Until that number reaches 25, my point still stands.
And that's why the mods were wrong to give "insightful" to the guy following you who went to great pains to quantify the day. As long as there's only 24 hours in a day, it doesn't matter what you are using them for if there is competition for all 24 of them. Trying to say there are only 4 hours available is not insightful, it's myopic. It also ignores multitasking, like making dinner while watching TV, or watching videos at work.
His point and mine still stand.
All of the replies to counter the argument miss the point because they're debating *exactly* how much one might spend on any of the tasks, and/or how much time is spent on multitasking.
The point being that there are only 24 hours in a day, most of which are engaged in "non monetized" tasks, and you don't get to increase the number of hours in a day
If I bothered to quantify how long everything takes down the the minute, someone will still be on here moaning that it's not accurate enough, or doesn't match what they do
To clarify: the two largest time sinks in a day are working and sleeping (2/3 of a day). You're not doing any multitasking while asleep, and work differs for each person. Not everyone is sat in an office watching Youtube when the boss isn't looking.
If you've got a counter example with greater detail than my "rounded to the nearest hour and no multitasking" example then please provide it.
It's bloody obvious, and always has been, that there are 24 hours in a day, 8 of which you typically spend asleep.
It's a ten dollar name for a ten cent idea, and now the "influencers": and other bullshit artists are latching onto it.
24 hours in a day, about 8 spent asleep, 8 at work, maybe an hour in traffic, maybe another 2 hours on the preparation and consumption of food, maybe another hour for washing yourself (being generous here, I know some of you won't even shower daily)
That's already 20 hours gone out of a day, leaving just 4 hours for whatever random errands and entertainment (not even taking into account time spent fucking your partner or parenting)
The publishers think they can make those who don't work grind their way through the game while those of us with jobs will pay to skip the grind. They didn't consider that we paying customers will stop paying, leaving them with millions spent to make a game, and millions more spent on servers that need to remain running for people who will grind instead of pay. How many times can they take that sort of financial hit before the shareholders leave?
I'm looking forward to a gaming market crash, hopefully some valuable franchises will get liberated from their greedy owners during liquidation proceedings and get picked up by whoever is left to actually make good games again
Progressive for using the female pronoun by default,
and idiot for using the female pronoun when talking about an industry that is majority male, on an article about what a male idiot said, as opposed to a female idiot.
Note: When using the pronouns, I'm not talking about gender here, I'm talking about sex.
I don't really care if he gender identifies as a slightly damp turd or whatever is popular these days.
That only makes it more difficult to construct an English sentence, and if he doesn't like that, then I guess It can go fuck Itself
"Navi" should be the new one, presumably on 7nm and GDDR6. Why not now?
Because the Navi team is working on PS5. When that's done, they'll work on the PC Navi hardware.
Also related: Everyone talking about Ray tracing are playing right into NVidia's hands; they would want any talking points regarding AMD to include "but where's the ray tracing?" even though it's a vendor specific thing that not everyone will use, even if they have the hardware, because using it drops your frame rate.
Meanwhile, the game developers are going to primarily target AMD based GPUs for most of their work, because Playstation and XBox contain AMD chips.
Adding RTX support to their games as well will incur more development and maintenance cost, to support a subset of the PC gaming market that's going RTX off anyway due to frame rates. Why bother doing that extra work for nothing?
that made the programming easier. Right now AAA games cost a fortune and they're kind of simplistic. Compare any modern game to Deus Ex. The stupid complexity of modern graphics are a big part of that. Having to hand code shaders for every little look and effect gets really pricey really fast....
These days, it's more likely that they're not spending as much time on game design / gameplay to rival Deus Ex, because they've spent that time on microtransaction systems instead. For example, why should Bungle go through all of that effort to make a good game when they can just put in bullet sponge enemies into Destiny 2 that force you to go grinding for better loot to kill them. Max out your character with the loot and they just need to raise the enemy health count so you can repeat the grind for new loot to kill stronger enemies.
Repeat forever, or until the community gets bored.
One could argue that a good game like God of War has the same bullet sponge enemy design (without the bullets) but there, even with the best equipment you're still going to die if you don't know what you're doing.
TL;DR: games are less interesting because the big devs are all making some form of open world grind with microtransactions
But when will they demonstrate a hot shit processor?
What are these stupid fucking names for anyway? It tells me nothing about what this processor is and I have to go look for that info elsewhere
So what added value will AMD bring to a platform that's used mainly for casual web browsing? I doubt there are any compelling online games that will run on the Chromebook's notoriously small storage space? Ultra HD videos are out of the picture unless Google comes out with a tabloid size Chromebook (a Chromepaper?).
I'm using Web Assembly to build my C++ app for the web. It can use OpenGL, so it would benefit from being able to use the GPU for drawing. For a Windows equivalent: if you write some dot net app using XAML for the UI, it will render using DirectX to accelerate the drawing of vector based assets. It doesn't even have to be running the latest AAA microtransaction shitfest, or a 4K video, or my example app above, to benefit from having a GPU. Even regular 2D rendering of your web page will be using the GPU for drawing, here's some old stats
Down in New Zealand there was an incumbent phone company called Telecom that provided phone and internet access. It was split into two parts: a company called Spark that serves as a phone company / ISP, and an infrastructure company called Chorus which provides most of the network infrastructure in the country.
For example, 1000mbps up / 500mbps down is about NZ$135
A key part for all of this to work is that the organisation providing the infrastructure is not allowed to also gain a competitive advantage by being a service provider upon that infrastructure, which is why the telecom company had to be split into two parts.
New Zealand is also a good example for this sort of thing because it is a fairly large area, with both high population density cities and sparsely populated towns of the sort that some telecoms companies like to claim are too expensive to provide decent service in.
If you've three alternative GPS signals and one is shut down, you still have two alternative systems.
As stated above, try and toggle between BeiDou and GPS for example and see how that works out for you. If that idea is going to work during a failure it ought to work right now. It should work on Pixel 2 for example, but your phone manufacturer may not have included support for the other systems
Your entire response is a blind reaction to someone telling you that competition isn't always a good thing, built upon the strawman that redundancy does not feature in what I'm talking about, because I didn't explicitly write it down for you.
This was an opportunity to think outside your box and you opted not to, so I'm going to break it down for you:
The point I was trying to make is: "Competition can be counter productive for certain use cases", and this is one of those use cases.
If your GPS goes down today, and for example you think everyone can just switch to a competing platform, go ahead and switch to BeiDou, Galileo or GLONASS right now and see how that goes. It may or may not work, depending on satellite coverage and/or the manufacturer of each device (most will likely be phones where they all support GPS but only a subset support a competing standard); therefore, your competing location services idea might not work for you as an individual, and certainly does not work for the entire group of people who depend upon GPS today. When shit happens, you'll find yourself using printed maps from a convenience store.
Now for an alternative example that might work if the competitors could trust each other enough to collaborate, and if these collaborators could operate in a non malicious manner (the non malicious and trust aspects are the root problem):
Instead of redundancy from many networks built around the premise that one could just switch to a totally alternative network, consider that at the hardware level a failure might look something like a satellite going down over one region, but there can be many replacements already in orbit ready to serve the exact same purpose for the same region, built by many different companies and/or governments, but built to work on the same communication protocols.
Once that's in place the next step might be for the collaborators to design a "Next Gen" service together that may or may not be backwards compatible with their existing system. Some of the competitors might even want to start supporting some other frequency as a form of "let the market decide which technology is better" by having their new satellites support both the global standard and their own side show project.
Consider how many satellite launches would be needed for such a system vs doing the same thing over and over for competing systems, along with all the other requirements for supporting it (such as ground stations for managing the satellites)
Your internet is already a collaborative system that works (in the sense that you send bits on a wire without thinking "My bits can only go on the Verizon wires" ) yet you are arguing for the equivalent of this for your location services. The same applies for your road network (The Fords and the Teslas share the same road) and for your airlines (Different planes and airlines share the same airports)
Your Fukushima example doesn't even make sense within the context of competing, or for preventing that specific failure in a reactor. Would multiple generators of the same bad design at Reactor A all failing at the same time, be solved by having Reactor B next door built by a competitor with a better design? No, Reactor A still fails and causes an environmental disaster. Your redundancy example only serves to provide backup sources of power if Reactor A goes down
Another fine example of how competition leads to duplication of effort: the world only needs one constellation of positioning satellites, but has more than that already, and with more to come (because WE can't trust THEM. Insert your own candidates for WE and THEM)
This also demonstrates how the idea of a nation state is not compatible with space faring civilisations: we need to have more that one of everything because we can't trust the other groups on this one planet.
How would that look when we occupy more than one planet? USA.Earth vs China.Earth vs Muskia.Mars vs Bezostan.Mars all fighting over the same space rock containing vast amounts of water ice?
Will all the nations of one planet band together to fight/compete with the nations of other planets? Everyone.Earth vs Everyone.Mars?
Don't forget CAD packages. At least AutoCAD makes a version for OSX.
They also make this AutoCAD version, which is a clue that long term, what desktop you're on doesn't really matter, and all the major browsers already support Web Assembly.
NEWS FLASH: Every place on the planet spends half the year in darkness. It's called "night".
NEWS FLASH: That "half the year" you're talking about is spread out evenly over the whole year, meaning that THOSE SAME PLACES SPEND HALF THE YEAR IN A THING CALLED "day"
I would love nothing more than to see DirectX DIAF but the truth is no developer is going to rewrite their existing code because there is no $$$ in it. Therefore, if I can get all my Steam games to work on a Linux kernel via a Microsoft derived Linux kernel/DirectX implementation I'm all for it.
Nobody implied developers should go rewrite their shit to remove DirectX
You could use the Linux version of Steam with Proton to make the Windows games from your Steam account work on Linux
And I just played the Windows version of Starcraft 2 on Linux using Lutris to configure the correct Wine version etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Indoctrination. It's easier when you start them young, just like religion.
It's just weird that a country would need to do this, as if they might all grow up resentful of their country for some reason.
...But in this thread that leads commenters to
Call users morons.
Because they are.
Deride Apple as (mere) profit seekers.
Because they are.
Declare the design of devices without headphone jacks as defective (which your joke plays upon).
Because they are.
Until that number reaches 25, my point still stands.
And that's why the mods were wrong to give "insightful" to the guy following you who went to great pains to quantify the day. As long as there's only 24 hours in a day, it doesn't matter what you are using them for if there is competition for all 24 of them. Trying to say there are only 4 hours available is not insightful, it's myopic. It also ignores multitasking, like making dinner while watching TV, or watching videos at work.
His point and mine still stand.
All of the replies to counter the argument miss the point because they're debating *exactly* how much one might spend on any of the tasks, and/or how much time is spent on multitasking.
The point being that there are only 24 hours in a day, most of which are engaged in "non monetized" tasks, and you don't get to increase the number of hours in a day
If I bothered to quantify how long everything takes down the the minute, someone will still be on here moaning that it's not accurate enough, or doesn't match what they do
To clarify: the two largest time sinks in a day are working and sleeping (2/3 of a day). You're not doing any multitasking while asleep, and work differs for each person. Not everyone is sat in an office watching Youtube when the boss isn't looking.
If you've got a counter example with greater detail than my "rounded to the nearest hour and no multitasking" example then please provide it.
You must be preparing very elaborate meals for it to take 2 hours a day. You could surely optimize that.
2 hours on the preparation and consumption of food
I don't know what slave driver you work for, but I go away during lunchtime for an hour. The other hour is for the other meals in a day.
It's bloody obvious, and always has been, that there are 24 hours in a day, 8 of which you typically spend asleep.
It's a ten dollar name for a ten cent idea, and now the "influencers": and other bullshit artists are latching onto it.
24 hours in a day, about 8 spent asleep, 8 at work, maybe an hour in traffic, maybe another 2 hours on the preparation and consumption of food, maybe another hour for washing yourself (being generous here, I know some of you won't even shower daily)
That's already 20 hours gone out of a day, leaving just 4 hours for whatever random errands and entertainment (not even taking into account time spent fucking your partner or parenting)
The publishers think they can make those who don't work grind their way through the game while those of us with jobs will pay to skip the grind. They didn't consider that we paying customers will stop paying, leaving them with millions spent to make a game, and millions more spent on servers that need to remain running for people who will grind instead of pay. How many times can they take that sort of financial hit before the shareholders leave?
I'm looking forward to a gaming market crash, hopefully some valuable franchises will get liberated from their greedy owners during liquidation proceedings and get picked up by whoever is left to actually make good games again
A Beowulf cluster of them...
And then a Beowulf clusterfuck when some AI becomes sentient on a future supercomputer
They can trade it in for tree fiddy
Or in this case, an idiot progressive.
Progressive for using the female pronoun by default,
and idiot for using the female pronoun when talking about an industry that is majority male, on an article about what a male idiot said, as opposed to a female idiot.
Note: When using the pronouns, I'm not talking about gender here, I'm talking about sex.
I don't really care if he gender identifies as a slightly damp turd or whatever is popular these days.
That only makes it more difficult to construct an English sentence, and if he doesn't like that, then I guess It can go fuck Itself
That Microsoft manager seems to be totally incompetent at observation and analysis.
Being incompetent seems to be a prerequisite for being a manager at MS.
Correct, I want this to become a sustainable product so I can leave the spyware behind. Whether that actually happens, I'm still uncertain.
Unplug your spy devices, permanently
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the notion of Trump being a person who runs, but here's a solution for your problems
Trump is running
Yeah, right
"Navi" should be the new one, presumably on 7nm and GDDR6. Why not now?
Because the Navi team is working on PS5. When that's done, they'll work on the PC Navi hardware.
Also related: Everyone talking about Ray tracing are playing right into NVidia's hands; they would want any talking points regarding AMD to include "but where's the ray tracing?" even though it's a vendor specific thing that not everyone will use, even if they have the hardware, because using it drops your frame rate.
Meanwhile, the game developers are going to primarily target AMD based GPUs for most of their work, because Playstation and XBox contain AMD chips.
Adding RTX support to their games as well will incur more development and maintenance cost, to support a subset of the PC gaming market that's going RTX off anyway due to frame rates. Why bother doing that extra work for nothing?
that made the programming easier. Right now AAA games cost a fortune and they're kind of simplistic. Compare any modern game to Deus Ex. The stupid complexity of modern graphics are a big part of that. Having to hand code shaders for every little look and effect gets really pricey really fast....
These days, it's more likely that they're not spending as much time on game design / gameplay to rival Deus Ex, because they've spent that time on microtransaction systems instead. For example, why should Bungle go through all of that effort to make a good game when they can just put in bullet sponge enemies into Destiny 2 that force you to go grinding for better loot to kill them. Max out your character with the loot and they just need to raise the enemy health count so you can repeat the grind for new loot to kill stronger enemies.
Repeat forever, or until the community gets bored.
One could argue that a good game like God of War has the same bullet sponge enemy design (without the bullets) but there, even with the best equipment you're still going to die if you don't know what you're doing.
TL;DR: games are less interesting because the big devs are all making some form of open world grind with microtransactions
But when will they demonstrate a hot shit processor? What are these stupid fucking names for anyway? It tells me nothing about what this processor is and I have to go look for that info elsewhere
So what added value will AMD bring to a platform that's used mainly for casual web browsing? I doubt there are any compelling online games that will run on the Chromebook's notoriously small storage space? Ultra HD videos are out of the picture unless Google comes out with a tabloid size Chromebook (a Chromepaper?).
I'm using Web Assembly to build my C++ app for the web. It can use OpenGL, so it would benefit from being able to use the GPU for drawing. For a Windows equivalent: if you write some dot net app using XAML for the UI, it will render using DirectX to accelerate the drawing of vector based assets. It doesn't even have to be running the latest AAA microtransaction shitfest, or a 4K video, or my example app above, to benefit from having a GPU. Even regular 2D rendering of your web page will be using the GPU for drawing, here's some old stats
Down in New Zealand there was an incumbent phone company called Telecom that provided phone and internet access. It was split into two parts: a company called Spark that serves as a phone company / ISP, and an infrastructure company called Chorus which provides most of the network infrastructure in the country.
All the other ISPs provide internet access on the Chorus network as well, and in the past few years Chorus has been building out their fibre network. The current state of things is that you could get fast uncapped fibre at a range of prices
For example, 1000mbps up / 500mbps down is about NZ$135
A key part for all of this to work is that the organisation providing the infrastructure is not allowed to also gain a competitive advantage by being a service provider upon that infrastructure, which is why the telecom company had to be split into two parts.
New Zealand is also a good example for this sort of thing because it is a fairly large area, with both high population density cities and sparsely populated towns of the sort that some telecoms companies like to claim are too expensive to provide decent service in.
Competing systems provide REDUNDANCY.
If you've three alternative GPS signals and one is shut down, you still have two alternative systems.
As stated above, try and toggle between BeiDou and GPS for example and see how that works out for you. If that idea is going to work during a failure it ought to work right now. It should work on Pixel 2 for example, but your phone manufacturer may not have included support for the other systems
Your entire response is a blind reaction to someone telling you that competition isn't always a good thing, built upon the strawman that redundancy does not feature in what I'm talking about, because I didn't explicitly write it down for you.
This was an opportunity to think outside your box and you opted not to, so I'm going to break it down for you:
The point I was trying to make is: "Competition can be counter productive for certain use cases", and this is one of those use cases.
If your GPS goes down today, and for example you think everyone can just switch to a competing platform, go ahead and switch to BeiDou, Galileo or GLONASS right now and see how that goes. It may or may not work, depending on satellite coverage and/or the manufacturer of each device (most will likely be phones where they all support GPS but only a subset support a competing standard); therefore, your competing location services idea might not work for you as an individual, and certainly does not work for the entire group of people who depend upon GPS today. When shit happens, you'll find yourself using printed maps from a convenience store.
Now for an alternative example that might work if the competitors could trust each other enough to collaborate, and if these collaborators could operate in a non malicious manner (the non malicious and trust aspects are the root problem):
Instead of redundancy from many networks built around the premise that one could just switch to a totally alternative network, consider that at the hardware level a failure might look something like a satellite going down over one region, but there can be many replacements already in orbit ready to serve the exact same purpose for the same region, built by many different companies and/or governments, but built to work on the same communication protocols.
Once that's in place the next step might be for the collaborators to design a "Next Gen" service together that may or may not be backwards compatible with their existing system. Some of the competitors might even want to start supporting some other frequency as a form of "let the market decide which technology is better" by having their new satellites support both the global standard and their own side show project.
Consider how many satellite launches would be needed for such a system vs doing the same thing over and over for competing systems, along with all the other requirements for supporting it (such as ground stations for managing the satellites)
Your internet is already a collaborative system that works (in the sense that you send bits on a wire without thinking "My bits can only go on the Verizon wires" ) yet you are arguing for the equivalent of this for your location services. The same applies for your road network (The Fords and the Teslas share the same road) and for your airlines (Different planes and airlines share the same airports)
Your Fukushima example doesn't even make sense within the context of competing, or for preventing that specific failure in a reactor. Would multiple generators of the same bad design at Reactor A all failing at the same time, be solved by having Reactor B next door built by a competitor with a better design? No, Reactor A still fails and causes an environmental disaster. Your redundancy example only serves to provide backup sources of power if Reactor A goes down
Another fine example of how competition leads to duplication of effort: the world only needs one constellation of positioning satellites, but has more than that already, and with more to come (because WE can't trust THEM. Insert your own candidates for WE and THEM)
This also demonstrates how the idea of a nation state is not compatible with space faring civilisations: we need to have more that one of everything because we can't trust the other groups on this one planet.
How would that look when we occupy more than one planet? USA.Earth vs China.Earth vs Muskia.Mars vs Bezostan.Mars all fighting over the same space rock containing vast amounts of water ice?
Will all the nations of one planet band together to fight/compete with the nations of other planets? Everyone.Earth vs Everyone.Mars?
Don't forget CAD packages. At least AutoCAD makes a version for OSX.
They also make this AutoCAD version, which is a clue that long term, what desktop you're on doesn't really matter, and all the major browsers already support Web Assembly.
NEWS FLASH: Every place on the planet spends half the year in darkness. It's called "night".
NEWS FLASH: That "half the year" you're talking about is spread out evenly over the whole year, meaning that THOSE SAME PLACES SPEND HALF THE YEAR IN A THING CALLED "day"
Halfwit
172 comments and still no "embrace, extend, extinguish" ?
We've already passed all that, this is about Edge getting extinguished
I would love nothing more than to see DirectX DIAF but the truth is no developer is going to rewrite their existing code because there is no $$$ in it. Therefore, if I can get all my Steam games to work on a Linux kernel via a Microsoft derived Linux kernel/DirectX implementation I'm all for it.
Nobody implied developers should go rewrite their shit to remove DirectX
You could use the Linux version of Steam with Proton to make the Windows games from your Steam account work on Linux
And I just played the Windows version of Starcraft 2 on Linux using Lutris to configure the correct Wine version etc.