but Mozilla focused on usability.
(Slide aside, it's not a coincidence the best CEO Mozilla ever had was a designer.)
I'm not an AI hater, but I don't think Mozilla can compete here. There's just too much good stuff already, and it's not the type of thing Mozilla will shine with.
Instead, if I were CEO, I'd go the opposite way: I'd focus on privacy. Not AI privacy, but privacy in general. Buy a really great email provider, and start to own "identity on the internet". As there's more bots and less privacy, identity is going to be incredibly important over the years.. and right now, Google defacto owns identity. Make it free, but also give people a way to pay.
Would this work? I don't know. But like I said, it's not a job I envy.
- I think when most people talk about the "AI bubble bursting", they mean a dramatic end to this notion that AI is the "next big thing". Much like how we had Web3 and NFTs and all those other things that were going to change how we interacted with the internet.
Sure, my BTC is up, but I can go weeks or months without interacting with a blockchain in any way, directly or indirectly.
Valuations of individual AI companies might (and will) drop, but we are currently experiencing the least amount of AI in our everyday lives that we (or our children) ever will.
- Sure, but crypto companies aren’t as in vogue anymore.
AI companies will someday just be called companies, much like how tech companies are just companies.
- I guess I wonder what people think the AI bubble is.
Are you worried about the high valuations of the big AI companies (OpenAI, Nvidia, etc)? Then sure, that will correct over time. There will likely be 1-2 big winners.
But if you're talking about AI in general... right now is the least amount of money companies will be spending on AI ever. It will only go up. This isn't crypto.
- I think there's a potential argument to be made that Anthropic isn't trying to make it easier to write TS code, but rather that their goal is a level higher and the average person wouldn't even know what "language" is running it (in the same way most TS devs don't need to care the many layers their TS code is compiled via).
Disney has become significantly less accessible for the average family of 4. Aside from ticket costs, there's almost nothing free in the parks anymore... you have to pay for lightning lane passes for all the cool rides, there's minimal live entertainment, etc.
The demographics have significantly shifted. Only 1/3 visitors now come from households with children under 18, and millennials and gen z have started taking frequent trips (friend groups, couples, etc).
So while they still get the same number of "attendance", the demographics have started to shift toward older, more affluent repeat visitors.
Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/why-disney-parks-top-destina...