Is there a reason why it would be useful to make D3D 9 support more complete?
Games only started using D3D 10/11 *very* recently -- the back catalog this could enable is huge, and D3D 9 games are still coming out today. It'd say it's very important to support.
It's quite possible that he means they have artificially slowed down the graphics rendering to provide more cycles to the AI.
This is how I read it as well. Though, pure rendering and lerping should not eat up much CPU especially on consoles. Unless they've got a really inefficient rendering pipeline. I'm curious exactly how much extra AI this would allow them to run.
Your logic doesn't track. People enjoy a good murder mystery, yet murders are actually uncommon.
Stories are all about exploring the unknown without actually having to experience it. I'd even say violence is a common thread in stories for a similar reason as evil science/tech -- people are certainly hostile toward it.
So many movies and TV shows have inept, complacent, or downright evil scientists creating technologies that either lose control or are specifically for enacting violence. Or they mishandle something and a plague starts. Or a technology-driven society encroaching on one who's in touch with nature or a hundred years in the past.
And it's usually either a dumb "everyman" who stumbles into the situation and rises to the occasion -- maybe a military guy with a heart of gold -- and saves the day without much science or wit. Heck, look at Bruce Banner -- a brilliant scientist who needs to turn into a dumb tank to fight evil.
The scientists who do good in these stories are rarely portrayed as healthy people. They may be brilliant, but they're also asocial goofballs and usually side characters.
I think he's right on the money. People are hostile to technology and science. A fear of the unknown, a fear of someone being smarter than them, a fear of something clashing with their beliefs, or telling them they need to change their ways.
This trend in media, entertainment, and politics is obvious. There are plenty of counter-examples but on a whole, I think it's very easy to see if you're looking. It must reflect society to a not-insignificant degree, or people wouldn't latch on to it.
The odd thing is, after succeeding at exams and leaving education with a glowing set of grades, they'll get a job in which if they refused to use the internet to look up answers, they'd be fired.
This. I have a Stack Overflow tab open up as a pinned tab.
Sorry, but C++ literally cannot offer any feature which is impossible in C
So when I mentioned zero-cost error handling, I was referring to an exception handling model that keeps all exception handling code -- your entire catch block -- entirely out of your hot path. It can be put in entirely separate cache lines. Basically ensuring that your non-exceptional code is all as close together and fast as possible.
You can't do this in C. Please prove me wrong! I enjoy learning.
The Windows kernel APIs are all C, there is no C++ in it. You can use a subset of C++ that doesn't require runtime support, but it is unsupported.
Linus hates C++ for a lot more reasons than ABI, and the majority of them are completely uninformed and show a lack of C++ experience.
All the understandability and maintainability worries people have about C++ in the kernel would be easily controlled by standard patch review. Don't like giant template metaprograms? Don't accept the pull request. That easy. Perhaps one of the valid reasons to keep C++ out of the kernel right now is purely that Linus would be unable to review such patches with authority.
Even simple things like classes, RAII, basic templates, and exceptions would do wonders for development.
My workplace gets regular audits from our clients, usually every 3-24 months depending on how big/paranoid the client is. JP Morgan Chase is one of them.
We could tell the audit this summer was a bit different. It took about twice as long and went into much more detail than usual specifically regarding our tech side. After the audit, we got an unexpected list of demands related to stopping leaks.
Now, we don't handle sensitive financial information for them, so it's possible they were just trying to cover all their bases and we got stuck with security theater. Irritatingly, everyone in IT immediately recognized that the demands wouldn't actually prevent leaks. When you have a company full of employees who regularly use FTP, email, and even dropbox to send files to clients, you're simply not going to be able to prevent it.
After months of back and forth trying to kill some of the more ridiculous demands -- like blocking access to Gmail, which we use for company email -- they simply wouldn't budge. We've been wondering why they're standing so firm about it, and now it all makes sense.
he trouble with CloudFlare is, if you want to stay anonymous on the internet using Tor, you're SOL, as they serve you captchas every 3 pages when they see a connection coming from a Tor exit node.
This feature can be easily turned off in their settings. It is part of their security features.
I'd love to see more people using Tor, but the experience has to change a lot before we can do that.
Putting a mainstream user into the same environment is simply not going to work.
So did they send in the new Scorpion team to save the day?
They tried, but were having trouble finding a 458 that could transform into a 360 and back in the blink of an eye.
(The dash they flash to while accelerating was a Ferrari 360, not the 458 he was driving)