On the other hand, NVIDIA has started to consolidate all these technologies as the NVIDIA DLSS suite a few months ago for some reason.
So it’s DLSS Super Resolution and DLSS Frame Generation, DLSS Ray Reconstruction and so on, with the exception of DLAA. Probably because that would get too stupid even for them.
Ok, I’m intrigued but looking it up there’s apparently a few GitS things in 3D/VR:
I’m guessing you’re talking about the live movie, but now I also want to know how an anime would look like in 3D.
Year-based version numbers are pretty neat IMO, particularly for applications. Not only can you quickly estimate how up-to-date any particular application is, it also avoids the version number racing problem between competing applications, because some people equate lower version numbers with a less developed application.
For programming libraries though semantic versioning is still the good ol’ reliable.
Slightly off-topic, but this annoyed me during the Win 8.1/10 start screen era as well. Just because an interface is touch-friendlier doesn’t mean it can’t also be an improvement for keyboard/mouse users as well.
Then they ditched all that and made it a worse experience for everyone in Win 11, so un turn I ditched their mess and fully switched over.
I believe there are some services, including some selfhosted ones, that allow you to quickly create (and later delete) unique aliases.
That said, I was surprised that these dictionary spam attacks don’t really happen all that much, at least based on my own experience. Most of the ambient drive-by spam my server receives targets email addresses belonging to domains I don’t even own. Blocking those and a few Sieve scripts gets rid of 99% of spam for me.
Interestingly, there was one time I received spam to a bogus address belonging to my own domain: A while back, one of my actual email addresses got leaked (thanks Sega) and a few months later that address got copied into another dataset but with a typo, which I assume was caused someone using OCR.
I think the way to go about detecting cheats server-side would be primarily driven by statistics. For example, to counter wallhacks one might track how often a player is already targeting an enemy before they become visible. Or to counter aimbots one could check for humanly impossible amounts of changes in the direction of mouse movement, somewhat similar to how the community found out a bunch of cheaters using slowmo in Trackmania.
Add in a reputation system that actually requires a good amount of playtime to be put into the highest tier of trust for matchmaking and I think one could have a pretty solid system that wouldn’t have to rely on client-side anticheat at all.
But also, in a world where such a law did exist, it would naturally force every third-party to create their contracts in a way that would allow the eventual release of the source code, or lose out on the deal and subsequently, the money.
I’ve switched over a year ago and that’s the thing that, looking back, sticks out to me the most as well. It’s just insane that practically every application I used had its own update routine. Lesser used apps I had to update every single time before using them. Just constant interruptions everywhere.
Winget is a step in the right directions, but it still has to build upon and work around that same shaky foundation, and it shows.
Yup. For me it similar. I was getting frustrated with the lack of customization in Win11, while at the same time seeing that Linux is actually viable for me with the Steam Deck.
I’ve been running Linux for a year now and while it was good enough for me to switch back then, it’s incredible how much better it has gotten since then.
Not any specific model, but I kinda like low-profile keyboards using scissor switches often found in laptops. Not as great as a mechanical, but I like how they bring over some of the aspects of clicky/tactile switches while also being low profile.
I see you implying everyone arguing against you is either a dumb moron, a child or russians in your other comments, so it’s worthless arguing against your, ironically, authoritarianism-fueled idea.
Bye.
Sorry, but this comment left me completely stunlocked. Why am I supposed to solve the problems to a problem you’ve created? Since when is trying to prove your point not how an argument works? What even is an argument anymore?
So what happens when a platform grows and that threshold is reached one day? Force everyone to de-anonymize and potentially reveal sensitive information about themselves or abandon their account?
There’s just no good way to force only some to de-anonymize without running into problems.
While I believe in the right to online anonymity, I also don’t think that de-anonymization would even work, when I see the same garbage being posted in places that enforce real names. It just doesn’t seem like a detractor to those types of people.
Instead, I’d rather want to see harsher punishments for big sites failing to moderate their content. I’d also take a look at these personalized “recommendation” engine and maybe ban them altogether. (Bonus points if it also affects personalized ads.)
So how exactly would you decide which platforms are allowed to be anonymous then?
It might be feasible, but it’s a bit awkward to implement because Wireguard is stateless and doesn’t know if a client is offline or just hasn’t sent any traffic for some time.
That’s kind of weird, because the reason why I never bothered with (selfhosted) VPNs before Wireguard was because it was the first one that just worked. Granted, due to its nature, you don’t get a lot of feedback when things don’t work, but it’s so simple in principle that there’s not a lot that can go wrong. For external VPNs like this, it should just be: Load config, double-check, done.
Aside from better server side detection, which is I agree is severely underdeveloped, I’d say that the next big step should be a much bigger reliance on reputation-based matchmaking, ideally across games. It would need to be built in a way that’s not abusable by devs or trolls and should be as privacy-respecting as much as possible (as in, not having to validate with your ID South-Korean style), which isn’t an easy task. Working properly however, it would keep honest players from seeing any cheaters at all with no client-side anticheat required at all, which would be nice.
Yup. If it’s important enough that devs now have to add a disclaimer on the store page, surely devs shouldn’t be allowed to circumvent that by adding it later. Since SteamDeck customers are affected by this the most, it’s weird that this isn’t already a rule, particularly for games that are SteamDeck verified.
Yup. What’s wild In particular is that they believe that games like Lost Crown have enough of a pull to convince people to use their store/launcher. That’s something that even the big AAA releases struggle with. When you stubbornly try to do that with a mid-sized game, you might as well cancel your entire marketing budget.
If anything I’d say that the lesson to be learned from this should be the exact opposite: No company is safe forever, so you should choose based on how easy it is to switch.
Chaining yourself to a single company all the way from the services you use down to the OS and even the hardware is only making it worse. Particularly when Apple is already aggressively anti-consumer on a lot of fronts.