It's probably me being pedantic, but for an "objective masterpiece" the game needs to stand on its own and not on its legacy. I just don't think Ocarina of Time holds up to later zelda games in many aspects (although I do think the story and soundtrack do).
Generally I think the ps1 and N64 era just suffer from the transition to 3D. Graphically and gameplay wise many games suffered for being the first foray into 3D gaming and those challenges wouldn't really be settled until the next generation.
I'm always curious why people add things like Ocarina of Time to lists like these. While the game was revolutionary at the time, I don't think it holds up particularly well nor succeeds where later zeldas fail.
To call it an objective masterpiece I feel like it has to be a game that someone picking up today would still enjoy and appreciate. Tetris and Portal for example hold up well even by today's standards.
It is "built-in" as the name is part of python. However, Python runs top to bottom, rather than having a special entrypoint. So name is just a utility you can use in your design.
While it can be a good practice to define a main entrypoint, that's more of a design decision and not hard rule. Many applications would not benefit from it because there is only one way to actually call the application to begin with.
Edit: Also not a dumb question. All programming languages have unique elements to them due to how they were envisioned and or developed over time (Pythons 30 years old)
The point of the name==main logic is that it checks if that is the file that was invoked (like running python filename.py). If you just put a main() in the global scope it will be called either when the file is invoked or loaded (which can cause unintended consequences).
This is my question too, the biggest benefit to SteamOS was the pause/resume capability. When dual booting windows on the Steamdeck was that windows didn't sleep well.
This also happened to some extent with Reagan. While it wouldn't be another 5 years after his presidency when he was officially diagnosed with Alzheimers, it was speculated there were issues during his presidency.
I tend to see the big issue in having people too far removed from the investment/risk rather than the ratings themselves. Which is why I call out the bundling as securities.
No one at the time thought the ratings were bad because they bundled good and bad mortgages and were accounting for default rates. However, spreading the risk of mortgage assets to every financial institution meant there was no escape when the housing market burst.
The real issue with 2008 is that the mortgages were being bundled and sold as securities. So lots of financial institutions (even those disconnected from mortgage markets) were all holding these toxic assets without anyway to unload them.
With Klarna, I suspect that most risk is with them and their stockholders.
There are three top credit rating agencies and this was the final one to downgrade the US. First one was under Obama in 2011 due to Republicans playing games with the debt ceiling. Then in 2023, but I'm not sure why. And now it's due to continued brinkmanship, but I think primarily due to Trumps impact to current and future health of us.
Yeah, I know it would mean emulation, the question is more if they can deliver. Since they state it will work with all Microsoft, Epic, and Steam games. Assuming any of the leaks are right.
I mean it is one of the premiere educational institutions in the world. I imagine they're looking for some of the best people to run the school and that has a cost.
Also, unlike CEOs or for-profit companies, his compensation is probably his own income (from the school).
Vesting generally requires there to be some asset you become entitled to. In private companies that's stock, but Harvard is a non-profit (and a school) so I don't think they have any equivelant.
Looking online, it does seem likely there are bonuses and other forms of compensation. But I think agreeing to take a pay cut is him trying to do right, or at least indicate that he's willing to take a hit too.
It's probably me being pedantic, but for an "objective masterpiece" the game needs to stand on its own and not on its legacy. I just don't think Ocarina of Time holds up to later zelda games in many aspects (although I do think the story and soundtrack do).
Generally I think the ps1 and N64 era just suffer from the transition to 3D. Graphically and gameplay wise many games suffered for being the first foray into 3D gaming and those challenges wouldn't really be settled until the next generation.