You present a graph for one spot, the GISP2 ice core at the summit of Greenland, that ends over 160 years ago in 1855 and think that means something globally today. I wonder how it would look if you added in the temperatures since 1855? Also the time scale is not even. The further back you get the more is compresses the graph horizontally which could be a bit misleading.
The GISP2 correlates with stalactite growth all over the World, such is in my own country in the southern hemisphere. Furthermore, given the fact that the observed warming since the Little Ice Age is agreed to be around 1.5 degrees Centigrade so far, consider the size of the modern record on this graph. Furthermore, the specific claim of AGW proponents, via Michael Mann, is that there has been no natural warming for the last thousand years and possibly two thousand. This is clearly not true and Mann's analysis has been thoroughly and utterly debunked - so much so that the IPCC have discarded their analysis. This proves that natural variability is large and relatively swift. Humans are not required to explain the observed variability since the end of the Little Ice Age (in fact, the warming we see is the End of the Little Ice Age).
Now you must explain why the specific prediction of AGW theory, that the LTT will warm faster than the surface, is not only not observed but the counter is observed.
I looks like 2016 will set a new record for the lowest maximum ice extent unless there is a big freeze up in the next few weeks.
FALSE. The quantity of interest is the minimum in the Arctic summer ice cover and this does not occur in the boreal regions until September. Here is the data which shows your statement is silly and should be beneath any Slashdotter: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/ice...
Your graph only shows Greenland temperatures, not global, so it's not useful for discussing global climate. It also cuts off most of the recent warming.
That's a fair enough comment. It turns out that if one looks at data from around the globe, such as stalactite growth rates one sees that the fluctuations in the Greenland ice core temperatures are matched. The data I presented is a nice set which illustrates what was observed globally (with some regional variability for sure). What else is clear is:
* NATURAL variability is quite significant
* We are climbing out of the Little Ice Age, and natural warming is to be expected
* Michael Mann's 'Hockey Stick' has been debunked for other reasons but this data reinforces the death of the Hockey Stick
* It has been much warmer in even the recent past and humanity not only survived, it THRIVED, it turns out that plants grow better when it is warm like Hawaii and not when it is cold like Greenland or Iceland
Yes, the most recent warming is cut off, but that warming is less than the natural warming seen in the past.
As for the Little Ice Age, a large factor in that cooling was the Spörer and Maunder Minimums in solar activity, which ended a couple hundred years ago. Solar output then climbed, and temperatures climbed with it - but then solar output peaked in the 1950s [gsu.edu], and has been slowly dropping since then. Yet temperatures kept on climbing.
It is great you accept the reality of the Little Ice Age - a lot of people invested in AGW theory do not. You do undertstand that solar luminosity varies a few Watts, right? not very significant compared to solar output. But solar magnetic activity varies hugely, and this is evidenced by sunspot activity. It turns out that there is a link between solar magnetic activity, the resulting heliospheric interaction with cosmic rays, and the effect of cosmic rays creating clouds in the atmosphere. Since water vapor is the dominant 'greenhouse gas' and determinant of global climate this means that solar magnetic activity is a significant driver. Not the only driver, but a significant driver. See the work of Svensmark and Nir Shaviv. Now what also has to be taken into account is not only the drivers, but the oceans which moderate the heat received from the Sun. The oceans have all sorts of multi-decadal oscillations and thermal reservoir effects which are not properly understood.
However, the specific prediction of the AGW theory (where human-emitted CO2 is the significant driver of climate) is that the Tropical Lower Troposphere (TLT) will warm faster than the surface. This is the 'fingerprint' of the AGW theory promoted by the UN's IPCC. The two satellite global surveys which look for this signature not only don't show TLT warming faster than the surface, which is enough to falsify the AGW hypothesis, but actually show the opposite is happening, the surface is warming faster than the TLT - which destroys the AGW hypothesis. That's ok, its just the Scientific Method in action and we'll come out with a new theory where solar magnetic activity is accounted for and a better attempt to model the dominant greenhouse gas, water vapor, and its very complex behavior eg. convection effects, etc).
Meanwhile, there is zero justification for the UN gaining more power over your life and imposing 'carbon pollution' tax on you (what happened to "no taxation without [directly elected] representation" ?). There is no need to follow the Agenda 21 described by the UN's folks here: http://green-agenda.com/
Which admits that they don't care about the science at all, it's just an excuse for global governance and involuntary (and thus, immoral) collectivist wealth-redistribution from all the citizens of the First World to the Third World.
Here is some data that many people don't know about. We *expect* to see natural warming as the planet climbs out of the Little Ice Age. This is corroborated by the fact that surface is warming faster than the lower tropical troposphere - which is *opposite* to the specific hypothesis of AGW. http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com...
When the observations contradict the hypothesis the Scientific Method is extremely clear we must accept the Null Hypothesis for now, and discard or amend the AGW hypothesis until it matches observations.
It turns out that the Transient and Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity values were computed too high by a factor of 4 to 7 because modelling of water vapor (the dominant 'Greenhouse gas') along with convection and other transport mechanisms is simply too complex for our computing power. So we guessed. Turns out the guess was not only wrong, it was very wrong.
Do we see warming? yes.
Is some of the warming due to humans? quite possibly.
Is there a natural component to the warming? yes.
Is the warming at a disastrous rate compared to warming in the last hundred centuries? no.
Is the current mean global temperature greater than recorded than 1855? yes
Is the current mean global temperature greater than determined by proxies in the last hundred centuries? no
Are polar bears going extinct? no, their population is increasing (yay!)
Is the Arctic summer ice cap disappearing? no, after a low in 2012 it is recovering
Is the Antarctic ice cap disappearing? no, some parts are melting but the overall ice volume is increasing
Can politicians affect the climate? no, thank goodness
Is the sea level rising? yes, but at the same rate for centuries
if you look at the actual data, not the sensationalist journalist reports, but the actual data, you will find that while we need to treat our planet better - there is no cause for panic, no cause to give the *unelected* United Nations more power to regulate every aspect of your life, and no reason for the UN to take money from you in the name of 'carbon pollution'.
Be Free people. Thanks to human ingenuity and innovation we can move to a brighter future instead of having to live with less and less (smaller houses, smaller cars, less water, less choice, less liberty, etc).
True. In graphics single-precision is used because it is faster, but it means that some extra work is required to ensure loss of precision doesn't occur. Consider a flight simulator that wants precision of on millimeter over the circumference of the Earth. Single Precision Floating Point doesn't cut it, you have to use relative locations for rendering, you can't just use the full global coordinates you have. However, if the GPU is fast enough for double precision operations then you can do everything in global coordinates (eg.unmodified WGS-84).
Graphics will probably always choose the extra speed of single precision over the ease of use of double. But the advent of faster and faster consumer grade cards like this might start to change that for some applications. The competition between NVidia and AMD (and to a lesser extend, Intel) really benefits consumers and developers. The performance of this card is great news.
Correct. But perhaps you could consider a better analysis is, "When the Collective becomes more important than the Individual, then Individuals will suffer". The political Left (Statist Collectivists) includes Far Left "National Socialists" and Extreme Left "Communist Socialists" that prioritize the will of the Collective (as determined by the Collective's leaders) over the desires of Individuals.
Collectivists believe that they are doing great good for the Collective, often at great expense (wealth confiscation, oppression or death) to Individuals. Hence, Collectivists see themselves as the "good guys" and this justifies their harsh actions towards Individuals. And they also reason that since they consider themselves the "good guys" that any Individualists who oppose the Collective must necessarily be "bad guys". Hence, we see self-styled "Social Justice Warriors" using violence and slander against Individuals who disagree with them. We see Feminists apologize for rapists as long as they are foreign. We see "Liberals" be against Free Speech. And we see people who claim to champion "diversity" work to get the State to suppress Diversity of Opinion (the only diversity that actually matters).
When the Collective becomes more important than the Individual, then Individuals will suffer. Too bad so many Slashdotters champion the cultural-Marxist Narrative of the Statist Collectivists over the diverse Free Speech opinions of Individualists and individuals.
What is wrong with you????? why call someone an "ass-hole" when you have a minor correction to what they've written? it sounds to me that it is you that is the "ass-hole" that needs to take a good look in the mirror at what a douche you are.
Apparently Apple has helped the US Government decrypt iPhones at least SEVENTY times in the past.
Citation: http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...
It is curious that Apple does not want to decrypt the phone of a jihadi (fanatical enemy of all Free People, based on Koran 9:29), but has no problem unlocking phones of US citizens. Seems like Apple prefers to defend foreign enemies and doesn't care about citizens (but then, the same can be said of mainstream media and politicians too).
-the effect of el nino on the GLOBAL AVERAGE is tiny. even with el nino it still would have been the hottest year.
http://www.slate.com/content/d... [slate.com]
Why don't you add the missing bit? "Hottest year since modern surface records began in the 19th Century". Which is completely expected given the recovery since the Little Ice Age. Not the hottest year within the last 500 years, nor 1000, nor 2000. Look again at the REALITY that warmunists must deny: http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com...
Please tell us wall why the Vikings used to farm in Greenland, but are now buried under permafrost? could it be that today is COLDER than it used to be, and we are only getting back to relatively normal temperatures - and all of this is ****NATURAL****.
ROFL you think "SkepticalScience" is anything except blinkered rants from eco-loons who deliberately ignore data (that is, REALITY) they don't like. They don't have neutral peer-review of their drivel.
-your continual pointing to the RSS satellites show only that you are ignorant of what that data is and what it is capable of showing, let alone its relation to the overall picture from all the data.
https://www.skepticalscience.c... [skepticalscience.com]
BOOM! here you show you know NOTHING about the CAGW/AGW Hypothesis that predicts that the lower tropic troposphere will show warming before anything else, including the sea and surface. The predictions of this hypothesis are NOT observed (and the UAH and RSS satellites agree with each other, and the tens of thousands of weather balloons, and the well-sited surface stations, etc). The Scientific Method REQUIRES you to accept the Null Hypothesis instead of AGW based on the OBSERVATIONS (that is, reality) because the specific prediction of AGW is not observed (in fact, the counter is observed). Did you not know this?
-the urban heat island effect isn't a factor. IE, remove all urban stations from the data and the trend still remains the same.
https://www.skepticalscience.c... [skepticalscience.com]
COMPLETELY FALSE. The apparent surface warming decreases significantly when UHI affected stations and the increasing proportion of ESTIMATED data is taken away. Here's a discussion of the developing story, that has been improved by wamists critiquing it: http://wattsupwiththat.com/201...
-the corrections actually reduce the amount of warming shown in the data, by ~20%.
Here you show a complete inability to reason statistically. Who cares if the absolute level is reduced? the 'corrections' introduce a systematic effect that cools the past and warms the present - artificially introducing a trend in the first time derivative. But you are not smart enough to see this and instead trot out a deception you were unable to see through.
-there are no observations which "falsify AGW all the time". there are only cranks like yourself who misinterpret the data (deliberately) in order to spread misinformation.
It is you spreading disinformation. It is you who merely parrots talking points because you don't understand the specific predictions of AGW and how the observational data have falsified this hypothesis. You refuse to follow the Scientific Method when it conflicts with your cultural Marxist "Progressive" Narrative. Even your byline "America, shining city on a hill, was built upon progressive ideals. Conservatism has only ever diminished its luster." shows how colossally ignorant you are of economics and American history. But hey, you are prepared to deny th
Where is your data? of, and if you want citations I suggest you learn to read. It is right in front of your face - but apparently this is too hard for you. Let's see if you can work it out, because the fact you can't shows how hilarious your ignorant posture is.
So, that's the (adjusted, and increasingly, ***estimated***) surface data subject to the Urban Heat Island effect and a bunch of other things.
Now, AGW theory states that the lower tropical troposphere will have a temperature rise before the surface does. Could you please tell us all what the UAH and RSS satellites are showing?
Furthermore, this year is an El Nino year. It is fully expected that the global temperature will increase a a result of NATURAL effects. And the last century and a half has been a temperature rise after the end of the Little Ice Age, but we're still colder today than the Minoan, Roman and Medieval Warm Periods.
Given that the IPCC's computed (as in guessed) ECS and TCS and too high by a factor of 4 compared to the observed value (because they guessed at the effect of water vapor and got the sign and magnitude wrong) then anyone who believes human-emitted CO2 is the dominant driver of Climate Change should be given a 'Flat Earth' award for their refusal to follow the Scientific Method and look at the observations which falsify the AGW hypothesis at this time.
Or do you think those 115,000 people helped in some way? Or why else where they employed?
These people were compensated for their labor. But what makes Steve Jobs special is that he had the great idea. Without him the iPhone would not exist and EVERYONE would be worse off. Furthermore, the ecosystem that benefitted from Steve Jobs' brilliance is vastly greater than the 115k Apple employees.
The World needs more entrepreneurs, not less. That is why you life is so very much better today than the life of the greatest royalty a century ago. Governments did NOT do this, visionaries and hard working people did. They are the ones who CREATE wealth - and they keep a fraction of the wealth they generate and then the rest is distributed to the lesser people who helped, but did not have the creative idea themselves.
Do you not understand that entrepreneurs and risk takers and business creators create all the wealth you see around you (everything you choose to eat or wear or play with) ?
Do you think all the government research that went into the technology in an iPhone helped? Do you think a government funded education helped to create all those engineers and programmers that made it so successful? Do you think that a society which provided a solid base for it's citizens to build on helped create customers for all those iPads?
Ok, so you are a worshipper of the Government, Got that. If Government is so great then why don't the North Koreans and Chinese and Soviets outstrip the entrepreneurs of the West in creativity and producing choice for consumers? because private property matters - entrepreneurs create based on their self-interest which does far, far more to help society than the self-interest of bureaucrats does. Big Govenrment doesn't create wealth nor liberty nor innovation - individual entrepreneurs do that and employ people who may be skilled but lack the vision and drive to create new markets and products that benefit EVERYONE.
Furthermore, entrepreneurs obtain their money through voluntary exchange which is perceived as win-win by both sides. Governments don't - their transactions are involuntary (and thus. immoral), are win-lose, and only occur through coercion (the threat of Government initiating force to take what it demands). These systems are not equivalent at all.
With regard to Government research, just because the robber occasionally does some nice things for his neighborhood does not make the robber or the robbery any less immoral. You can have all the socialism/communism/croynism/Academic-Bureaucratic Complex you want, just stop demanding everyone else pay for it.
Why do you think that Apple is a company who's workers created $1.7M of profit - that's surplus, not even including the net value - each, but all that money ended up in a pile in the middle? Do you think that's helpful, or productive?
Do you not understand any economics at all? profit is required so that investment can be made for further products and wealth generation. This is analogous to thermodynamics where energy differentials are required for any work to be possible. The Marxist idea of wealth redistribution is not only immoral (since the initiation of force is required against Individual by the Collective) but also removes concentrations of capital that are required to produce society-benefiting products. Of course, in a Collectivist system the wealth is not actually redistributed evenly at all, the peasants are given minimum rations and the State hordes the capital (which the most politically ruthless can use for their own benefit).
For perspective, the most expensive civil research project on Earth, the ITER reactor, has cost around $15B. That's trying to solve the energy crisis. Apple sits on that $200B, presumably so they can do a stock repurchase to keep their price up if people
While we'd all like to be paid to do whatever we felt like, how is this in any way sustainable? the money that is put into this project is very unlikely to be recovered, and certainly not if replicated over the general population.
What do you think about the significance of what this kind of small-population study would show?
Nothing, because this has been tried in dozens of countries in the 20th Century alone. It didn't work in any of them because it CANNOT work. This doesn't understand that economies are not a zero sum game - it doesn't understand a Fundamental Principle of economics, "WEALTH IS CREATED". Wealth is created through innovation and perspiration and the promise of a reward for your labor. If there is no reward for your labor then there is no incentive to create wealth.
Just think of how Steve Jobs created massive wealth for himself and others, and gave jobs to hundreds of thousands across the globe, all though the power of his vision and hard work in ***creating wealth***.
The Collectivist wealth redistribution folks are worried about the fairness of making sure everyone gets an equal cut of the pie. The Free Market solution is, "bake more pies"!
With this scheme, there is no incentive for the *general population* to get out of bed to produce. It is unsustainable, and since it is unsustainable the people who control such a system (Collectivist politicians and apparatchiks) always end up resorting to increasing oppression to try and preserve the unsustainable system a little longer. You can even see this happening in Europe where the Ponzi scheme welfare states are unsustainable with non-pyramid demographics. So the 'elites' are replacing the native populations with fast-breading people from the Third World to try keep the Ponzi scheme going - and use the media to demonize all dissent to this population replacement. Unfortunately, a significant proportion of the imported people agree with this Y Combinator scheme and want to be paid without having to produce anything in return. The system is unsustainable and only increasing repression (which is starting to happen if you watch the police forces in Europe work for the elites against legitimate peaceful protests) can delay the inevitable collapse of this system.
I used to think the Y Combinator folks were pretty smart. My opinion of them has dropped massively for doing an experiment that has been tried on the huge scale (eg. in China, North Korea, all the countries of the Federation of Soviet Socialist Republics, East Germany, Venezuela today, etc) in the past and ALWAYS fails.
This is a nice idea (I'd love to get paid to do whatever coding I wanted) but it economically unsustainable - and when applied to countries ALWAYS ends up in oppression of those who point out the fact such a system is ultimately unsustainable (even in Sweden they seem to ruthlessly crush dissenting voices to their redistributionist system through severe public vilification).
Thanks for the update. The curious thing is that as the number of personal firearms has gone up, the number of violent crimes (including gun crimes) has dropped significantly. My personal theory on this is that video games (and porn) have decreased the boredom of young males that would otherwise engage in violent crime for kicks (or rape). Perhaps I'm wrong in this, but it is my current working hypothesis. It also seems that guns (as in, the right of citizens to armed self-defense) does save lives.
Summary: in the US, where there are around 300 million personal firearms.
There are around 30,000 firearms deaths per year.
20,000 firearms deaths are self-inflicted (suicide) and would occur whether firearms were available for self-defense or not.
of other the 10,000 firearms deaths, many are gang violence.
However, set against the 10,000 non-suicide gun deaths is around 100,000 violence crimes prevented by citizens. In many cases the firearm is not discharged, the mere presentation is enough to deter the crime.
In cases such as a string 26-year old male attacker who waited for the family to go out the only defense a 12-year old girl had against rape and possibly murder at the hands of the much-stronger attacker was the pink rifle her father had given her. She was able to stop the attacker in her home and drive him off. And there are many, many similar cases like this.
Whether or not you believe citizens have a right to self-defense - or if you think it is somehow morally superior' to be defenseless and slaughtered like sheep either by criminals that don't obey gun control laws; or by any of the mass-murdering Governments (National Socialism, Soviet Socialism, Chinese Socialism, North Korean Socialism, Cuban Socialism, Vietnamese Socialism, East German Socialism, Ba'athist Socialism, and various Islamist regimes) that murdered over 200 million of their *own* citizens in peacetime - then the statistics are clear: GUNS SAVE LIVES.
The best defense against a bad guy/jihadi with a gun really is good guys with guns. This is proven over and over and over again.
Now if you don't like firearms then please don't obtain and learn how to use one - but it is illogical and immoral to say that competent individuals cannot have access to firearms for self-defense. Even Europeans are slowly starting to grok this (shotguns are pretty much sold out in Austria as their country buckles under invasion of a large number of unruly youths who don't share European cultural norms about not stealing, not raping and not trashing the joint). I wish this were not the reality of today's world, but unfortunately it is.
Yes yes more "fanboy" namecalling garbage to detract from your inability to express yourself objectively. Post your criticism in the Vulkan forums, then you will see how wrong you are. It will expose both your lack of knowledge and understanding.
Ah, after all your lies and assertions that I was supposedly unable and unwilling to learn you now want to "play the victim" card. Laughable. You are an amateur who doesn't know anything about design nor about the economics of producing a 3D application and the decision making in producing and maintaining commercial applications.
We can do this in tiny steps, one at a time since large things are clearly overwhelming and enraging you:
Here your "victim" play goes into passive-aggressive idiocy. All because you cannot refute the REAL WORLD benchmarks I gave, nor discuss the economics, nor talk about what Vulkan implementors have had to say, nor on Apple's decision to abandon Vulkan, nor AMD's decision to bot support recent hardware (should be easy if Vulkan drivers are as simple as the hype claims).
OpenGL's model means application-specific optimization code must exist in the driver rather than the application, this is wrong. In Vulkan this application code is in the application instead of the driver.
You sound exactly like a religious zealot - which, for all intents and purposes, you are. Application-level optimations are still done in OpenGL just as in Vulkan. However, in OpenGL the driver writers also have the option of assisting applications if they choose to. They don't have to, but they can (and, as it turns out, they do - because it results in faster high-end applications; resulting in not only better applications, but better drivers). In the Vulkan model the drivers are dumb. If an application developer doesn't use an optimization the Vulkan driver is too dumb to assist. The experts in the hardware (driver writers) cannot help application developers use their hardware better without any extra effort because the Vulkan model doesn't allow for this - the application developers must thus write an optimized code-path for each piece of hardware - this destroys the concept of "abstraction" where each driver can optimize for its own hardware architecture and the application doesn't have to care too much. As I said, this is bad design and a step backwards - because guys good at hardware are often crap at application design and architecture. It is a different set of skills. But as an amateur, you don't know this.
The only criticism in that article is that Vulkan comes with some added complexity, which is precisely why I pointed out that for people like you there is the higher level API built on top of Vulkan. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
You know all that complexity in the driver Vulkans want to avoid? it now gets push to the application. EVERY application has to replicate the same optimizations - and unless you are specializing in the hardware (as driver writers do) then there are a lot of optimizations that won't be done by application developers. You fail to grok this. With regard to your suggestion of using a "higher level library" then you you are back to using something less efficient than Vulkan - which means you might as well use OpenGL (which will be faster for GPU-bound applications because the driver has so many optimizations for the specific hardware). Why is this difficult for you to understand?
And also the massive benefits that you do get with Vulkan, so again, for people like you that can't manage the complexity and for which the benefits of Vulkan aren't an advantage there are less efficient higher level APIs for you to use.
"Massive benefits" are theoretical, and for limited cases on low-end hardware that is CPU-limited. I've already given benchmarks of an API faster than Vulkan (that is, Metal - but the design tradeoffs are comparable to Vulkan) that outperforms OpenGL on low-end hardware but is completely blown-away on even mid-range discrete GPUs like the Nvidia 680 GTX that was tested. You are arguing on the basis of hype - and the REALITY of the architecture shows the implementation does not quite live up to the hype - all at the cost of increasing time-to-market, development cost, complexity and reliability.
Not for everybody, hence the reason OpenGL (and DirectX which is wrong.
I didn't say no-one could use Vulkan. I didn't say everyone must use OpenGL. I didn't say that OpenGL beats Vulkan in all cases. You are LYING when you put words into my mouth (again). It is a bad habit you really should get out of. What I did say is that Vulkan has limitations that make it worthwhile on low-end CPU-bound hardware, but not worth the effort on high-end hardware compared to OpenGL. Your fanboism drops your reading comprehension to that of a retard.
Which is why you would use a higher level API for your use-case, problem solved. Why are you still whining about it?
Which means... drumroll... that going to Vulkan is not worth the effort for most people, except those working on low-end hardware. Why are you unable to grok this? Vulkan is not going to be successful as you think and will go the way of Mantle.
What I'm pointing out is that you citicised Vulkan for having memory barriers and now that I have educated you on the fact that OpenGL also has memory barriers you have changed your mind. You claim to be experienced yet you didn't even know this existed in OpenGL before and so criticized its existence in Vulkan. I don't expect anybody to know everything so stop pretending, you just keep looking stupid.
You are LYING again. I said that in OpenGL you don't have to deal with memory barriers, and they are not universally supported anyway. With Vulkan you HAVE to do driver-level management (including memory barriers, but all sorts of different paths based on the hardware capabilities) - there is no avoiding it. The average application developer is not going to do this. You can refuse to listen now, but reality will bite you in the azz later. but like I said, I don't actually care - it is clear that Vulkan is going the way of Mantle - particularly with partial support on Linux and no support from Apple (who walked away from Vulkan - they can see what you cannot).
So use OpenGL (or a high level equivalent) in that case. Parallel
Link me to the powerpoint presentations that have those points then. I doubt they exist, they are your points and they are derived from your own misinterpretation of the information.
Here's a short summary from a Vulkan IMPLEMENTOR on where OpenGL is better than Vulkan, and vice-versa: https://developer.nvidia.com/e...
Then if you read Graham Seller's own Powerpoint AND have experience in developing LARGE applications you can see massive potential pitfalls in using Vulkan that you won't get with OpenGL: http://nextgenapis.realtimeren...
Of course, as an amateur you are not used to looking for indications of the limitations of an API rather than the marketing points - as doing this only comes with experience (and as I was a fanboi once but learned to look through the marketing spiel with a critical eye - a habit which it appears you have not yet developed).
If that is how you feel then use one of the various alternative solutions I already outlined for you.
Nope, OpenGL is more than sufficient - especially with the "Approaching Zero Driver Overhead" approaches and extensions. You don't seem to grok that the increased productivity of OpenGL for desktop workloads more than makes up for the few cases where Vulkan is better. For example, Vulkan produces zero benefit when rendering tessellated terrain on the GPU in my flight simulator, because the GPU is doing all the work and the use of the Vulkan command-buffer model gains nothing, but increases development cost. Hence, OpenGL is still a better option when your problem is rendering hundreds of millions of polygons per second on a discrete workstationGPU, and not submitting tens of thousands of sprites to a phone GPU with the phone's limited CPU.
But it isn't poorly designed, your specific criticism is that it has memory barriers - just like GLSL does - so when you say you have all this experience yet you don't understand the basics of asynchronous programming and don't even know GLSL very well certainly calls your claims into question.
Yes, OpenGL has that feature (so why use Vulkan?) but you don't HAVE to use that feature. This is the two-level API design I mentioned a few posts back, and why OpenGL gives you some control if you need it, plus higher-level options too - but you are not forced to do everything as if you were programming for a console with a shelf-life of a few years. Plus, on my MacPro with dual D700s the glMemoryBarrier call s not yet supported (grrrrrr crappy Apple spending effort on Metal instead).
No, I said post your objective criticism, the problem is you are so misinformed that you don't have one. You've gone to great effort to make baseless claims about things you clearly don't understand but then tell me you don't have time to post such things on the Khronos forum? No sorry that's just rubbish. If you really thought it was a waste of time and not that you're just going to look like an idiot then you wouldn't be spending all this time trying to convince me. Quite frankly when your only criticism of the design of the API is because it has memory barriers (and you think that is telling you the internal state of the GPU, which it isn't) then you have proven all this credential-dropping is untrue since you don't even have any experience with the basics of asynchronous programming and you think application code belongs in the driver. Every time you get backed into a corner you throw out the obviously false claim that you are expderienced, which you clearly are not.
Wrong. EVERYBODY says that Vulkan is more work. Everyone says that Vulkan drivers don't check for errors, which means it is easier to not only crash your application, but crash the whole damn machine - you wait until Vulkan is used in the Real World (tm). Everyo
Well no, you misunderstand. In fact quite clearly most of your assertions are wrong and you have obviously misinterpretted what I said, you also seem to disagree with people like Graham Sellers, Tim Foley and Cass Everitt, yet are not able to explain why.
I got thsoe points from Vulkan powerpoint presentations. It appears you are not able to understand my explanation as to the design and economics reasons why Vulkan is useless except on low-end hardware (eg. mobile), where it does make a difference - although so does the "zero driver overhead OpenGL" techniques. The Vulkan people themselves say that Vulkan will not make any difference on GPU-constrained applications, and they themselves say that Vulkan is inappropriate unless you are CPU-constrained, plus taking more effort to develop for the same end-user functionality. Your dispute is with them, not with me - I'm merely pointing out that Vulkan is a worse choice than OpenGL for desktop and workstation application developers.
The fact that you find memory barriers, a basic concept of asynchronous programming - that of course already exists in GLSL [opengl.org] - to be too complex demonstrates that you aren't very experienced despite your attempts at credential-dropping. However since you aren't able to realize this on your own and you won't take my word for it I invite you to enact change if indeed your criticisms are valid:
I've been developing a lot of stuff in the last two decades. I've used a LOT of complex APIs, but my experience has shown me that a poorly designed API doesn't last long - think of AMD's Mantle, and Vulkan is Mantle 2.0 - if you cannot convince developers like me to use it in our products then it is dead. We eschew complexity not because we can't handle it (we can, but it doesn't excite veterans who have done it all before in the way it excites you amateurs) but because it makes poor economic an strategic sense - especially when the added complexity makes no significant performance difference on the desktop where our products are.
To use a car analogy: we have a 2013 racing car with a 6L engine, with a complex tiptronic/manumatic transmission. You are saying that if you switch to a 2015 car with a 4L engine with manual transmission then you'll get better control over cornering - which is entirely true - but you miss the fact that the point is to get from start to end in minimum time (time-to-market) and that the performance of manumatic over the long straights makes up for the few corners that a manual does a better job at. Hence you argue with the concerns of an amateur, instead of those of a professional (time-to-market, cost, ease for larger teams to work together, avoiding unnecessary complexity where possible, etc).
Please post your objective criticism(s) here [khronos.org] on the Vulkan forums. You genuinely believe your criticisms to be comprehensive and valid so please post them in the appropriate place.
That's not a bad idea. The only problem is that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. I see Vulkan as much of a design mistake as Mantle was. I could spend time arguing how to make it better, but what is the point trying to convince people who are so bad at API design they are completely oblivious as to what their intended audience actually need? I'd rather spend more time getting my product finished than debating with people who have closed minds and haven't been developing long enough to understand what really matters to application developers on higher-end hardware.
Seriously, you have completely failed to make the case as to why existing developments should be switched to Vulkan when Vulkan is going to cost more to use in development and make no difference to performance in GPU-bound situations. You could argue that it is not your job to convince others to use Vulkan, but that is clearly your intention as a fan of it. Fortunately even Khronos know not to bet the farm on making the s
But hey... you said racist. I just called you a coward.
Nope, you said "brown skin". That's calling me a racist. When I countered and called out your bullshit you then switch to "coward". Where is your evidence that I'm a coward? where?
Perhaps I don't like Swedish, British and German children getting raped just so a narcissistic douchebag like you can virtue signal how 'tolerant' you are towards such rapes.
But it's nice to see that when faced with your own ignorance and inability to refute any of the arguments (which IS kinda hard to do when facing truth) - you run and hide behind a fallacy. [wikipedia.org] Or two... Or more...
While even the punctuation fails you. Or are you secretly a 12 year old? Or maybe a dog?
It is not a fallacy when you have STILL not made a coherent argument. You're just a sanctimonious douchebag who has no empathy for the tens of thousands of raped children which all could have been avoided - except that delusional people like you oppose stopping the madness - the problem is not the invaders, it is people like YOU who demand that more people with the culture of rape and murder and female abuse be brought in. The problem is not me, or them, it is YOU. You don't understand now, but very soon the blood of innocent Europeans will be on YOUR hands. Douchebag.
What a truly pathetic creature you must be.
What? for wanting the fruits of Finnish labor to go to Finns? to think that German women should be free to walk the streets wearing what they like? that cartoonists should be free to draw Mohammed without being killed and having you cheerlead their deaths? it is YOU who is utterly repulsive and against Enlightenment Civilization.
Fortunately, the Internet never forgets. All those that supported the barbarian invasion of the West by Islamic Supremacists will not escape justice. And you will not be able to say you were not warned .
A correctly regulated market which allows for a level playing field.
I said "ideal". Your reading comprehension sucks.
Yes, that's correct. A businessman who has owned and operated his own business for going on 30 years wants the right amount of regulation.
What is the "right amount", Goldilocks? I argue that you already have too much, I did not say "none". Again your poor reading comprehension lets you down.
But what's funny about that is that you actually think you should be allowed to have an opinion this in this discussion as if you are some kind of equal or peer to me.
Based on your statements about your marginal business success, I'm indeed not your peer, but your superior.
But my argument does not rest on my success, your approach does and is an Appeal to Authority based on nothing more than your angry and emotive opinion.
The United States is now running equal to China as the world's single largest economy. We do this with less than 1/3rd of China's population.
In other words, the US is not hampered by regulation and if it is, maybe the rest of the world should immediately hamper themselves so they can catch up.
Wow, you really are crap at business. You don't understand "Opportunity Cost" at all, and how far ahead of China the US could have been - and still could be.
I fully support and demand that any business selling food not only be licensed but inspected so as to insure that any food sold is safe to eat.
I know that where you live food safety isn't a problem and that the when you get sick you probably shit pleasant smelling rainbows -
but here in regulation land, we're not as lucky as you so obviously are.
Yeah, a lot of people get killed by lemonade poisoning, right? "here in regulation land", yeah strangling your business -
which is why China will soon surpass you and keep going. And of course you ***LOVE*** more regulations, since you are
probably sucking the teat of Government in Maryland just like a good cronyist.
I thought you said you had a better idea.
Name an index.
So, you are about to be displaced out of your great country? Damn, I wonder how great life will be for you after that happens?
"Displaced"? no. We have plenty of land. So we simply take lots of money from rich Americans who have ruined their own country.
Except that your country is being bought out from underneath you? If only there was some way to prevent that from happening...
Undoubtedly less regulations will fix that challenge too.
No, unlike you we control our borders. No one gets in unless they bring something that benefits the existing citizens.
I know this concept is alien to you Americans - which is why all of America will end up like
California and London (where natives are in the minority and rapidly decreasing). You received a great
country from your parents, and you will pass on a declining balkanized hellhole to your children. Great job, Einstein.
As mentioned previously, the United States is one of the two largest economies on the face of the earth.
We produce almost exactly as much as the Chinese do with roughly 1/3rd of the manpower. By definition,
that makes us three times more productive than the only competing manufacturing entity in the world - but you are
screaming how compliance is costing us a lot of money?
Wow, a "businessman" who thinks compliance doesn't cost money. A businessman who doesn't understand
Opportunity Cost. No wonder you are not very successful. The US could be vastly wealthier than it is.
Instead, muppets like you created Detroit and Baltimore through decades of Democrat/Collectivist policy,
overspending and overregulation. Another great job you idiots did - but now you fools want to take it
countrywide.
Just that your prejudices lead you to be afraid of brown people so much, that all you see are large numbers.
Ah, the old "your a racist" canard. Always pulled out just when a Leftist is about to rob you - and in this case, rob the tax paying citizens of Finland from the benefit of their own money. You don't even know what my skin color is (not that it makes any difference, except to racist Leftists who think virtue is determined solely by skin color).
And you advocate for robbing the Finns just so you can 'virtue signal' and feel sanctimonious with unearned moral superiority. How about instead of demanding the Finns pay you instead work harder and put up YOUR OWN money? how about you practice what you preach and sell your computer right now and give it to the "brown people" you worship? you don't. You are a repulsive hypocrite of the worst kind - and the citizens of the West are getting tired of your slanders and tantrums, bullsh!t and demands to steal our hard-earned tax money while depriving our fellow citizens of the fruits of our labor. Bugger off, Comrade.
Ok it is quite clear you don't know anything about Vulkan hence your inability to give any specifics on what you think is wrong with it. Not a conceptual level, when I say specific I mean specific about the API. You can't do that because you don't know anything about it, you're ranting about your own misinterpretation. So try again to be specific.
Ok, you don't understand. True or false, Vulkan requires more work from application developers and a much greater conceptual understanding from beginnings? True or false? You know this is true, which means Vulkan is a fail out of the gate except for those CPU bound (mobile devices, but not desktop or workstation applications).
Cite the specific design aspects. What parts of the API design are "horrible"? If you know what you're talking about this should be very easy.
Well, the fact that API specification is not finalized is a hinderance. But looking at what has been released wtf should I be tracking the internal state of the GPU in application code?
VkImageMemoryBarrier
vkCmdPipelineBarrier
No matter whether I track these or not it makes ZERO difference to my application that is GPU bound. And if your application is not GPU bound you are either on a mobile device (which has shitty performance at the best of times) or you don't know what the fsck you are doing.
How will Vulkan help my existing multi-threaded, GPU-bound application get any faster - even if I spent the $100k to port it to Vulkan ? Also, I'm working in Java/JoGL as C++ is a dog and development is much slower and the tools a junk compared to the Java ecosystem?
How does Vulkan help me in any way? it does not! in fact it is a hinderance. It forces me to worry about all sorts of concerns that should be the responsibility of the driver, and optimized by the driver writer for their hardware.
So where do I get the official Vulkan 1.0 spec? it's release has been delayed and the specification is not available from Khronos. All we have are snippets of code and they look fscking AWFUL. You are ranting about vaporware whose early implementations don't live up to the hype. Vulkan takes the design mistakes of DirectX (pre-compiled shaders being a massive source of grief) and moves it to OpenGL. All so crappy mobile devices are marginally less turdish, and not only doing nothing for the high-performance GPU-bound workstation applications, but actually making the development much slower (resulting in longer time to market).
You don't even have an official finished spec to talk about - you are talking about vaporware. All you have are press releases and some beta-code that pre-dates the spec, and thus, cannot be conformant.
Obviously what you need is a higher level API, which can be built atop Vulkan, DirectX, Metal and/or Mantle and that will solve your problem, it will be far less efficient but it will be easy and you won't be holding everybody else back. That's your problem solved.
BOOM! here is the admission from you that Vulkan has already failed as a replacement for the ***application-level*** OpenGL. Instead of a three-tier system (hardware, driver, application [OpenGL]) your architecture moves to four-tier (hardware, driver, Vulkan, framework) because of the *crappy API design* of Vulkan. You know this is true but your ego is preventing you from admitting it.
Fortunately even Khronos understand this and will continue with OpenGL, while Mantle 2.0 ("Vulkan") goes the same way as Mantle 1.0 (as in, nowhere, except for fanbois).
Sorry, for GPU-bound workstation devs Vulkan is pretty much a bust out of the starting gate. You can keep your koolaid, thanks.
I agree. But my point was that Governments care less about their own citizens then about 'virtue signalling' to foreigners. Here we have an article about native Finns being put out of work at a university, due to hard economic times, meanwhile the Finns are spending large amounts of money on importing foreigners, rather than helping them closer to home. This is madness.
The 15 k x 15 k was the figure I put up. Now you have to put up a different figure and show why your source is superior. At the moment you don't appear to be going on anything except your own unexplained opinion - which is a worse source, not a better one.
Slashdot Mirror
You present a graph for one spot, the GISP2 ice core at the summit of Greenland, that ends over 160 years ago in 1855 and think that means something globally today. I wonder how it would look if you added in the temperatures since 1855? Also the time scale is not even. The further back you get the more is compresses the graph horizontally which could be a bit misleading.
The GISP2 correlates with stalactite growth all over the World, such is in my own country in the southern hemisphere. Furthermore, given the fact that the observed warming since the Little Ice Age is agreed to be around 1.5 degrees Centigrade so far, consider the size of the modern record on this graph. Furthermore, the specific claim of AGW proponents, via Michael Mann, is that there has been no natural warming for the last thousand years and possibly two thousand. This is clearly not true and Mann's analysis has been thoroughly and utterly debunked - so much so that the IPCC have discarded their analysis. This proves that natural variability is large and relatively swift. Humans are not required to explain the observed variability since the end of the Little Ice Age (in fact, the warming we see is the End of the Little Ice Age).
Now you must explain why the specific prediction of AGW theory, that the LTT will warm faster than the surface, is not only not observed but the counter is observed.
I looks like 2016 will set a new record for the lowest maximum ice extent unless there is a big freeze up in the next few weeks.
FALSE. The quantity of interest is the minimum in the Arctic summer ice cover and this does not occur in the boreal regions until September. Here is the data which shows your statement is silly and should be beneath any Slashdotter:
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/ice...
Your graph only shows Greenland temperatures, not global, so it's not useful for discussing global climate. It also cuts off most of the recent warming.
That's a fair enough comment. It turns out that if one looks at data from around the globe, such as stalactite growth rates one sees that the fluctuations in the Greenland ice core temperatures are matched. The data I presented is a nice set which illustrates what was observed globally (with some regional variability for sure). What else is clear is:
* NATURAL variability is quite significant
* We are climbing out of the Little Ice Age, and natural warming is to be expected
* Michael Mann's 'Hockey Stick' has been debunked for other reasons but this data reinforces the death of the Hockey Stick
* It has been much warmer in even the recent past and humanity not only survived, it THRIVED, it turns out that plants grow better when it is warm like Hawaii and not when it is cold like Greenland or Iceland
Yes, the most recent warming is cut off, but that warming is less than the natural warming seen in the past.
As for the Little Ice Age, a large factor in that cooling was the Spörer and Maunder Minimums in solar activity, which ended a couple hundred years ago. Solar output then climbed, and temperatures climbed with it - but then solar output peaked in the 1950s [gsu.edu], and has been slowly dropping since then. Yet temperatures kept on climbing.
It is great you accept the reality of the Little Ice Age - a lot of people invested in AGW theory do not. You do undertstand that solar luminosity varies a few Watts, right? not very significant compared to solar output. But solar magnetic activity varies hugely, and this is evidenced by sunspot activity. It turns out that there is a link between solar magnetic activity, the resulting heliospheric interaction with cosmic rays, and the effect of cosmic rays creating clouds in the atmosphere. Since water vapor is the dominant 'greenhouse gas' and determinant of global climate this means that solar magnetic activity is a significant driver. Not the only driver, but a significant driver. See the work of Svensmark and Nir Shaviv. Now what also has to be taken into account is not only the drivers, but the oceans which moderate the heat received from the Sun. The oceans have all sorts of multi-decadal oscillations and thermal reservoir effects which are not properly understood.
However, the specific prediction of the AGW theory (where human-emitted CO2 is the significant driver of climate) is that the Tropical Lower Troposphere (TLT) will warm faster than the surface. This is the 'fingerprint' of the AGW theory promoted by the UN's IPCC. The two satellite global surveys which look for this signature not only don't show TLT warming faster than the surface, which is enough to falsify the AGW hypothesis, but actually show the opposite is happening, the surface is warming faster than the TLT - which destroys the AGW hypothesis. That's ok, its just the Scientific Method in action and we'll come out with a new theory where solar magnetic activity is accounted for and a better attempt to model the dominant greenhouse gas, water vapor, and its very complex behavior eg. convection effects, etc).
Meanwhile, there is zero justification for the UN gaining more power over your life and imposing 'carbon pollution' tax on you (what happened to "no taxation without [directly elected] representation" ?). There is no need to follow the Agenda 21 described by the UN's folks here:
http://green-agenda.com/
Which admits that they don't care about the science at all, it's just an excuse for global governance and involuntary (and thus, immoral) collectivist wealth-redistribution from all the citizens of the First World to the Third World.
Here is some data that many people don't know about. We *expect* to see natural warming as the planet climbs out of the Little Ice Age. This is corroborated by the fact that surface is warming faster than the lower tropical troposphere - which is *opposite* to the specific hypothesis of AGW.
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com...
When the observations contradict the hypothesis the Scientific Method is extremely clear we must accept the Null Hypothesis for now, and discard or amend the AGW hypothesis until it matches observations.
It turns out that the Transient and Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity values were computed too high by a factor of 4 to 7 because modelling of water vapor (the dominant 'Greenhouse gas') along with convection and other transport mechanisms is simply too complex for our computing power. So we guessed. Turns out the guess was not only wrong, it was very wrong.
Do we see warming? yes.
Is some of the warming due to humans? quite possibly.
Is there a natural component to the warming? yes.
Is the warming at a disastrous rate compared to warming in the last hundred centuries? no.
Is the current mean global temperature greater than recorded than 1855? yes
Is the current mean global temperature greater than determined by proxies in the last hundred centuries? no
Are polar bears going extinct? no, their population is increasing (yay!)
Is the Arctic summer ice cap disappearing? no, after a low in 2012 it is recovering
Is the Antarctic ice cap disappearing? no, some parts are melting but the overall ice volume is increasing
Can politicians affect the climate? no, thank goodness
Is the sea level rising? yes, but at the same rate for centuries
if you look at the actual data, not the sensationalist journalist reports, but the actual data, you will find that while we need to treat our planet better - there is no cause for panic, no cause to give the *unelected* United Nations more power to regulate every aspect of your life, and no reason for the UN to take money from you in the name of 'carbon pollution'.
Be Free people. Thanks to human ingenuity and innovation we can move to a brighter future instead of having to live with less and less (smaller houses, smaller cars, less water, less choice, less liberty, etc).
True. In graphics single-precision is used because it is faster, but it means that some extra work is required to ensure loss of precision doesn't occur. Consider a flight simulator that wants precision of on millimeter over the circumference of the Earth. Single Precision Floating Point doesn't cut it, you have to use relative locations for rendering, you can't just use the full global coordinates you have. However, if the GPU is fast enough for double precision operations then you can do everything in global coordinates (eg.unmodified WGS-84).
Graphics will probably always choose the extra speed of single precision over the ease of use of double. But the advent of faster and faster consumer grade cards like this might start to change that for some applications. The competition between NVidia and AMD (and to a lesser extend, Intel) really benefits consumers and developers. The performance of this card is great news.
Correct. But perhaps you could consider a better analysis is, "When the Collective becomes more important than the Individual, then Individuals will suffer". The political Left (Statist Collectivists) includes Far Left "National Socialists" and Extreme Left "Communist Socialists" that prioritize the will of the Collective (as determined by the Collective's leaders) over the desires of Individuals.
Collectivists believe that they are doing great good for the Collective, often at great expense (wealth confiscation, oppression or death) to Individuals. Hence, Collectivists see themselves as the "good guys" and this justifies their harsh actions towards Individuals. And they also reason that since they consider themselves the "good guys" that any Individualists who oppose the Collective must necessarily be "bad guys". Hence, we see self-styled "Social Justice Warriors" using violence and slander against Individuals who disagree with them. We see Feminists apologize for rapists as long as they are foreign. We see "Liberals" be against Free Speech. And we see people who claim to champion "diversity" work to get the State to suppress Diversity of Opinion (the only diversity that actually matters).
When the Collective becomes more important than the Individual, then Individuals will suffer. Too bad so many Slashdotters champion the cultural-Marxist Narrative of the Statist Collectivists over the diverse Free Speech opinions of Individualists and individuals.
There Is No Substitute for Individual Liberty.
Collectivism Kills !
What is wrong with you????? why call someone an "ass-hole" when you have a minor correction to what they've written? it sounds to me that it is you that is the "ass-hole" that needs to take a good look in the mirror at what a douche you are.
Apparently Apple has helped the US Government decrypt iPhones at least SEVENTY times in the past.
Citation: http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...
It is curious that Apple does not want to decrypt the phone of a jihadi (fanatical enemy of all Free People, based on Koran 9:29), but has no problem unlocking phones of US citizens. Seems like Apple prefers to defend foreign enemies and doesn't care about citizens (but then, the same can be said of mainstream media and politicians too).
-the effect of el nino on the GLOBAL AVERAGE is tiny. even with el nino it still would have been the hottest year. http://www.slate.com/content/d... [slate.com]
Why don't you add the missing bit? "Hottest year since modern surface records began in the 19th Century". Which is completely expected given the recovery since the Little Ice Age. Not the hottest year within the last 500 years, nor 1000, nor 2000. Look again at the REALITY that warmunists must deny:
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com...
Please tell us wall why the Vikings used to farm in Greenland, but are now buried under permafrost? could it be that today is COLDER than it used to be, and we are only getting back to relatively normal temperatures - and all of this is ****NATURAL****.
ROFL you think "SkepticalScience" is anything except blinkered rants from eco-loons who deliberately ignore data (that is, REALITY) they don't like. They don't have neutral peer-review of their drivel.
-your continual pointing to the RSS satellites show only that you are ignorant of what that data is and what it is capable of showing, let alone its relation to the overall picture from all the data. https://www.skepticalscience.c... [skepticalscience.com]
BOOM! here you show you know NOTHING about the CAGW/AGW Hypothesis that predicts that the lower tropic troposphere will show warming before anything else, including the sea and surface. The predictions of this hypothesis are NOT observed (and the UAH and RSS satellites agree with each other, and the tens of thousands of weather balloons, and the well-sited surface stations, etc). The Scientific Method REQUIRES you to accept the Null Hypothesis instead of AGW based on the OBSERVATIONS (that is, reality) because the specific prediction of AGW is not observed (in fact, the counter is observed). Did you not know this?
-the urban heat island effect isn't a factor. IE, remove all urban stations from the data and the trend still remains the same. https://www.skepticalscience.c... [skepticalscience.com]
COMPLETELY FALSE. The apparent surface warming decreases significantly when UHI affected stations and the increasing proportion of ESTIMATED data is taken away. Here's a discussion of the developing story, that has been improved by wamists critiquing it:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/201...
-the corrections actually reduce the amount of warming shown in the data, by ~20%.
Here you show a complete inability to reason statistically. Who cares if the absolute level is reduced? the 'corrections' introduce a systematic effect that cools the past and warms the present - artificially introducing a trend in the first time derivative. But you are not smart enough to see this and instead trot out a deception you were unable to see through.
-there are no observations which "falsify AGW all the time". there are only cranks like yourself who misinterpret the data (deliberately) in order to spread misinformation.
It is you spreading disinformation. It is you who merely parrots talking points because you don't understand the specific predictions of AGW and how the observational data have falsified this hypothesis. You refuse to follow the Scientific Method when it conflicts with your cultural Marxist "Progressive" Narrative. Even your byline "America, shining city on a hill, was built upon progressive ideals. Conservatism has only ever diminished its luster." shows how colossally ignorant you are of economics and American history. But hey, you are prepared to deny th
Where is your data? of, and if you want citations I suggest you learn to read. It is right in front of your face - but apparently this is too hard for you. Let's see if you can work it out, because the fact you can't shows how hilarious your ignorant posture is.
So, that's the (adjusted, and increasingly, ***estimated***) surface data subject to the Urban Heat Island effect and a bunch of other things.
Now, AGW theory states that the lower tropical troposphere will have a temperature rise before the surface does. Could you please tell us all what the UAH and RSS satellites are showing?
Furthermore, this year is an El Nino year. It is fully expected that the global temperature will increase a a result of NATURAL effects. And the last century and a half has been a temperature rise after the end of the Little Ice Age, but we're still colder today than the Minoan, Roman and Medieval Warm Periods.
Here is some data that might help you put the NATURAL temperature variability into perspective
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com...
Given that the IPCC's computed (as in guessed) ECS and TCS and too high by a factor of 4 compared to the observed value (because they guessed at the effect of water vapor and got the sign and magnitude wrong) then anyone who believes human-emitted CO2 is the dominant driver of Climate Change should be given a 'Flat Earth' award for their refusal to follow the Scientific Method and look at the observations which falsify the AGW hypothesis at this time.
Hi, it's nice to meet another PhD here.
These people were compensated for their labor. But what makes Steve Jobs special is that he had the great idea. Without him the iPhone would not exist and EVERYONE would be worse off. Furthermore, the ecosystem that benefitted from Steve Jobs' brilliance is vastly greater than the 115k Apple employees.
The World needs more entrepreneurs, not less. That is why you life is so very much better today than the life of the greatest royalty a century ago. Governments did NOT do this, visionaries and hard working people did. They are the ones who CREATE wealth - and they keep a fraction of the wealth they generate and then the rest is distributed to the lesser people who helped, but did not have the creative idea themselves.
Do you not understand that entrepreneurs and risk takers and business creators create all the wealth you see around you (everything you choose to eat or wear or play with) ?
Ok, so you are a worshipper of the Government, Got that. If Government is so great then why don't the North Koreans and Chinese and Soviets outstrip the entrepreneurs of the West in creativity and producing choice for consumers? because private property matters - entrepreneurs create based on their self-interest which does far, far more to help society than the self-interest of bureaucrats does. Big Govenrment doesn't create wealth nor liberty nor innovation - individual entrepreneurs do that and employ people who may be skilled but lack the vision and drive to create new markets and products that benefit EVERYONE.
Furthermore, entrepreneurs obtain their money through voluntary exchange which is perceived as win-win by both sides. Governments don't - their transactions are involuntary (and thus. immoral), are win-lose, and only occur through coercion (the threat of Government initiating force to take what it demands). These systems are not equivalent at all.
With regard to Government research, just because the robber occasionally does some nice things for his neighborhood does not make the robber or the robbery any less immoral. You can have all the socialism/communism/croynism/Academic-Bureaucratic Complex you want, just stop demanding everyone else pay for it.
Do you not understand any economics at all? profit is required so that investment can be made for further products and wealth generation. This is analogous to thermodynamics where energy differentials are required for any work to be possible. The Marxist idea of wealth redistribution is not only immoral (since the initiation of force is required against Individual by the Collective) but also removes concentrations of capital that are required to produce society-benefiting products. Of course, in a Collectivist system the wealth is not actually redistributed evenly at all, the peasants are given minimum rations and the State hordes the capital (which the most politically ruthless can use for their own benefit).
While we'd all like to be paid to do whatever we felt like, how is this in any way sustainable? the money that is put into this project is very unlikely to be recovered, and certainly not if replicated over the general population.
Nothing, because this has been tried in dozens of countries in the 20th Century alone. It didn't work in any of them because it CANNOT work. This doesn't understand that economies are not a zero sum game - it doesn't understand a Fundamental Principle of economics, "WEALTH IS CREATED". Wealth is created through innovation and perspiration and the promise of a reward for your labor. If there is no reward for your labor then there is no incentive to create wealth.
Just think of how Steve Jobs created massive wealth for himself and others, and gave jobs to hundreds of thousands across the globe, all though the power of his vision and hard work in ***creating wealth***.
The Collectivist wealth redistribution folks are worried about the fairness of making sure everyone gets an equal cut of the pie. The Free Market solution is, "bake more pies"!
With this scheme, there is no incentive for the *general population* to get out of bed to produce. It is unsustainable, and since it is unsustainable the people who control such a system (Collectivist politicians and apparatchiks) always end up resorting to increasing oppression to try and preserve the unsustainable system a little longer. You can even see this happening in Europe where the Ponzi scheme welfare states are unsustainable with non-pyramid demographics. So the 'elites' are replacing the native populations with fast-breading people from the Third World to try keep the Ponzi scheme going - and use the media to demonize all dissent to this population replacement. Unfortunately, a significant proportion of the imported people agree with this Y Combinator scheme and want to be paid without having to produce anything in return. The system is unsustainable and only increasing repression (which is starting to happen if you watch the police forces in Europe work for the elites against legitimate peaceful protests) can delay the inevitable collapse of this system.
I used to think the Y Combinator folks were pretty smart. My opinion of them has dropped massively for doing an experiment that has been tried on the huge scale (eg. in China, North Korea, all the countries of the Federation of Soviet Socialist Republics, East Germany, Venezuela today, etc) in the past and ALWAYS fails.
This is a nice idea (I'd love to get paid to do whatever coding I wanted) but it economically unsustainable - and when applied to countries ALWAYS ends up in oppression of those who point out the fact such a system is ultimately unsustainable (even in Sweden they seem to ruthlessly crush dissenting voices to their redistributionist system through severe public vilification).
Thanks for the update. The curious thing is that as the number of personal firearms has gone up, the number of violent crimes (including gun crimes) has dropped significantly. My personal theory on this is that video games (and porn) have decreased the boredom of young males that would otherwise engage in violent crime for kicks (or rape). Perhaps I'm wrong in this, but it is my current working hypothesis. It also seems that guns (as in, the right of citizens to armed self-defense) does save lives.
Guns save lives - Thomas Sowell
http://www.creators.com/opinio...
Summary: in the US, where there are around 300 million personal firearms.
There are around 30,000 firearms deaths per year. 20,000 firearms deaths are self-inflicted (suicide) and would occur whether firearms were available for self-defense or not. of other the 10,000 firearms deaths, many are gang violence. However, set against the 10,000 non-suicide gun deaths is around 100,000 violence crimes prevented by citizens. In many cases the firearm is not discharged, the mere presentation is enough to deter the crime.
In cases such as a string 26-year old male attacker who waited for the family to go out the only defense a 12-year old girl had against rape and possibly murder at the hands of the much-stronger attacker was the pink rifle her father had given her. She was able to stop the attacker in her home and drive him off. And there are many, many similar cases like this.
Whether or not you believe citizens have a right to self-defense - or if you think it is somehow morally superior' to be defenseless and slaughtered like sheep either by criminals that don't obey gun control laws; or by any of the mass-murdering Governments (National Socialism, Soviet Socialism, Chinese Socialism, North Korean Socialism, Cuban Socialism, Vietnamese Socialism, East German Socialism, Ba'athist Socialism, and various Islamist regimes) that murdered over 200 million of their *own* citizens in peacetime - then the statistics are clear: GUNS SAVE LIVES.
The best defense against a bad guy/jihadi with a gun really is good guys with guns. This is proven over and over and over again.
Now if you don't like firearms then please don't obtain and learn how to use one - but it is illogical and immoral to say that competent individuals cannot have access to firearms for self-defense. Even Europeans are slowly starting to grok this (shotguns are pretty much sold out in Austria as their country buckles under invasion of a large number of unruly youths who don't share European cultural norms about not stealing, not raping and not trashing the joint). I wish this were not the reality of today's world, but unfortunately it is.
Yes yes more "fanboy" namecalling garbage to detract from your inability to express yourself objectively. Post your criticism in the Vulkan forums, then you will see how wrong you are. It will expose both your lack of knowledge and understanding.
Ah, after all your lies and assertions that I was supposedly unable and unwilling to learn you now want to "play the victim" card. Laughable. You are an amateur who doesn't know anything about design nor about the economics of producing a 3D application and the decision making in producing and maintaining commercial applications.
We can do this in tiny steps, one at a time since large things are clearly overwhelming and enraging you:
Here your "victim" play goes into passive-aggressive idiocy. All because you cannot refute the REAL WORLD benchmarks I gave, nor discuss the economics, nor talk about what Vulkan implementors have had to say, nor on Apple's decision to abandon Vulkan, nor AMD's decision to bot support recent hardware (should be easy if Vulkan drivers are as simple as the hype claims).
OpenGL's model means application-specific optimization code must exist in the driver rather than the application, this is wrong. In Vulkan this application code is in the application instead of the driver.
You sound exactly like a religious zealot - which, for all intents and purposes, you are. Application-level optimations are still done in OpenGL just as in Vulkan. However, in OpenGL the driver writers also have the option of assisting applications if they choose to. They don't have to, but they can (and, as it turns out, they do - because it results in faster high-end applications; resulting in not only better applications, but better drivers). In the Vulkan model the drivers are dumb. If an application developer doesn't use an optimization the Vulkan driver is too dumb to assist. The experts in the hardware (driver writers) cannot help application developers use their hardware better without any extra effort because the Vulkan model doesn't allow for this - the application developers must thus write an optimized code-path for each piece of hardware - this destroys the concept of "abstraction" where each driver can optimize for its own hardware architecture and the application doesn't have to care too much. As I said, this is bad design and a step backwards - because guys good at hardware are often crap at application design and architecture. It is a different set of skills. But as an amateur, you don't know this.
The only criticism in that article is that Vulkan comes with some added complexity, which is precisely why I pointed out that for people like you there is the higher level API built on top of Vulkan. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
You know all that complexity in the driver Vulkans want to avoid? it now gets push to the application. EVERY application has to replicate the same optimizations - and unless you are specializing in the hardware (as driver writers do) then there are a lot of optimizations that won't be done by application developers. You fail to grok this. With regard to your suggestion of using a "higher level library" then you you are back to using something less efficient than Vulkan - which means you might as well use OpenGL (which will be faster for GPU-bound applications because the driver has so many optimizations for the specific hardware). Why is this difficult for you to understand?
And also the massive benefits that you do get with Vulkan, so again, for people like you that can't manage the complexity and for which the benefits of Vulkan aren't an advantage there are less efficient higher level APIs for you to use.
"Massive benefits" are theoretical, and for limited cases on low-end hardware that is CPU-limited. I've already given benchmarks of an API faster than Vulkan (that is, Metal - but the design tradeoffs are comparable to Vulkan) that outperforms OpenGL on low-end hardware but is completely blown-away on even mid-range discrete GPUs like the Nvidia 680 GTX that was tested. You are arguing on the basis of hype - and the REALITY of the architecture shows the implementation does not quite live up to the hype - all at the cost of increasing time-to-market, development cost, complexity and reliability.
Not for everybody, hence the reason OpenGL (and DirectX which is wrong.
I didn't say no-one could use Vulkan. I didn't say everyone must use OpenGL. I didn't say that OpenGL beats Vulkan in all cases. You are LYING when you put words into my mouth (again). It is a bad habit you really should get out of. What I did say is that Vulkan has limitations that make it worthwhile on low-end CPU-bound hardware, but not worth the effort on high-end hardware compared to OpenGL. Your fanboism drops your reading comprehension to that of a retard.
Which is why you would use a higher level API for your use-case, problem solved. Why are you still whining about it?
Which means ... drumroll ... that going to Vulkan is not worth the effort for most people, except those working on low-end hardware. Why are you unable to grok this? Vulkan is not going to be successful as you think and will go the way of Mantle.
What I'm pointing out is that you citicised Vulkan for having memory barriers and now that I have educated you on the fact that OpenGL also has memory barriers you have changed your mind. You claim to be experienced yet you didn't even know this existed in OpenGL before and so criticized its existence in Vulkan. I don't expect anybody to know everything so stop pretending, you just keep looking stupid.
You are LYING again. I said that in OpenGL you don't have to deal with memory barriers, and they are not universally supported anyway. With Vulkan you HAVE to do driver-level management (including memory barriers, but all sorts of different paths based on the hardware capabilities) - there is no avoiding it. The average application developer is not going to do this. You can refuse to listen now, but reality will bite you in the azz later. but like I said, I don't actually care - it is clear that Vulkan is going the way of Mantle - particularly with partial support on Linux and no support from Apple (who walked away from Vulkan - they can see what you cannot).
So use OpenGL (or a high level equivalent) in that case. Parallel
Link me to the powerpoint presentations that have those points then. I doubt they exist, they are your points and they are derived from your own misinterpretation of the information.
Here's a short summary from a Vulkan IMPLEMENTOR on where OpenGL is better than Vulkan, and vice-versa:
https://developer.nvidia.com/e...
Then if you read Graham Seller's own Powerpoint AND have experience in developing LARGE applications you can see massive potential pitfalls in using Vulkan that you won't get with OpenGL:
http://nextgenapis.realtimeren...
Of course, as an amateur you are not used to looking for indications of the limitations of an API rather than the marketing points - as doing this only comes with experience (and as I was a fanboi once but learned to look through the marketing spiel with a critical eye - a habit which it appears you have not yet developed).
If that is how you feel then use one of the various alternative solutions I already outlined for you.
Nope, OpenGL is more than sufficient - especially with the "Approaching Zero Driver Overhead" approaches and extensions. You don't seem to grok that the increased productivity of OpenGL for desktop workloads more than makes up for the few cases where Vulkan is better. For example, Vulkan produces zero benefit when rendering tessellated terrain on the GPU in my flight simulator, because the GPU is doing all the work and the use of the Vulkan command-buffer model gains nothing, but increases development cost. Hence, OpenGL is still a better option when your problem is rendering hundreds of millions of polygons per second on a discrete workstationGPU, and not submitting tens of thousands of sprites to a phone GPU with the phone's limited CPU.
But it isn't poorly designed, your specific criticism is that it has memory barriers - just like GLSL does - so when you say you have all this experience yet you don't understand the basics of asynchronous programming and don't even know GLSL very well certainly calls your claims into question.
Yes, OpenGL has that feature (so why use Vulkan?) but you don't HAVE to use that feature. This is the two-level API design I mentioned a few posts back, and why OpenGL gives you some control if you need it, plus higher-level options too - but you are not forced to do everything as if you were programming for a console with a shelf-life of a few years. Plus, on my MacPro with dual D700s the glMemoryBarrier call s not yet supported (grrrrrr crappy Apple spending effort on Metal instead).
No, I said post your objective criticism, the problem is you are so misinformed that you don't have one. You've gone to great effort to make baseless claims about things you clearly don't understand but then tell me you don't have time to post such things on the Khronos forum? No sorry that's just rubbish. If you really thought it was a waste of time and not that you're just going to look like an idiot then you wouldn't be spending all this time trying to convince me. Quite frankly when your only criticism of the design of the API is because it has memory barriers (and you think that is telling you the internal state of the GPU, which it isn't) then you have proven all this credential-dropping is untrue since you don't even have any experience with the basics of asynchronous programming and you think application code belongs in the driver. Every time you get backed into a corner you throw out the obviously false claim that you are expderienced, which you clearly are not.
Wrong. EVERYBODY says that Vulkan is more work. Everyone says that Vulkan drivers don't check for errors, which means it is easier to not only crash your application, but crash the whole damn machine - you wait until Vulkan is used in the Real World (tm). Everyo
Well no, you misunderstand. In fact quite clearly most of your assertions are wrong and you have obviously misinterpretted what I said, you also seem to disagree with people like Graham Sellers, Tim Foley and Cass Everitt, yet are not able to explain why.
I got thsoe points from Vulkan powerpoint presentations. It appears you are not able to understand my explanation as to the design and economics reasons why Vulkan is useless except on low-end hardware (eg. mobile), where it does make a difference - although so does the "zero driver overhead OpenGL" techniques. The Vulkan people themselves say that Vulkan will not make any difference on GPU-constrained applications, and they themselves say that Vulkan is inappropriate unless you are CPU-constrained, plus taking more effort to develop for the same end-user functionality. Your dispute is with them, not with me - I'm merely pointing out that Vulkan is a worse choice than OpenGL for desktop and workstation application developers.
The fact that you find memory barriers, a basic concept of asynchronous programming - that of course already exists in GLSL [opengl.org] - to be too complex demonstrates that you aren't very experienced despite your attempts at credential-dropping. However since you aren't able to realize this on your own and you won't take my word for it I invite you to enact change if indeed your criticisms are valid:
I've been developing a lot of stuff in the last two decades. I've used a LOT of complex APIs, but my experience has shown me that a poorly designed API doesn't last long - think of AMD's Mantle, and Vulkan is Mantle 2.0 - if you cannot convince developers like me to use it in our products then it is dead. We eschew complexity not because we can't handle it (we can, but it doesn't excite veterans who have done it all before in the way it excites you amateurs) but because it makes poor economic an strategic sense - especially when the added complexity makes no significant performance difference on the desktop where our products are.
To use a car analogy: we have a 2013 racing car with a 6L engine, with a complex tiptronic/manumatic transmission. You are saying that if you switch to a 2015 car with a 4L engine with manual transmission then you'll get better control over cornering - which is entirely true - but you miss the fact that the point is to get from start to end in minimum time (time-to-market) and that the performance of manumatic over the long straights makes up for the few corners that a manual does a better job at. Hence you argue with the concerns of an amateur, instead of those of a professional (time-to-market, cost, ease for larger teams to work together, avoiding unnecessary complexity where possible, etc).
Please post your objective criticism(s) here [khronos.org] on the Vulkan forums. You genuinely believe your criticisms to be comprehensive and valid so please post them in the appropriate place.
That's not a bad idea. The only problem is that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. I see Vulkan as much of a design mistake as Mantle was. I could spend time arguing how to make it better, but what is the point trying to convince people who are so bad at API design they are completely oblivious as to what their intended audience actually need? I'd rather spend more time getting my product finished than debating with people who have closed minds and haven't been developing long enough to understand what really matters to application developers on higher-end hardware.
Seriously, you have completely failed to make the case as to why existing developments should be switched to Vulkan when Vulkan is going to cost more to use in development and make no difference to performance in GPU-bound situations. You could argue that it is not your job to convince others to use Vulkan, but that is clearly your intention as a fan of it. Fortunately even Khronos know not to bet the farm on making the s
But hey... you said racist. I just called you a coward.
Nope, you said "brown skin". That's calling me a racist. When I countered and called out your bullshit you then switch to "coward". Where is your evidence that I'm a coward? where?
Perhaps I don't like Swedish, British and German children getting raped just so a narcissistic douchebag like you can virtue signal how 'tolerant' you are towards such rapes.
But it's nice to see that when faced with your own ignorance and inability to refute any of the arguments (which IS kinda hard to do when facing truth) - you run and hide behind a fallacy. [wikipedia.org] Or two... Or more... While even the punctuation fails you. Or are you secretly a 12 year old? Or maybe a dog?
It is not a fallacy when you have STILL not made a coherent argument. You're just a sanctimonious douchebag who has no empathy for the tens of thousands of raped children which all could have been avoided - except that delusional people like you oppose stopping the madness - the problem is not the invaders, it is people like YOU who demand that more people with the culture of rape and murder and female abuse be brought in. The problem is not me, or them, it is YOU. You don't understand now, but very soon the blood of innocent Europeans will be on YOUR hands. Douchebag.
What a truly pathetic creature you must be.
What? for wanting the fruits of Finnish labor to go to Finns? to think that German women should be free to walk the streets wearing what they like? that cartoonists should be free to draw Mohammed without being killed and having you cheerlead their deaths? it is YOU who is utterly repulsive and against Enlightenment Civilization.
Fortunately, the Internet never forgets. All those that supported the barbarian invasion of the West by Islamic Supremacists will not escape justice. And you will not be able to say you were not warned .
A correctly regulated market which allows for a level playing field.
I said "ideal". Your reading comprehension sucks.
Yes, that's correct. A businessman who has owned and operated his own business for going on 30 years wants the right amount of regulation.
What is the "right amount", Goldilocks? I argue that you already have too much, I did not say "none". Again your poor reading comprehension lets you down.
But what's funny about that is that you actually think you should be allowed to have an opinion this in this discussion as if you are some kind of equal or peer to me.
Based on your statements about your marginal business success, I'm indeed not your peer, but your superior. But my argument does not rest on my success, your approach does and is an Appeal to Authority based on nothing more than your angry and emotive opinion.
The United States is now running equal to China as the world's single largest economy. We do this with less than 1/3rd of China's population. In other words, the US is not hampered by regulation and if it is, maybe the rest of the world should immediately hamper themselves so they can catch up.
Wow, you really are crap at business. You don't understand "Opportunity Cost" at all, and how far ahead of China the US could have been - and still could be.
I fully support and demand that any business selling food not only be licensed but inspected so as to insure that any food sold is safe to eat. I know that where you live food safety isn't a problem and that the when you get sick you probably shit pleasant smelling rainbows - but here in regulation land, we're not as lucky as you so obviously are.
Yeah, a lot of people get killed by lemonade poisoning, right? "here in regulation land", yeah strangling your business - which is why China will soon surpass you and keep going. And of course you ***LOVE*** more regulations, since you are probably sucking the teat of Government in Maryland just like a good cronyist.
I thought you said you had a better idea.
Name an index.
So, you are about to be displaced out of your great country? Damn, I wonder how great life will be for you after that happens?
"Displaced"? no. We have plenty of land. So we simply take lots of money from rich Americans who have ruined their own country.
Except that your country is being bought out from underneath you? If only there was some way to prevent that from happening... Undoubtedly less regulations will fix that challenge too.
No, unlike you we control our borders. No one gets in unless they bring something that benefits the existing citizens. I know this concept is alien to you Americans - which is why all of America will end up like California and London (where natives are in the minority and rapidly decreasing). You received a great country from your parents, and you will pass on a declining balkanized hellhole to your children. Great job, Einstein.
As mentioned previously, the United States is one of the two largest economies on the face of the earth. We produce almost exactly as much as the Chinese do with roughly 1/3rd of the manpower. By definition, that makes us three times more productive than the only competing manufacturing entity in the world - but you are screaming how compliance is costing us a lot of money?
Wow, a "businessman" who thinks compliance doesn't cost money. A businessman who doesn't understand Opportunity Cost. No wonder you are not very successful. The US could be vastly wealthier than it is. Instead, muppets like you created Detroit and Baltimore through decades of Democrat/Collectivist policy, overspending and overregulation. Another great job you idiots did - but now you fools want to take it countrywide.
Just that your prejudices lead you to be afraid of brown people so much, that all you see are large numbers.
Ah, the old "your a racist" canard. Always pulled out just when a Leftist is about to rob you - and in this case, rob the tax paying citizens of Finland from the benefit of their own money. You don't even know what my skin color is (not that it makes any difference, except to racist Leftists who think virtue is determined solely by skin color).
And you advocate for robbing the Finns just so you can 'virtue signal' and feel sanctimonious with unearned moral superiority. How about instead of demanding the Finns pay you instead work harder and put up YOUR OWN money? how about you practice what you preach and sell your computer right now and give it to the "brown people" you worship? you don't. You are a repulsive hypocrite of the worst kind - and the citizens of the West are getting tired of your slanders and tantrums, bullsh!t and demands to steal our hard-earned tax money while depriving our fellow citizens of the fruits of our labor. Bugger off, Comrade.
Ok it is quite clear you don't know anything about Vulkan hence your inability to give any specifics on what you think is wrong with it. Not a conceptual level, when I say specific I mean specific about the API. You can't do that because you don't know anything about it, you're ranting about your own misinterpretation. So try again to be specific.
Ok, you don't understand. True or false, Vulkan requires more work from application developers and a much greater conceptual understanding from beginnings? True or false? You know this is true, which means Vulkan is a fail out of the gate except for those CPU bound (mobile devices, but not desktop or workstation applications).
Cite the specific design aspects. What parts of the API design are "horrible"? If you know what you're talking about this should be very easy.
Well, the fact that API specification is not finalized is a hinderance. But looking at what has been released wtf should I be tracking the internal state of the GPU in application code?
VkImageMemoryBarrier
vkCmdPipelineBarrier
No matter whether I track these or not it makes ZERO difference to my application that is GPU bound. And if your application is not GPU bound you are either on a mobile device (which has shitty performance at the best of times) or you don't know what the fsck you are doing.
How will Vulkan help my existing multi-threaded, GPU-bound application get any faster - even if I spent the $100k to port it to Vulkan ? Also, I'm working in Java/JoGL as C++ is a dog and development is much slower and the tools a junk compared to the Java ecosystem?
How does Vulkan help me in any way? it does not! in fact it is a hinderance. It forces me to worry about all sorts of concerns that should be the responsibility of the driver, and optimized by the driver writer for their hardware.
So where do I get the official Vulkan 1.0 spec? it's release has been delayed and the specification is not available from Khronos. All we have are snippets of code and they look fscking AWFUL. You are ranting about vaporware whose early implementations don't live up to the hype. Vulkan takes the design mistakes of DirectX (pre-compiled shaders being a massive source of grief) and moves it to OpenGL. All so crappy mobile devices are marginally less turdish, and not only doing nothing for the high-performance GPU-bound workstation applications, but actually making the development much slower (resulting in longer time to market).
You don't even have an official finished spec to talk about - you are talking about vaporware. All you have are press releases and some beta-code that pre-dates the spec, and thus, cannot be conformant.
Obviously what you need is a higher level API, which can be built atop Vulkan, DirectX, Metal and/or Mantle and that will solve your problem, it will be far less efficient but it will be easy and you won't be holding everybody else back. That's your problem solved.
BOOM! here is the admission from you that Vulkan has already failed as a replacement for the ***application-level*** OpenGL. Instead of a three-tier system (hardware, driver, application [OpenGL]) your architecture moves to four-tier (hardware, driver, Vulkan, framework) because of the *crappy API design* of Vulkan. You know this is true but your ego is preventing you from admitting it.
Fortunately even Khronos understand this and will continue with OpenGL, while Mantle 2.0 ("Vulkan") goes the same way as Mantle 1.0 (as in, nowhere, except for fanbois).
Sorry, for GPU-bound workstation devs Vulkan is pretty much a bust out of the starting gate. You can keep your koolaid, thanks.
I agree. But my point was that Governments care less about their own citizens then about 'virtue signalling' to foreigners. Here we have an article about native Finns being put out of work at a university, due to hard economic times, meanwhile the Finns are spending large amounts of money on importing foreigners, rather than helping them closer to home. This is madness.
The 15 k x 15 k was the figure I put up. Now you have to put up a different figure and show why your source is superior. At the moment you don't appear to be going on anything except your own unexplained opinion - which is a worse source, not a better one.