I don't have any numbers on this and would welcome any, but it seems true. How many young people are willing to sign up for $how_new_website_of_the_week vs older people? My personal experience is that older people realize that the website will likely disappear within the next 2-3 years, so they ignore it until it actually catches on. Younger people seem willing to sign up for anything new.
How many young vs old people used myspace or facebook when they first came out? How many young vs old people use instagram, whatsapp, etc ?
Once again, I have no numbers, but I'm guessing it's heavily skewed towards younger people.
It's a chicken-and-egg problem: I'd propose old people are not trying $hot_new_website_of_the_week because they are not in $hot_new_website_of_the_week's target market, and they are not in $hot_new_website_of_the_week's target market because they are old.
I consider myself an early technology adopter, have been all my life. But as I get older I'm less interested, not because I'm older, but because new technology companies are actively choosing to ignore my needs as a customer and my interests.
As you age, you become less motivated by trends and fads. The more seasons of fashion nouvelle you've seen, the more you recognize the Next Big Thing as being mere Pied Piper ephemera.
Soon enough, the major cultural inflection points of leaving elementary, HS, and college will fall behind you. Your job and family take center stage, and your free time shrinks along with the positive reinforcement you get from lightweight social immersion. Then the bloom is off the rose of those latest startups as your net-social focus shifts into more of a spectator mode, posting family photos on Facebook for those now distant friends of yore while caring for your kids, and then caring for your parents. Before you know it, 30 years have passed since you were tuned in and turned on by your last net pet rock.
In many ways, SV startups are truly a young person's game.
Because Silicon Valley, of which Hacker News and its commentariat are a subset, really tries to avoid thinking about the fact that “disruption” usually just means “meet the new boss, same as the old boss”. Posts which bring this to the surface cause cognitive dissonance and so have to be greyed so they can be ignored.
Sorry I meant this more in terms of "learning about every aspect of coffee" .. I did roast my own beans in the past. More out of curiosity, though. All you need to try/start is a cast iron pan and green beans .. but I would recommend reading a book about the roasting process or doing a comprehensive barista course that includes roasting, first.
A cheap (<$100) step up from that is a hot air popcorn popper, and the sky is the limit. Check out http://drinks.seriouseats.com/2013/12/why-you-shouldnt-roast... for a quick overview of what you're getting into and some recommended further reading. TL;DR it's not really worth it but can be a fun hobby which can yield good results with practice.
It lists a variety of elements (like antimony) that are surprisingly constrained. If I were to pick the most critical material on the list, though, it would be phosphates. The green boom that feeds the world needs phosphates, the world supply of phosphate-bearing rock is small, and there are no possible substitutes.
Interesting stories can provide a useful framework for inspiration, setting goals, or looking at what "rule sets" are in play.
If it's intended to be a "simulate (a substantial part of) everything" game, the above stories suggest game elements such as different depths of snow, non-hostile wild animal interactions, animal pathing behavior in snow, tracks, and animal habits/routines.
Dwarf Fortress has for a long time used short stories to describe interesting interactions that the developers like, and then tried to add features to the game until similar events can just happen naturally.
Thanks for answering this to me. This is what I have in mind basically. I'm also working on something like Dwarf Fortress but a "lite" version which is more accessible.
