Perhaps do a split second of research before jumping to conclusions? Your subtle shaming of the introverted is equally as retarding as the phobia you're projecting.
Web workers can only process data, and they can't directly contact the DOM.
It is a pain in the ass to do your vertex operations in a web worker's ArrayBuffer then hand them off to the main thread for renderer, but it does keep the browser responsive. Really though, rendering and UI should be called from separate threads. The JS event driven model is fucked for animation by its very design. Even the ~60hz refresh callback is shitty.
I can ALMOST get all the code to run in the GPU, and just have a few vectors for input states, however, anything networked is hosed.
Really, it's all happening exactly as predicted: Web browsers turn into a slightly slimmer version of Java (JS bytecode compiler), with a crappy version of "dynamic" PostScript (webGL/canvas). They've even started getting a raw audio interface, and local file/storage API. All we've ever needed is a cross platform media engine with sandboxed compiled bytecode language. Fuck all this DOM, HTML, CSS nonsense. Then, you can have HTML/CSS compile down into your PostScript-esque multi-media system... And that way folks could come up with different box models and different markup languages, etc. But, NooooOOO, we'll have to get there by some cluster fuck of a circuitous route which will be duct-taped together and buggy as hell.
I'd rather just scrap this whole WEB shit and just get Android on the desktop, stat. Even fuck Java/Javascript, and use an unencumbered compiled language like C, Lua, Go, hell even Dart (provided the last two are submitted to standards bodies, like the NaCl bytecode is). We're going to wind up with Web Apps actually being Web Apps anyway. Why go through this excruciating process. I swear all humans are masochists. It doesn't have to be Android, shit, strip the browser down to core components of graphics / audio / input / storage / VM and breakout the Lisp. Then Emacs will finally get google docs and be a descent text editor.
Remember MCI? Yes, tell us all about how much less competition we'll have when you're forced to compete on service instead of in disservice. Blow it out your interconnect. We've already been down this road. ISP definition of "competition" is how much more they can over charge for shit than their competitors without actually delivering service. Thus the throttling unless the endpoints pay even more for the shit they already paid for.
ISPs are quadruple dipping: The website pays for access, the end user pays for access, OK, but then they charge extra for non-NATted IPs (hello, IPv6 exists) and unblocked ports ("business" class), and now they want to sell the websites "faster" access to the customers when we both already paid for that speed of access to each other, AND they want to put caps on the number of bits downloaded -- Hint: That's not how it works. They have to have the hardware to handle peak load, it doesn't matter if I suck in tons of gigs during off-peak time, caps are not about congestion, they're just yet another way to monetize. Not to mention "bursting" plans where they allow the first n-bytes of a download to come in fast, then throttle the shit out of it. "Up To X MB/s, (minimum 0 BAUD, yes Zero)", WTF. Damn, that's more that quadruple, but I lost count of how many dippings that is.
Visit OpenCongress and locate your congress critters via zipcode. Politely call each of them and say, "I want the FCC to classify broadband Internet services providers as common carriers", and have them repeat it (a real person will answer, and they'll have written down your words). I also mention that it should be considered illegal anti-competitive business practices for municipalities to granted ISPs monopolies, and that breaking up said monopolies will allow new competition to flourish. You can leave a comment on Issue #14-28 via the FCC Comment Filing System. Contact the FCC by Email: openinternet@fcc.gov, or call the FCC comissioners (but remember they're not beholden to voters). The most effective thing to do is write a letter to the editor mentioning your congressman's name and the net neutrality issue and send it to your local news outlet, that really gets their goat -- they care about the newspaper for some odd reason, maybe because old folks read it? Here's a petition, but these don't do shit, really it's just the illusion of shit-doing.
Protip: Use a download accelerator to open multiple connections to the same file and trick the ISP into allowing you a faster speed. When the D/L starts getting throttled (hover to view the speed graph), pause it then unpause it and the speed goes back up (new connections = new "bursting" counter).
Yeah, well, I've seen how MS does shit. Every other update it's a rabid ram-job of shit users will HATE, then back off and apologize, but leave just the tip in. Next time they fuck you a bit harder. Same goes for IE versions, OS versions, Dashboard updates, etc. Just look how much they flopped around with this console since pre-launch. Saying that "everything that people have complained about has been removed / improved / fixed" is like a climate change denier who pick two favorable points in the graph then claim all is well while ignoring the big picture.
Perhaps read their gargantuan EULA which spells things out: None of that shit has any permanence at all, and they reserve the right to terminate every feature you have, including the ability to play games or even turn on the device. That's the #1 reason I game on a PC: Hardware vendors shouldn't sell OS's, OS vendors shouldn't sell software, Content producers shouldn't be in charge of selling competitor's content (MS Game Studios? The Comcast of gaming). Just look at windows 8 and 8.1. No, I'm not buying into the Facebook model of taking two steps into heinous shit then apologizing and taking one step back.
If that means my Gaming "PC" runs Linux and Steam, then that's what I'm doing... because it's actually possible to have different hardware, OS, and software vendors now... Bonus, I can install most Humble Indie Bundles, and lots of other indie devs are cross platform too. I put my money where my mouth is and hooked up a Linux media center / gaming PC to my home theater system. Consoles are just neutered AMD / ATI machines anyway (my 6 year old laptop has a gig of shared video memory, so what, no one knows how to utilize it).
I'm not impressed with MS being "a company that's willing to admit their mistakes", because they're fuckups that wouldn't happen anyway if they actually gave a fuck about their customers -- They don't, they just care about how much they can nickle and dime us... That's why W8 has an app store, so you have to pay MS a portion of every piece of software you buy -- what, you thought us app devs weren't going to pass that 30% MS tax onto you?
I write cross platform code, but fuck MS. They hate me, so I hate them.
That sounds amazing! You're saying that USB 3.1 means I won't be able to suck out the entire contents of your RAM like I can with a Firewire or Thunderbolt dongle?
Early Access is a scam, where they expect "the community" to do free testing for them.
Well, I agree that Early Access is free testing, sometimes it's also "startup money". That's why I set the price very low initially, and grant a free copy and full DLC to those that do the testing work, raise the price and taper off benefits towards completion as it gets closer to being the full game and there's less testing work to be done overall. Some folk don't think it's worth it, other folks do. Some folks just want to see the game development as it progresses and enjoy being early adopters; They like giving feedback and having some influence on the way development progresses. Lots of the latter type of folks learn from the experience and go into gamedev themselves. I do try to provide benefits to compensate for the "free" testing, but some studios really do abuse their fans, fortunately that can have disastrous results.
Day-1 DLC...
I dislike gratuitous Day-1 DLC; Where devs who would have made the original release even better get pulled off head the DLC team, or when stuff is removed from the game expressly to turn it into DLC. However, sometimes it's not all bad. Sometimes that DLC is made by folks who are sitting around twiddling their thumbs after the release goes gold and no more changes can be made, but the release isn't scheduled for weeks or months (and they're not involved in pre-production of the next product -- better to not lay off the folks who just made the game you like, eh?). Lots of games' Day 1 DLC gets made and tested during that "down" time between gold and release. No game is ever "done". There is always something someone wanted to put in, but couldn't. Sometimes things that got cut to make the deadline become the Day-1 DLC. On disk DLC is pretty shitty though. If they had the time to make it, test it, put it on the disk, then it should be part of the game, or just leave it online as Day-1 DLC. The Day-1 DLC also "helps" to kill used game sales (or at least devalue them), which is stupid because most folks trade in used games to buy new releases, and 1st week sales are key. Protip: Rather than boycott a product it's just as effective to wait a few weeks after release before purchasing; Seriously, statistically its indistinguishable from not buying the game at all.
"free" to play, micro transactions, always-online,
"Free to play" (pay to win) is bullshit, but folks rarely will buy a mobile or PC game for a few bucks anymore. I've tried to go with the old school shareware "demo" + full version method, but that's shooting myself in the foot. It's a conflict of interest: I have to show you how cool the game is going to be... but that leaves the player satisfied with just the demo (they go play another demo, and another demo, and forget to ever buy the game... OUYA!) -- Or, I have to make the demo really crappy so you're left "wanting more", so then players have a bad experience and they don't buy the game. What used to work is just videos, screen-shots, maybe an article or two, some word of mouth from closed beta-testers, and a full version of the game to buy with a falling price gradient over time to hit each impulse buying price point. That gets interests piqued and curiosity drives sales. However, since the competition is now $0.99 or "free" to play, no one will just buy a $9.99 game anymore. They'll D/L the "free" game and spend $20 to $100 in "upgrades" and shit though, ugh. Pisses me off, and I don't do that on principal (monetization is not a game mechanic), but I suffer for the stance immensely (probably won't ever be able to quit my day-job), and can fully understand why "Pay To Win" is happening: It works.
Here's the thing: It's stupid to sell copies in the first place! That's artificial scarcity. Copies are in infinite supply and econ101 says they should be $0. What's scarce is the ability to create new works. What I'd love to do is just ge
Someone pokes a hole in this thing I believed, and still do.
Now it gets weird.
I can fight against the establishment, for what I believe. Or I can admit defeat, and consider my theory back to hypothesis, or perhaps passing thought.
Now, if someone pokes a hole in my theory by pointing out a miscalculation, I'm not going to jump the gun and say, "You're Right!" first thing. I'm going to have to peer review that information, and depending on my (re)evaluation I'll come out and say what the updated calculation means for my hypothesis and release an updated or different conclusion -- I may even determine that the supposed erroneous calculation meant nothing to the results or determine that the critique was wrong and list the reasons why. Then this back and forth will continue until either my hypothesis is refuted or proven.
Both sides believe their ideas. Being on the bleeding edge of science means one side does not stand with science. Both may have solid evidence and good reason. Both sides have faith in their procedures.
No, there is no such thing as faith in science. No one strongly believes anything. We have strong evidence for things, and we conclude that based on evidence A, B, and C, it appears that X, Y, and Z are true; However anyone can come along and show that our conclusion is incorrect because of T, U or V and we'll embrace the correction. We don't have faith that our hypotheses and theories are correct, we have evidence. Faith is belief in the absence of evidence. Go back to theology101, you failed it son.
One side won, the other defeated. But it did not feel settled until someone admitted defeat. Someone has to go on record saying its dead, Jim.
Give them a chance to then, doofus. You sound like a raving loon. Time apparently exists, as evidenced by the delay in response. Right?
I actually have a mesh network replacement for the Internet in my garage. We came up with it right after Fidonet -- The BBS version of the Internet. If you deregulate the HAM radio spectrum I'll give it away for free.
You jest, but that's exactly how NASA's Disruption Tolerant Network (space Internet) works. We should just implement that planetside. Store and forward naturally moves data closer to endpoints and a DHT's infohash for data identity provides better security and automatic deduplication. The one to many problem is a solved problem since radio. No more fees, you buy a node and become part of the mesh.
Space Internet + shortwave packet radio + distributed hash table = replacement for Internet. Anyone who says it's impossible should piss on their cell phone.
Well, I use GCC and MinGW, so that would be GNU/Linux vs GNU/Windows... Apple's OS is illegal to install on my hardware so I don't know about GNU/OSX.
OpenGL ES is used on mobile platforms, and there are some tight CPU related issues (often what would be strictly GPU hardware is emulated CPU side on crappier devices). Smartphones and tablets don't really compare to the desktop. I'd be more interested in the difference in Nvidia vs ATI drivers consoles. For instance: the PS4's AMD/ATI Radeon vs the Xbone's AMD/ATI Radeon... hmm.
Virgin is trying to get around the issue by claiming it is using a definition of space used by NASA — in the 1960s."
Ah yes, the 1960's "virgin". The dawn of such wicked concepts as free love. Those were very bad times. Before you think me prude, I'm using the definitions from the 1970's and 1980's. Quite groovy of me, if I do say so myself -- I'm using the 2000's definition, of "groovy" AKA "ribbed for her pleasure" -- the latter being a biblically ambiguous reference to gender, fitting for the 2010's.
Allow me to introduce you to my latest invention: Television.
With it we can electromagnetically record and reproduce the image and sound of a professor, freeing them to do more research or dedicate even more time to interacting with students.
It will surely revolutionize the wor-- What? You've already got a tiny TV in your hand complete with Two Way Radio? My god man! You can even learn while dropping the duce!
Slashdot Mirror
I see you've never been to a dog park.
As a woman I think this must be great news! But as a foreigner - should I aim for Seattle or San Fransisco?
If you want the best selection of American jobs you'll need to go to India.
Cross Cultural Sex Differences put men as more introverted. The sex differences are larger in more egalitarian societies. Probably because men and women are freer to do what they like.
Perhaps do a split second of research before jumping to conclusions? Your subtle shaming of the introverted is equally as retarding as the phobia you're projecting.
If you want accuracy, you go to a journalist.
That's debatable, given that cybernetically this is a special case of the Ken Thompson Unix Compiler Hack.
Which watchers who watch what watchers warrant watching?
Wow, I can't wait to be dead at 40, right around family having age. Sign me up!
I'll just leave this free and open source CS101 course here: NAND to Tetris.
No need. The "Mythical Man Month" is merely a series of special cases of the law of diminishing returns and/or The Planning Fallacy.
It's much more efficient to say: "Too many chiefs and not enough braves is bad, and it will always take longer than expected."
They should be able to work the rest out from that.
Actually, you can't make such a generalized determination. Surely some of them will halt.
Web workers can only process data, and they can't directly contact the DOM.
It is a pain in the ass to do your vertex operations in a web worker's ArrayBuffer then hand them off to the main thread for renderer, but it does keep the browser responsive. Really though, rendering and UI should be called from separate threads. The JS event driven model is fucked for animation by its very design. Even the ~60hz refresh callback is shitty.
I can ALMOST get all the code to run in the GPU, and just have a few vectors for input states, however, anything networked is hosed.
Really, it's all happening exactly as predicted: Web browsers turn into a slightly slimmer version of Java (JS bytecode compiler), with a crappy version of "dynamic" PostScript (webGL/canvas). They've even started getting a raw audio interface, and local file/storage API. All we've ever needed is a cross platform media engine with sandboxed compiled bytecode language. Fuck all this DOM, HTML, CSS nonsense. Then, you can have HTML/CSS compile down into your PostScript-esque multi-media system... And that way folks could come up with different box models and different markup languages, etc. But, NooooOOO, we'll have to get there by some cluster fuck of a circuitous route which will be duct-taped together and buggy as hell.
I'd rather just scrap this whole WEB shit and just get Android on the desktop, stat. Even fuck Java/Javascript, and use an unencumbered compiled language like C, Lua, Go, hell even Dart (provided the last two are submitted to standards bodies, like the NaCl bytecode is). We're going to wind up with Web Apps actually being Web Apps anyway. Why go through this excruciating process. I swear all humans are masochists. It doesn't have to be Android, shit, strip the browser down to core components of graphics / audio / input / storage / VM and breakout the Lisp. Then Emacs will finally get google docs and be a descent text editor.
Cool stuff, but until one can write an optimized javascript virtual machine in it, I don't consider this project finished.
Done.
Remember MCI? Yes, tell us all about how much less competition we'll have when you're forced to compete on service instead of in disservice. Blow it out your interconnect. We've already been down this road. ISP definition of "competition" is how much more they can over charge for shit than their competitors without actually delivering service. Thus the throttling unless the endpoints pay even more for the shit they already paid for.
ISPs are quadruple dipping: The website pays for access, the end user pays for access, OK, but then they charge extra for non-NATted IPs (hello, IPv6 exists) and unblocked ports ("business" class), and now they want to sell the websites "faster" access to the customers when we both already paid for that speed of access to each other, AND they want to put caps on the number of bits downloaded -- Hint: That's not how it works. They have to have the hardware to handle peak load, it doesn't matter if I suck in tons of gigs during off-peak time, caps are not about congestion, they're just yet another way to monetize. Not to mention "bursting" plans where they allow the first n-bytes of a download to come in fast, then throttle the shit out of it. "Up To X MB/s, (minimum 0 BAUD, yes Zero)", WTF. Damn, that's more that quadruple, but I lost count of how many dippings that is.
Visit OpenCongress and locate your congress critters via zipcode. Politely call each of them and say, "I want the FCC to classify broadband Internet services providers as common carriers", and have them repeat it (a real person will answer, and they'll have written down your words). I also mention that it should be considered illegal anti-competitive business practices for municipalities to granted ISPs monopolies, and that breaking up said monopolies will allow new competition to flourish. You can leave a comment on Issue #14-28 via the FCC Comment Filing System. Contact the FCC by Email: openinternet@fcc.gov, or call the FCC comissioners (but remember they're not beholden to voters). The most effective thing to do is write a letter to the editor mentioning your congressman's name and the net neutrality issue and send it to your local news outlet, that really gets their goat -- they care about the newspaper for some odd reason, maybe because old folks read it? Here's a petition, but these don't do shit, really it's just the illusion of shit-doing.
P.S. Here's a vid explaining the net neutrality issue. Here's another more sarcastic and long winded vid on the subject. and here's a video from an actual honest ISP. (NSFW, for brutally honest language).
Protip: Use a download accelerator to open multiple connections to the same file and trick the ISP into allowing you a faster speed. When the D/L starts getting throttled (hover to view the speed graph), pause it then unpause it and the speed goes back up (new connections = new "bursting" counter).
Yeah, well, I've seen how MS does shit. Every other update it's a rabid ram-job of shit users will HATE, then back off and apologize, but leave just the tip in. Next time they fuck you a bit harder. Same goes for IE versions, OS versions, Dashboard updates, etc. Just look how much they flopped around with this console since pre-launch. Saying that "everything that people have complained about has been removed / improved / fixed" is like a climate change denier who pick two favorable points in the graph then claim all is well while ignoring the big picture.
Perhaps read their gargantuan EULA which spells things out: None of that shit has any permanence at all, and they reserve the right to terminate every feature you have, including the ability to play games or even turn on the device. That's the #1 reason I game on a PC: Hardware vendors shouldn't sell OS's, OS vendors shouldn't sell software, Content producers shouldn't be in charge of selling competitor's content (MS Game Studios? The Comcast of gaming). Just look at windows 8 and 8.1. No, I'm not buying into the Facebook model of taking two steps into heinous shit then apologizing and taking one step back.
If that means my Gaming "PC" runs Linux and Steam, then that's what I'm doing... because it's actually possible to have different hardware, OS, and software vendors now... Bonus, I can install most Humble Indie Bundles, and lots of other indie devs are cross platform too. I put my money where my mouth is and hooked up a Linux media center / gaming PC to my home theater system. Consoles are just neutered AMD / ATI machines anyway (my 6 year old laptop has a gig of shared video memory, so what, no one knows how to utilize it).
I'm not impressed with MS being "a company that's willing to admit their mistakes", because they're fuckups that wouldn't happen anyway if they actually gave a fuck about their customers -- They don't, they just care about how much they can nickle and dime us... That's why W8 has an app store, so you have to pay MS a portion of every piece of software you buy -- what, you thought us app devs weren't going to pass that 30% MS tax onto you?
I write cross platform code, but fuck MS. They hate me, so I hate them.
IE6 can't be removed, it is part of the OS!
Three Words: Escrow Accounts, moron.
I hear in the next version, USB 3.14, will come with a 360 orientation-less connector. It will be shaped like a standard headphone jack.
Is there a real use case for connecting a PCI-E card to a system via an external port?
Sucking out all your RAM, writing just about anywhere I want, Kernel level exploits galore, and completely defeating whole drive encryption.
That sounds amazing! You're saying that USB 3.1 means I won't be able to suck out the entire contents of your RAM like I can with a Firewire or Thunderbolt dongle?
Less really is More! Sign me up for USB 3.
Early Access is a scam, where they expect "the community" to do free testing for them.
Well, I agree that Early Access is free testing, sometimes it's also "startup money". That's why I set the price very low initially, and grant a free copy and full DLC to those that do the testing work, raise the price and taper off benefits towards completion as it gets closer to being the full game and there's less testing work to be done overall. Some folk don't think it's worth it, other folks do. Some folks just want to see the game development as it progresses and enjoy being early adopters; They like giving feedback and having some influence on the way development progresses. Lots of the latter type of folks learn from the experience and go into gamedev themselves. I do try to provide benefits to compensate for the "free" testing, but some studios really do abuse their fans, fortunately that can have disastrous results.
Day-1 DLC...
I dislike gratuitous Day-1 DLC; Where devs who would have made the original release even better get pulled off head the DLC team, or when stuff is removed from the game expressly to turn it into DLC. However, sometimes it's not all bad. Sometimes that DLC is made by folks who are sitting around twiddling their thumbs after the release goes gold and no more changes can be made, but the release isn't scheduled for weeks or months (and they're not involved in pre-production of the next product -- better to not lay off the folks who just made the game you like, eh?). Lots of games' Day 1 DLC gets made and tested during that "down" time between gold and release. No game is ever "done". There is always something someone wanted to put in, but couldn't. Sometimes things that got cut to make the deadline become the Day-1 DLC. On disk DLC is pretty shitty though. If they had the time to make it, test it, put it on the disk, then it should be part of the game, or just leave it online as Day-1 DLC. The Day-1 DLC also "helps" to kill used game sales (or at least devalue them), which is stupid because most folks trade in used games to buy new releases, and 1st week sales are key. Protip: Rather than boycott a product it's just as effective to wait a few weeks after release before purchasing; Seriously, statistically its indistinguishable from not buying the game at all.
"free" to play, micro transactions, always-online,
"Free to play" (pay to win) is bullshit, but folks rarely will buy a mobile or PC game for a few bucks anymore. I've tried to go with the old school shareware "demo" + full version method, but that's shooting myself in the foot. It's a conflict of interest: I have to show you how cool the game is going to be... but that leaves the player satisfied with just the demo (they go play another demo, and another demo, and forget to ever buy the game... OUYA!) -- Or, I have to make the demo really crappy so you're left "wanting more", so then players have a bad experience and they don't buy the game. What used to work is just videos, screen-shots, maybe an article or two, some word of mouth from closed beta-testers, and a full version of the game to buy with a falling price gradient over time to hit each impulse buying price point. That gets interests piqued and curiosity drives sales. However, since the competition is now $0.99 or "free" to play, no one will just buy a $9.99 game anymore. They'll D/L the "free" game and spend $20 to $100 in "upgrades" and shit though, ugh. Pisses me off, and I don't do that on principal (monetization is not a game mechanic), but I suffer for the stance immensely (probably won't ever be able to quit my day-job), and can fully understand why "Pay To Win" is happening: It works.
Here's the thing: It's stupid to sell copies in the first place! That's artificial scarcity. Copies are in infinite supply and econ101 says they should be $0. What's scarce is the ability to create new works. What I'd love to do is just ge
Someone pokes a hole in this thing I believed, and still do.
Now it gets weird.
I can fight against the establishment, for what I believe. Or I can admit defeat, and consider my theory back to hypothesis, or perhaps passing thought.
Now, if someone pokes a hole in my theory by pointing out a miscalculation, I'm not going to jump the gun and say, "You're Right!" first thing. I'm going to have to peer review that information, and depending on my (re)evaluation I'll come out and say what the updated calculation means for my hypothesis and release an updated or different conclusion -- I may even determine that the supposed erroneous calculation meant nothing to the results or determine that the critique was wrong and list the reasons why. Then this back and forth will continue until either my hypothesis is refuted or proven.
Both sides believe their ideas. Being on the bleeding edge of science means one side does not stand with science. Both may have solid evidence and good reason. Both sides have faith in their procedures.
No, there is no such thing as faith in science. No one strongly believes anything. We have strong evidence for things, and we conclude that based on evidence A, B, and C, it appears that X, Y, and Z are true; However anyone can come along and show that our conclusion is incorrect because of T, U or V and we'll embrace the correction. We don't have faith that our hypotheses and theories are correct, we have evidence. Faith is belief in the absence of evidence. Go back to theology101, you failed it son.
One side won, the other defeated. But it did not feel settled until someone admitted defeat. Someone has to go on record saying its dead, Jim.
Give them a chance to then, doofus. You sound like a raving loon. Time apparently exists, as evidenced by the delay in response. Right?
Instead divide the money up between the kids and let them decide. I guarantee you they'll be more interested in school then.
I actually have a mesh network replacement for the Internet in my garage. We came up with it right after Fidonet -- The BBS version of the Internet. If you deregulate the HAM radio spectrum I'll give it away for free.
You jest, but that's exactly how NASA's Disruption Tolerant Network (space Internet) works. We should just implement that planetside. Store and forward naturally moves data closer to endpoints and a DHT's infohash for data identity provides better security and automatic deduplication. The one to many problem is a solved problem since radio. No more fees, you buy a node and become part of the mesh.
Space Internet + shortwave packet radio + distributed hash table = replacement for Internet. Anyone who says it's impossible should piss on their cell phone.
Windows/Linux (or Linux/Window).
Well, I use GCC and MinGW, so that would be GNU/Linux vs GNU/Windows... Apple's OS is illegal to install on my hardware so I don't know about GNU/OSX.
OpenGL ES is used on mobile platforms, and there are some tight CPU related issues (often what would be strictly GPU hardware is emulated CPU side on crappier devices). Smartphones and tablets don't really compare to the desktop. I'd be more interested in the difference in Nvidia vs ATI drivers consoles. For instance: the PS4's AMD/ATI Radeon vs the Xbone's AMD/ATI Radeon... hmm.
Virgin is trying to get around the issue by claiming it is using a definition of space used by NASA — in the 1960s."
Ah yes, the 1960's "virgin". The dawn of such wicked concepts as free love. Those were very bad times. Before you think me prude, I'm using the definitions from the 1970's and 1980's. Quite groovy of me, if I do say so myself -- I'm using the 2000's definition, of "groovy" AKA "ribbed for her pleasure" -- the latter being a biblically ambiguous reference to gender, fitting for the 2010's.
Allow me to introduce you to my latest invention: Television.
With it we can electromagnetically record and reproduce the image and sound of a professor, freeing them to do more research or dedicate even more time to interacting with students.
It will surely revolutionize the wor-- What? You've already got a tiny TV in your hand complete with Two Way Radio? My god man! You can even learn while dropping the duce!