

Do you not see any value in engaging with views you don’t personally agree with? I don’t think agreeing with it is a good barometer for whether it’s post-worthy
Currently studying CS and some other stuff. Best known for previously being top 50 (OCE) in LoL, expert RoN modder, and creator of RoN:EE’s community patch (CBP). He/him.
(header photo by Brian Maffitt)
Do you not see any value in engaging with views you don’t personally agree with? I don’t think agreeing with it is a good barometer for whether it’s post-worthy
Fwiw it looks like Cutipol is the brand and that Horne is just the retailer
I think you’ve tilted slightly too far towards cynicism here, though “it might not be as ‘fair’ as you think” is probably also still largely true for people that don’t look into it too hard. Part of my perspective is coming from this random video I watched not long ago which is basically an extended review of the Fairphone 5 that also looks at the “fair” aspect of things.
Misc points:
So yes, they are a long way from selling “100% fair” phones, but it seems like they’re inching the needle a bit more than your summary suggests, and that’s not nothing. It feels like you’ve skipped over lots of small-yet-positive things which are not simply “low economy of scale manufacturing” efforts.
Unfortunately it’s hard for the rest of us to tell if you actually think you want a video to save you from having to read 18 sentences or if you’re just taking the piss lol
For platforms that don’t accept those types of edits, the link OP tried to submit: https://www.theverge.com/news/690815/bill-gates-linus-torvalds-meeting-photo
We just sent the code
Somehow this phrase triggered a memory of this short comedy sketch: https://youtu.be/LButXcZ57pc
Tbh I thought it was a bunch of non-lemmy platforms (e.g., mbin which fedia.io runs - anecdotally it usually happens due to some types of edits not federating well), but if someone from infosec.pub (which runs lemmy) also had the problem then I’m actually not sure what the common factor is lol
edit: the common factor might just be instances that have blocked lemmy.ml, which currently includes fedia.io (my instance) and infosec.pub (the other commenter’s instance), though I’m surprised links to lemmy.ml’s hosted images are included in the block
Yes! It still maintains some features not in mainline Mastodon, which I guess is why infosec.exchange runs it
Image link for those on platforms that don’t see it (e.g., me): https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/745658dd-60ef-44f9-bcf9-290aa9f23573.webp
That video of them interviewing people on the street with it was pretty fun!
Wow, they literally added more horse armor lol
FYI: OpenCritic average is moderately lower at (currently) 78/100 (82% recommend) https://opencritic.com/game/18413/tempest-rising
Fair enough - glad you’ve found it helpful (Y)
You’re making assumptions about how they work based on your intuition - luckily we don’t need to do much guesswork about how the sorts are actually implemented because we can just look at the code to check:
CREATE FUNCTION r.scaled_rank (score numeric, published timestamp with time zone, interactions_month numeric)
RETURNS double precision
LANGUAGE sql
IMMUTABLE PARALLEL SAFE
-- Add 2 to avoid divide by zero errors
-- Default for score = 1, active users = 1, and now, is (0.1728 / log(2 + 1)) = 0.3621
-- There may need to be a scale factor multiplied to interactions_month, to make
-- the log curve less pronounced. This can be tuned in the future.
RETURN (
r.hot_rank (score, published) / log(2 + interactions_month)
);
And since it relies on the hot_rank function:
CREATE FUNCTION r.hot_rank (score numeric, published timestamp with time zone)
RETURNS double precision
LANGUAGE sql
IMMUTABLE PARALLEL SAFE RETURN
-- after a week, it will default to 0.
CASE WHEN (
now() - published) > '0 days'
AND (
now() - published) < '7 days' THEN
-- Use greatest(2,score), so that the hot_rank will be positive and not ignored.
log (
greatest (2, score + 2)) / power (((EXTRACT(EPOCH FROM (now() - published)) / 3600) + 2), 1.8)
ELSE
-- if the post is from the future, set hot score to 0. otherwise you can game the post to
-- always be on top even with only 1 vote by setting it to the future
0.0
END;
So if there’s no further changes made elsewhere in the code (which may not be true!), it appears that hot
has no negative weighting for votes <2 because it uses the max value out of 2
and score + 2
in its calculation. If correct, those posts you’re pointing out are essentially being ranked as if their voting score was 2, which I hope helps to explain things.
edit: while looking for the function someone else beat me to it and it looks like possibly the hot_rank
function I posted may or may not be the current version but hopefully you get the idea regardless!
“Hot” is a mix of recency and votes. The posts in your example score low on votes but very high on recency (<1 hour ago) and extremely high on the size scaling because that community ( !hp_fanfiction@literature.cafe ) is tiny with only two subscribers.
You may consider Scaled to be a more appropriate sorting option for when you’re viewing the communities that you’ve subscribed to, rather than the firehose of /all
After many years of selectively evaluating and purchasing bundles as my main source of new games, I’ve come to wonder if it would’ve been better to just buy the individual games when I wanted to play them at whatever the available price was - the rate at which I get through games is far lower than the rate at which games are available in “good” bundles. In the end I’m not even sure if I’ve saved money (because of how many games have been bought but are as-of-yet unplayed) and it does take more time to evaluate whether something’s a good deal or not.
The upside is way more potential variety of games to pull from in my library, but if I only play at most like 1-2 dozen new games a year then I’m not sure that counts for much 🫠
Memory connected via the pci bus to the CPU, would be too slow for application use like that.
The experimental results presented in this paper demonstrate that Micron’s CZ122 CXL memory modules used in software level ratio based weighted interleave configuration significantly enhance memory bandwidth for HPC and AI workloads when used on systems with Intel’s 6th Generation Xeon processors.
Found via Wendell: YouTube
edit: typo
Using ram doesn’t add anything.
It would improve access latency vs flash though, despite less difference in raw bandwidth
Nice to see he took it in stride given how… aggressive the post was about him lol
It covers the breadth of problems pretty well, but I feel compelled to point out that there are a few times where things are misrepresented in this post e.g.:
The MSRP for a 5090 is $2k, but the MSRP for the 5090 Astral – a top-end card being used for overclocking world records – is $2.8k. I couldn’t quickly find the European MSRP but my money’s on it being more than 2.2k euro.
NVENC isn’t much of a moat right now, as both Intel and AMD’s encoders are roughly comparable in quality these days (including in Intel’s iGPUs!). There are cases where NVENC might do something specific better (like 4:2:2 support for prosumer/professional use cases) or have better software support in a specific program, but for common use cases like streaming/recording gameplay the alternatives should be roughly equivalent for most users.
Production apparently stopped on these for several months leading up to the 50-series launch; it seems unreasonable to harshly judge the pricing of a product that hasn’t had new stock for an extended period of time (of course, you can then judge either the decision to stop production or the still-elevated pricing of the 50 series).
I personally find this take crazy given that DLSS2+ / FSR4+, when quality-biased, average visual quality comparable to native for most users in most situations and that was with DLSS2 in 2023, not even DLSS3 let alone DLSS4 (which is markedly better on average). I don’t really care how a frame is generated if it looks good enough (and doesn’t come with other notable downsides like latency). This almost feels like complaining about screen space reflections being “fake” reflections. Like yeah, it’s fake, but if the average player experience is consistently better with it than without it then what does it matter?
Increasingly complex manufacturing nodes are becoming increasingly expensive as all fuck. If it’s more cost-efficient to use some of that die area for specialized cores that can do high-quality upscaling instead of natively rendering everything with all the die space then that’s fine by me. I don’t think blaming DLSS (and its equivalents like FSR and XeSS) as “snake oil” is the right takeaway. If the options are (1) spend $X on a card that outputs 60 FPS natively or (2) spend $X on a card that outputs upscaled 80 FPS at quality good enough that I can’t tell it’s not native, then sign me the fuck up for option #2. For people less fussy about static image quality and more invested in smoothness, they can be perfectly happy with 100 FPS but marginally worse image quality. Not everyone is as sweaty about static image quality as some of us in the enthusiast crowd are.
There’s some fair points here about RT (though I find exclusively using path tracing for RT performance testing a little disingenuous given the performance gap), but if RT performance is the main complaint then why is the sub-heading “DLSS is, and always was, snake oil”?
obligatory: disagreeing with some of the author’s points is not the same as saying “Nvidia is great”