magic_lobster_party

People build their identities around their cars because society is making sure that you feel confined without a car.

It’s a total special military operation

Sweden had the ”blue white” brand for low price products. There wasn’t even an image on the boxes.

https://kf.se/en-text-om-blavitt/

When I grew up I didn’t like drinking water. I thought it tasted bland compared to all the sugary drinks. Looking back, I think our family struggled with sugar addiction without knowing it. We consumed quite a lot of sugar in my childhood.

It wasn’t until my teenage years I questioned the amount of sugary drinks I consumed. So I just cut off all sugary drinks and embraced the way of the water.

Today I’m a proud water enjoyer.

AITAH has been mostly made up rage bait stories long time before AI nonsense. There’s nothing that generates more engagement than someone being wrong on the internet.

The difference now is that the rage bait has become automated.

I suppose Elon is feeling cornered.

The reputation of Tesla has never been lower and he’s at risk of getting kicked out. The future of SpaceX is uncertain under Trump. His role in the government didn’t pan out.

So I guess his only hope is to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. Maybe the next one will be less hostile against Elon.

I don’t think he will succeed. The cult of Trump is too strong. Elon is done for.

I see Brazil the same way as an artist going on world tour

It’s more like American car centric culture vs rest of the world.

Desychronization will likely happen considering the heart rate is varying. Both must somehow increase by exactly the same rate. Any slight variation will cause them to go out of sync.

Once they’re out of sync, it’s going to be hard for them to get back in sync.

This is assuming both hearts are independent systems. Could be a different story if there dependent (like connected in series rather than parallel), but in that case it’s conceptually no different than having one heart.

”Bomb has been defused”

There’s also the argument whether games really need that high of a budget. It feels like there’s little correlation between the budget of a game, and its success (or quality).

Sony could’ve invested in five or ten more Helldivers 2 scaled games, instead of wasting it all on the Concord flop.

Just watch Hollywood try to replicate ”chicken jockey” instead

Most of that cost was unlikely for the hardware itself, but rather Nintendo greed. Most of it was probably for the early access to Nintendo’s next console and possibly support from Nintendo directly.

Interesting paper. I skimmed through it quickly, but it seems like they wanted to avoid relying on ray tracing.

Minimal ray tracing. Many non-local lighting effects can be approximated with texture maps. Few objects in natural scenes would seem to require ray tracing. Accordingly, we consider it more important to optimize the architecture for complex geometries and large models than for the non-local lighting effects accounted for by ray tracing or radiosity.

Most of the paper is way above my understanding, so I’m not qualified.

They used top of the line hardware specialized for 3D rendering. Seems like they used Silicon Graphics workstations, which costed more than $10k back in the day. Not something the typical consumer would buy. The calculations are probably a bit off with this taken into account.

Then they likely relied on rendering techniques optimized for the hardware they had. I suspect modern GPUs aren’t exactly compatible with these old rendering pipelines.

So multiply with 10ish and I think we have a more accurate number.

Did Toy Story use ray tracing back then?

AFAIK, A Bug’s Life is the first Pixar movie that used ray tracing to some extent, and that was for a few reflections. Monster’s University is the first Pixar movie that was fully ray traced.

It wasn’t just this though; the tool itself lacks the intent, context, and limitations of what we’re doing. It doesn’t have other aspects of the project, influences, references, or personal experiences in the back of its mind, because it doesn’t have a mind.

This describes the fundamental problem with AI. The chatbot will forever be like that new recruit to the team. Sure, they have the skills to make some contributions, but they lack the surrounding context to fully work autonomously. They need some guidance to get to the right path.

The difference between the chatbot and the new recruit is that the chatbot won’t remember all the guidances it got. The chatbot won’t remember all the design decisions that were made. The chatbot won’t remember that time prod went down. The chatbot will forever be like the new recruit with no experience.

I suppose most people here are not alt-right at least.

It’s true the stock market goes up and down, but it’s rare it’s crashing down as a direct effect of one foolish action a single person made.

In 1995 most would probably consider Star Wars an old movie. I think most would consider Jurassic Park to be an old movie now.