They do have a different definition. They feel problems. They feel solutions.

If they can't feel the problem (such as the problem that the solution they feel increases the poverty of people other than them) then its not a problem.

These are a shitbags that dont understand that the number one killer in the world is poverty, that more than twice the population of the United States is way below the international poverty line in India alone. They are selfish self-centered coastal living fucks that have no sense of scale. They are extremely concerned that some people (such as themselves) might eventually be displaced by the extremely slow rise of the ocean, but are amazingly not outraged at all that the policies that they have pushed for cause people to die now.

You've heard of 1st world problems? This worry about sea level rise is the extreme form of that. They already feel it, even though they havent been displaced and need to be told by someone else that its even happening. And its more important that what we do about it feels like a solution rather than is a solution.

Could is different than should.

You do understand that the entire premise of the summary is horseshit based on the simple fact that there is no such thing as an "HD texture." -- but some eye-candy junkies want to make sure everything is called HD, even the textures!

Whats next, HD fonts? That might look real good in my HD text editor.

I am a witness to new unions doing exactly this. We unionized at my place of work about 6 years ago, and nows its seniority seniority seniority for everything.

So its profitable then? You do understand that it can trivially make financial sense to begin an investment that wont "show a profit" for even hundreds of years, right?

This is well practiced already in many types of tree investments where the tree can take 30+ years of growth before harvesting begins (either the lumber, or more commonly the fruits/nuts they produce.) As time progresses the plot of land becomes more and more valuable due to whats on it, and can even be sold for a profit far sooner than the 30+ years until any revenue begins.

It doesnt have to be altered in order to be bullshit.

In the video, the telemetry says -49.5 feet after the crash. Thats NEGATIVE 49.5 feet. It must have been very high to drill itself so far underground.

The telemetry also shows that it was at -45.9 feet when it crashed (see the video.) We can presume the telemetry is accurate and it crashed so hard that it buried itself 46 feet under the ground, or we can assume that this "telemetry" is bullshit.

You seem to want to presume accurate telemetry even when the evidence is right in front of you that it isnt accurate. Why is that? Why have you stopped giving a shit about accuracy and veracity? What motivation do you have to be willfully ignorant?

Good thing that he fired his gun into a drone instead of into the air then.

For all intents and purposes the "pro" part of Iris (bolting on EDRAM to the chip) does allow the GPU to do good graphics. It just isnt cost-competitive to buy a "pro" instead of buying a regular cpu with a discrete gpu card. These iris pro's are truly a ripoff.

I did a little comparison myself a few months back because I was backing up a bunch of DVD's .. VP9 was on par with H.264 for targeting 1GB filesizes, but H.265 was miles ahead .. targeted 600MB/movie and it was still better than either.

Subjective bullshit and I can prove it.

I declare that nothing you have ever done or potentially will ever do is useful. Now head off to jail, criminal.

You seem to be under the impression that the stuff I mentioned are or could be "tunables" -- they are based on specific conditions of a specific rendering scenario, cannot be discerned at runtime without a performance hit, etc.. determined by extensive profiling and statistics gathering, not your imaginary "tunable parameters"

It seems to me that you are quite far afield of your expertise to not know that determining if an edge of a polygon needs to be anti-aliased is something "tunable" - as if the end user is going to be presented with a list of several million polygon edges and enable and disable anti-aliasing on them individually..

I wonder why you bothered opening your mouth at all

Probably mostly corner cutting.

Don't need the 16x anisotropic shader if the texture isnt viewed from an extreme angle, or if the texture hasnt much high frequency detail, ...
Don't need the 16x antialiasing filter on edges of a polygon that connects seamlessly to another polygon, etc...

These two alone could be huge

Did you miss the whole mutually beneficial part of free markets?

You think this is "economics of advertising" when its just "economics" -- economics is the thing that tells you what is beneficial and what isn't -- its that whole efficient allocation of resources thing that flusters those that dont even understand what subject they are really talking about, but want to pontificate about it anyways.

You know, the thing about free trade is that when people are free to trade they only do so when they believe that it is beneficial for them to do so.

Viewing advertising is just another kind of cost. Its still trade.

The upshot is that so long as people are free to trade then trades are generally mutually beneficial. The advertiser wins, and the consumer playing that "free" game or watching that "free" program wins. They both win. Its win-win.

Not a zero sum game. The idea that society might lose is ultimately based on the notion that economies are zero sum games, but they aren't. They never have been. They never will be. The idea not only isn't right, its not possible for it to be right.