Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Chicago, IL, USA, IL 01/27
Chicago, IL USA, IL 10/19

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Ask Me

Real Name Ask Me   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Scheherazade
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage None given.
Signed On Feb 28, 2001, 23:01
Total Comments 289 (Amateur)
User ID 9185
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ] Older >


News Comments > Morning Mobilization
2. Re: Morning Mobilization Dec 28, 2017, 11:57 Scheherazade
 
I wonder if the UBER news stuff has any connection to reality, or if it's gossip/propaganda?

I know people who use uber, and people who drive for uber, and none have had any change in habbit. Are they unique or something?

What exactly is going on 'on the ground' that is actually affecting uber's bottom line? I just fail to find anyone who actually cares about what is going on at uber corporate. People either want a ride, or they want some side cash, and whether or not uber corporate is having a scandal doesn't change that.

I'm not referring to any google lawsuits. Google can bury anyone under a mountain of legal bills... but google a ways down the list when it comes to the news' typically spewed UBER woes.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Interviews
8. Re: Morning Interviews Dec 14, 2017, 11:55 Scheherazade
 
Creston wrote on Dec 14, 2017, 11:22:
Scheherazade wrote on Dec 14, 2017, 10:54:
The PUBG irony is next level.

Another DayZ (not a pubg dev property) gameplay clone skinned with a Battle Royale (not a pubg property) theme, complaining about copy cats.

L. O. L.

-scheherazade

I take it you're not aware the guy actually MADE the Battle Royale theme. So he has some legitimacy here. Even so, he still just comes off as a whiner.

Battle Royale is a Japanese movie.

It's the movie that "Hunger Games" was based on.

PUBG ripped the same movie.

Take a look :
https://imgur.com/a/Xj2tO

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Interviews
4. Re: Morning Interviews Dec 14, 2017, 10:54 Scheherazade
 
The PUBG irony is next level.

Another DayZ (not a pubg dev property) gameplay clone skinned with a Battle Royale (not a pubg property) theme, complaining about copy cats.

L. O. L.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
5. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 12, 2017, 16:04 Scheherazade
 
ledhead1969 wrote on Dec 12, 2017, 14:14:
NN didn't exist until 2015. Can someone explain to me why the world didn't fall apart in the 20 years preceding 2015 and it will happen now? I just don't get why the sky is falling by going back to pre-2015 models.

Yes, all sorts of bad stuff might happen but why didn't the whole internet fall apart before 2015? Why didn't all of those negatives completely take over the business model of the internet like they are predicted to now (by going back to the pre-2015 model).

Yes, I am oversimplifying but there was no NN pre-2015 and I don't remember everyone's head exploding on a daily basis on this board.

Earlier, ISPs were competing over speed.

Speed was difficult to acquire. Switching equipment was going as fast as it could, and there wasn't capacity to spare.



Today, speed is tapped out. You can watch multiple 4k streams and game simultaneously. Faster/Slower are basically meaningless numbers that won't affect your experience in any way.

So, ISPs can't get more money by winning customers with higher speeds.

Now ISPs need other sources of growth.



Also, compute power is now far in excess of what is needed to switch packets in a timely manner.

So, with the spare compute power, they now do 'deep packet inspection'.

They read the content of your internet packets, and use 'big data' to run analysis on where you go, and more importantly what info you send back and forth.

They then resell that information to corporations.



The latest big thing is to throttle your data in a very targeted manner. Limiting data rates for packets with certain high-value content - and offering to restore that bandwidth (that you already paid them for) for an additional fee.

This is what you saw with the Netflix shakedown, where ISPs throttled their own customer's inbound network packets when the packets contained video stream data from Netflix.
Video streams were super slow, unless you used a VPN to encrypt the content of you packets, so that ISPs couldn't identify them as video and throttle them.

The fraudulent part of this practice is that you pay $X for open access at some bandwidth, but ISPs elect to not provide that bandwidth even though they can.

The ISPs have an 'out' for providing less bandwidth : Because network congestion, etc, can make it impossible to provide your paid for bandwidth, so they only are responsible for doing their best effort UP TO your purchased bandwidth.
Since you can't prove that there is or isn't congestion inside the ISP (they won't let you see what's going on inside), the ISP can effectively choose to not deliver on what you paid for. If you complain they just say 'network is congested, nothing we can do'. (You can use a VPN to show that the bandwidth is available, and that the ISP is cheating... but most people [in authority] are too computer illiterate to realize what this means, or are in on it to begin with.)

The risk is that ISPs will do what happened in Portugal, and throttle/lock-down the internet as a whole, and sell it back to you as additional services.






Basically, this is where things are going :

Yesterday : You pay for a connection, the ISP switches your packets at the highest speed they can, up to the max speed you paid for.

Today : You pay for a connection, the ISP collects data on what packets are high value, and if it's valuable enough they then deny your connection, and ask the website you're trying to communicate with for more money, to get the connection you already paid for.

Future : You pay for a connection, but the ISP only sells you some sites. You need to pay extra for every place you want to access.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
18. Re: Landscaping Drama...Rand Paul Nov 9, 2017, 09:06 Scheherazade
 
Orogogus wrote on Nov 8, 2017, 22:10:
Scheherazade wrote on Nov 8, 2017, 21:27:
Foregrip :
https://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2006/04/041006-openletter-nfa-adding-vertical-fore-grip.html

(NFA violations generally come in the form of a few years + $100'000 in fines. The pistol+foregrip combo is just one example I like. There is literally a phone book worth of federal firearm regulations that can land you in jail - almost all of which don't require that you even harm anyone. Most non-gun-owners [and ignorant weekend gun buyers that only go as far as squirreling away a pistol in the closet] are unaware these laws even exist [and only find out after they post a picture to facebook, and someone either warns them or they get a knock on the door].)

I don't know if it's changed since 2006, but that link suggests that it's legal after you've register your intent to modify the weapon.

The takeaway is : Most people don't even know that it's a serious crime to put a fore grip on a pistol. Which is how people get into big trouble over innocuous alterations.

Yes, that's how the NFA works. You pay $200, wait 7 months, and you now have a registered weapon.

That's also how you legally acquire a machine gun manufactured before 1986 [plus the $25K they usually cost].
For machine guns made after 1986, you need a corporation with a manufacturer's class 7 FFL, SOT and contracts with police/military, and a request for manufacture from police/military for at minimum demonstration purposes.
Mishandling your pistol with fore grip makes you subject to the same penalties as mishandling a chaingun.

With all the pitfalls of a registered weapon, most people don't want to have registered weapons.

A) There are legal access restraints that you need to guard. So you have to do things like form a trust that owns the firearm and put everyone in your house on the trust. Otherwise you gotta make sure no one else knows your safe combo to where you store the item, otherwise when you leave home and someone else knows the combo they are now the illegal custodian. (Don't have to worry about this with a normal firearm)

B) It's a serious crime to be _not_ in possession of the registered firearm. So, loaning it to your brother would be a crime. As would misplacing it among a collection. Point is, if the ATF asks that you show the item, and you can't find it, you go to jail. (Don't have to worry about this with a normal firearm)

C) Some people don't like being on an owners list. They worry about events like Katrina, and Virgin Islands, where guns were either confiscated or ordered for confiscation during a time of crisis (when people most needed them). Furthermore, you can't hide a registered weapon, because you're already in trouble if you can't produce it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf8trl69kzo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLm5kkBgKSM
https://www.snopes.com/virgin-islands-order-seizure-weapons-irma/
(Granted, the local police already know who purchased firearms from the NICS check records [which nobody actually deletes when they expire], and from the 4473 form that dealers fill out, so it's less of a difference on this point.)

Basically, for a "normal" firearm, doing anything that would NFA the item just isn't worth the trouble.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Nov 9, 2017, 09:29.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
16. Re: Landscaping Drama...Rand Paul Nov 8, 2017, 21:27 Scheherazade
 
jdreyer wrote on Nov 8, 2017, 18:25:
Scheherazade wrote on Nov 8, 2017, 09:53:
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Nov 7, 2017, 11:06:
Well, regardless of what started the feud, 5 broken ribs and some bruised lungs? That's a very good tackle.

I'm picturing good jog, breaking into a spring the last few steps, then shoulder down, right into the side. Clearly he followed Paul to the ground as well. Too bad it's two 50+ year old idiots in a gated community, otherwise there would be a Youtube Worldstar video of it, I'm sure.


What blows my mind : misdemeanor

In a world where :
- Farting in the presence of a cop gets you a felony assault charge
- Attaching a "vertical grip" to the accessory rail of a legally owned pistol gets you a felony with years in fed jail and hundreds of thousands of dollars penalty
...
Breaking 5 ribs is a misdemeanor?

wtf?

-scheherazade

Do you have links to the first two stories? I've never heard of either.

Fart :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQj7saRG7wQ

Foregrip :
https://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2006/04/041006-openletter-nfa-adding-vertical-fore-grip.html

(NFA violations generally come in the form of a few years + $100'000 in fines. The pistol+foregrip combo is just one example I like. There is literally a phone book worth of federal firearm regulations that can land you in jail - almost all of which don't require that you even harm anyone. Most non-gun-owners [and ignorant weekend gun buyers that only go as far as squirreling away a pistol in the closet] are unaware these laws even exist [and only find out after they post a picture to facebook, and someone either warns them or they get a knock on the door].)

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Nov 8, 2017, 21:44.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
14. Re: Landscaping Drama...Rand Paul Nov 8, 2017, 09:53 Scheherazade
 
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Nov 7, 2017, 11:06:
Well, regardless of what started the feud, 5 broken ribs and some bruised lungs? That's a very good tackle.

I'm picturing good jog, breaking into a spring the last few steps, then shoulder down, right into the side. Clearly he followed Paul to the ground as well. Too bad it's two 50+ year old idiots in a gated community, otherwise there would be a Youtube Worldstar video of it, I'm sure.


What blows my mind : misdemeanor

In a world where :
- Farting in the presence of a cop gets you a felony assault charge
- Attaching a "vertical grip" to the accessory rail of a legally owned pistol gets you a felony with years in fed jail and hundreds of thousands of dollars penalty
...
Breaking 5 ribs is a misdemeanor?

wtf?

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
13. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 8, 2017, 09:41 Scheherazade
 
RedEye9 wrote on Nov 7, 2017, 20:53:
In Backlash To Trump, Democrat Ralph Northam Wins Virginia Governor's Race
And that's just the good news.

VA was already skewed Dem before Trump. A Rep win would have been a statistical upset.
I wouldn't attribute the Dem win to backlash - rather the magnitude of the margin.

-scheherazade

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Tech Bits
4. Re: Evening Tech Bits Nov 2, 2017, 18:41 Scheherazade
 
VR is just shy of worthwhile.

Unfortunately, everyone jumping on the bandwagon (Dat early market share, yo) have yet again soured many people on the idea.

When you get 8K per eye at 120hz consistent, it'll be ready to /start/ useful adoption.

(4k @ 90hz per eye can be serviceable, but still bad)

Till then, there just aren't enough pixels to make 100+ degrees of FOV look good.

(lens distortion, color shift, massive area to fill, make resolutions that look great on a monitor look bad in VR. Resolutions that are 'ok' on a monitor are just terrible in VR. Don't expect to read 12 point font [on a virtual monitor positioned like it would be IRL] any time soon in VR.).

5 years from now, we'll be at the real verge of VR utility.

-scheherazade

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc.
22. Re: etc. Oct 9, 2017, 22:49 Scheherazade
 
Didn't you guys know?

Violent video games cause violence.
And sports cars cause car accidents.
And guns cause mass shootings.

Duh...

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Tech Bits
4. Re: Evening Tech Bits Oct 4, 2017, 04:16 Scheherazade
 
DangerDog wrote on Oct 4, 2017, 03:38:
jdreyer wrote on Oct 4, 2017, 02:16:
Another Windows VR headset enters the fray with Samsung Odyssey.

I've read this headset is the one to own: AMOLED, super responsive, 110 viewing angle, highest res.

Probably the only one to get, the rest look really sub-par. Still $499 is a big ask considering there really isn't a killer game for VR.

I tried war thunder in VR. Can't compete with monitor users.
For one stupid reason : Zoom is disabled in VR mode.
In sim mode: no zoom = you can't identify your targets at distance (unlike normal monitor users who can zoom and identify you at a distance).

No zoom -> Can't compete -> won't use.
Sucks, but that one missing feature made me sell my headset. One minor design choice by the game studio and bam, useless hardware.

(DCS had unintelligible text on the HUD and instruments, and required potato quality to maintain FPS, so that wasn't a reason to keep it either. I had nothing else that interested me that I could use it for, and it sat for ages unused.)

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
17. Re: Morning Tech Bits Sep 29, 2017, 22:07 Scheherazade
 
MeanJim wrote on Sep 29, 2017, 13:12:
Scheherazade wrote on Sep 28, 2017, 11:53:
Moores law has been a thing of the past for a while now in CPU land.

My 6 core CPU from ~2011 performs indistinguishably similar against the latest offerings in real world application. It's been half a decade.
(Barring esoteric stuff like video transcoding - in which case it's only /most/ of the speed of the latest offerings.)

I'm not that old, but I remember when speeds would double every year, and that was so normal that it was expected like the way people expect the sun to rise next morning.

Moore's law isn't about speed, it was an observation that the number of transistors on a chip double roughly every two years.

That hasn't played out in CPU land. Browse the various CPUs. Transistor counts are rather stagnant. Minor variance, with some series even losing transistors (eg. 3930 -> 4930 lost quite a few).
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpudb/

More importantly, the relevance of Moore's law was that doubling transistors = shrinking feature size by -30%. Shrunken size meant better voltages, better thermals and higher clocks (back then, when things like tunneling were not an issue), which meant better performance.

Regarding a single core, you can't throw more transistors at it to make it faster. At some point, you can't think of anything to use the extra transistors for.

In any case, short of applications that are primarily width limited, like GPUs, or specialized vector processors, there is no need increase transistor count. You really need the transistors you have now to switch faster. Since shrinking feature size isn't getting that done anymore, things are rather stagnant.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Legal Briefs
6. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Sep 29, 2017, 11:12 Scheherazade
 
Simon Says wrote on Sep 29, 2017, 00:09:
LittleMe wrote on Sep 28, 2017, 23:39:
Redeye9 I'm not sure what you mean. In a communist system you can not sue your employer. Corporatist system is similar in that regard. jdreyer was correct in his label.

There is no employer in a communist system... It works like socialism, you have decentralized as much as possible decisional powers in the form of small local cooperatives run by the workers who vote when a choice must be made. There is no hierarchy below or above that.

People like Noam Chomsky and some center to left wing libertarian for a free market anti capitalist system call that an "Industrial democracy".

The only difference between communism and socialism in this regard is that in a communist system, there is no currency, money or trade. Wherehas in socialism, money, currency and trade remains.



Socialism, communism, democracy, etc, are generally hollow words.
They have with them associated ideologies, but in practice they are never followed.
What use is a label for a system where in practice it isn't followed?



There are a number of applied socialism cases.
Some are leftist (power to "the people" - but in practice the government), some are rightist (power to the "state" - but in practice the government).

Even the nazis were fashioned as "socialist", but they were about as far right corporate-partnership-fixes-everything as things can go.

Gererally, no nation ever that has fashioned itself as socialist, has actually been socialist.
Same is true for communism and democracy.




The only governing case where what you describe as communism ever took place, was in Catalonia during the Spanish civil war, where there was an anarchist "government", where people ran industry by popular vote, and abolished "money". You would get an "I worked voucher" from work, and you would show it to any establishment you went to, and that establishment would serve you for free. Local popular consent was how all decisions were made.

Unfortunately for them, the communists invaded and took over, because they needed the Catalan industry for their war effort. It's hard to put up a resistance when every military action is by volunteers that vote among themselves about what to do. Reaction times are slow and indecisive.





The classical cases of applied communism are rather nationalist. From the British civil war, to the French commune, it was not what we think of today.

The modern interpretation of communism happened for a good reason. It comes from a situation where people in industrialized nations worked 16 hours a day since childhood, weekends didn't exist, you made enough money as a family to cover rent [for a hole in the wall apartment] and buy some clothes and some food (not as much as you needed), no money for a doctor, you could be fired on a whim, and there were no morality based protections (eg. "Hey girl, fuck me or you're fired"). The owners never had a hand in the factory day to day operations. So naturally, people were tired, upset, and knew that the very existence of their bosses was patently unnecessary for the day to day operation of their industry.

However, that circumstance never played out. The labor movement in industrialized nations managed to get enough concessions from the powerful to de-pressurize the angst. Largely thanks to the success of communism in less industrialized areas, causing power brokers within industrialized nations to realize that they could be replaced if they refused to yield.

Within less industrialized nations, communism was more in tune with the idea of a republic. I.e. A state that is 'the people', not 'the crown', not 'the land', etc. Where the people own the land, rather than the entire country being the private property of a monarch (or some 3rd party entity).




Russian communism was the people taking the country from the monarchy, much like the U.S. revolution.
(The U.S. constitution has more "what people today think of as communist" (but is actually "republican") stuff in it than people like to think. Eg. People are the state, the state owns all the land - the very reason why 'eminent domain' is 'eminent').
The government that the people of Russia established in their revolution was designed to fix the problems that they saw in society : overworked, underpaid, no job security, no one to help you.
So they demanded a system that fixes that. Less hours, livable wages, inability to be fired, a safety blanket for when you're sick or disabled or old. And that's what they got. And it worked - until newer generations took it for granted and abused it.



In the USSR, people said that they were "striving to achieve communism", and that they were _not_ living as communists yet. But that they themselves are people were "communist".

The crux of applied communism in the USSR was that : You could not own your own business (*unless you had friends in high places). You could only be a state employee.

In practice, the USSR did have state run corporations. The low level workers did not run the facilities. Day to day operation was similar to normal corporatism, however the heads of the operation were not the owners of the corporation. In fact, nobody and everybody was the owner. No people running the corporations would be cutting checks to the employees from any personal account. The state would pay everyone.

This was the fundamental flaw. No one within a corporation had anything to lose. It wasn't their money, they were paid regardless, and they couldn't be fired. From management to the hands-on people, no one had any stake in things.
In fact, there were laws against being of working age, able bodied, and not working. You literally had to show up for work, but you didn't have to do anything once you were there (because nobody above you even cared).

As a sole proprietor (think : farmer on his own land), what you produced would be sold to central distribution, and would be sold on to state owned shops, which were ran by state employees.





In China, "communism" is like a joke title. As a person, you were basically on your own. No safety nets.
You basically got the shitty restrictions, but none of the benefits.

One of the reasons why male children are favored under the 1 child policy was because of the lack of a state provided safety net. Males would usually inherit the parent's property and bring their wife. So when you're old, your son and daughter in law would help you at home. If you had a daughter, she would end up moving in with her in laws, and you would be left old and alone.

Their initial motivations, again, were more republican than communist. They didn't want a monarchy. They didn't want a foreign established puppet government. They didn't want a foreign military government. The people wanted their own country with their own government (for better or for worse).





Cuba was simply people one day finding themselves living on an island where the foreigners owned all of their land, all of the businesses, and effectively owned the government. They wanted their stuff back, and wanted a system that would not allow that situation to happen again. Again, more republican than communist.





Democracy as a label has been equally irrelevant. To be a democracy, the people have to be in charge of the laws.
Representative democracy exists for practical reasons. You can't fit the entire population inside the house and senate, so you send messengers that represent the people (senators, etc).

Note that democratic election is irrelevant. How you choose your representatives doesn't matter. They could be elected, they could be randomly selected, they could be born into the role. So long as the representatives relay the people's law demands to the legislature, and the legislature enacts those laws (and ONLY those laws), there is a functioning democracy.

In practice, every democracy on earth has the legislature going off on its own. The only time it ever considers what people want, is during an election cycle. And even then, it's only to pander and forget as soon as the election is over. The people lack the legal/procedural ability to criminally punish their representatives when they create laws that aren't representative. Hence the hollow title.

In the U.S., the only directly democratic counter to non-democratic laws that the people have is jury nullification.







All government on earth basically boils down to this :

As the government, do what you want, to maximize your own power and opportunity.
Temper your actions enough to not upset people so much that they either hurt your progress, or hurt your self.
To your people, always maintain the appearance of a moral actor, regardless of the reality.


One of the things that I love about history, is that you can read about corporate cronyism, people suing each other over dumb shit, insider dealing, etc, going back even before the roman empire.
You an pull up court cases from 700 years ago, recorded on scrolls, where one farmer in England is suing another farmer in England because one put a fence post too close to an inter-field easement. (Did you know there were over 10'000 laws on the books in England back then? About as many as apply to the average person any given place you are standing within the U.S.)
People like to think that things have changed a lot... but they really haven't. Not with the people themselves. We're the same as we've ever been.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Sep 29, 2017, 11:33.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
14. Re: Morning Tech Bits Sep 28, 2017, 18:55 Scheherazade
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Sep 28, 2017, 18:14:
HoSpanky wrote on Sep 28, 2017, 14:21:
The Half Elf wrote on Sep 28, 2017, 12:23:
I thought we got that with the 1060-1080 series from Nvidia and that was just within the last 2 years.

While the performance leap (and low power usage) of the 1000 series was indeed a big, awesome surprise, nothing comes even close to the mind-boggling difference the first 3dfx card offered.

While I agree that the introduction of 3dfx Glide was a pivotal moment in graphics rendering at the time, I would say we are also in hyperbole land with a blanket statement like that ("nothing comes even close to the mind-boggling difference the first 3dfx card offered").
For example, when hardware T&L made its way onto VGA cards (first or second GeForce IIRC) and we got our first pixel-shaded water in games (like in Morrowind) it definitely came close to the first 3Dfx experiences in terms of jaw-dropping.
Or the release of the awesome, almost legendary, GTX/GTS 8800 cards which also introduced all new levels of image quality and efficiency.

Geforce 256 had T&L. I believe T&L is what made the GeForce the "Ge" force.
The Riva series that preceded it handled mostly texture workloads.
However, at that time, texture workload was still by far the main problem, and hardware vertex transformation made little impact (nearly indistinguishable) over software vertex transformation. Geometry complexity was just so low back then.

8800's were really good. You could also enable quadro features in their bios for cheap CAD acceleration.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
12. Re: Morning Tech Bits Sep 28, 2017, 17:44 Scheherazade
 
Beamer wrote on Sep 28, 2017, 17:25:
[...]

Yes, but...

For me, the Holy Shit moment was Doom. We went to a Super Bowl party where a kid had Doom. I'd actually purchased it the week prior, but the 3.5" floppies I bought were corrupt and since it was from the mall I hadn't had time to go back and exchange it. But I didn't know what Doom was, I was only buying it because it had the name id on it. I had no clue what to expect. Literally entering with zero expectations.

So were most of the kids at the party. Some knew Wolfenstein. Maybe a third. The rest just knew Mario and Sonic. The kid said Doom was running around killing things. Great, so was Bionic Commando, big deal.

Yeah, it was a big deal. Jaws dropped. Minds blown. We ran around for a while just punching stuff, amazed at how cool punching stuff looked.

To date, no video game experience compares to that. None come close. Yeah, the first time I saw a 3D accelerated game it was awesome, but not that awesome. Maybe because I had a crappy S3 Virge card before going 3dfx, so there was something bridging the gap. And next steps were still cool, as I remember when Hardware T&L was a big deal, and when colored lighting was a big deal. I remember spending time just firing the blaster down a hallway in Quake 2 and watching the lighting move down the hall, or watching the flies buzz around a dead Strogg. All those were big moments, but nothing blew minds quite like Doom.

For me, wolfenstein and spear of destiny were my transition towards doom, which made doom less of a shocker.

BBS multiplayer was what made doom amazing for me (rather than the game's initial impression). Same for warcraft2 (pre battle net).

Once I started gaming multiplayer on BBS', single player games just about stopped mattering (barring some amazing ones).

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
9. Re: Morning Tech Bits Sep 28, 2017, 16:50 Scheherazade
 
HoSpanky wrote on Sep 28, 2017, 14:21:
The Half Elf wrote on Sep 28, 2017, 12:23:
I thought we got that with the 1060-1080 series from Nvidia and that was just within the last 2 years.

While the performance leap (and low power usage) of the 1000 series was indeed a big, awesome surprise, nothing comes even close to the mind-boggling difference the first 3dfx card offered. The comparison screenshots of Tomb Raider and Mechwarrior 2 were all I needed to see to convince me I needed to save up for a 3dfx card. There wasn’t any YouTube back then, so I was unaware that it wouldn’t only LOOK better, but it’d run at a MUCH higher framerate. No one even paid attention to framerate back then, outside of “it’s unplayably slow”.

3dfx changed everything. It’s a shame they’re gone, but they held onto the Glide wrapper for too long. Nvidia’s GeForce came along with 32 bit color and support for high-poly curves in Quake 3, and it was over.

Gosh.

Lan party, playing quake.

We're all playing 320x240 or 640x480. The fast computers are hitting 15 fps.

One dude had a voodoo. 800x600 at 30 fps. With _dithering_ (never seen before. Before that every texel showed up like as if you're playing mario)

Minds exploded. There was always a group of people standing around that machine looking at it like as if it had teleported there from the future.

Nothing in computing has ever replicated that moment.

It was "holy shit!" in a pc component.

It's like country bringing F16s to WW2.

It wasn't just a proverbial game changer, it was an entirely new game.

Imagine someone dropping a GPU today that can run today's AAA titles in 8K resolution at a steady 120+ fps with free damn-near-perfect anti-aliasing, 40 bit color, and 10 bits per channel color output. And lets you run two of them together for 240 fps.
... Then 2 years later drops another GPU that lets you do the same at 16K rez. That's like what 3DFX did.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Sep 28, 2017, 17:13.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
3. Re: Morning Tech Bits Sep 28, 2017, 11:53 Scheherazade
 
Moores law has been a thing of the past for a while now in CPU land.

My 6 core CPU from ~2011 performs indistinguishably similar against the latest offerings in real world application. It's been half a decade.
(Barring esoteric stuff like video transcoding - in which case it's only /most/ of the speed of the latest offerings.)

I'm not that old, but I remember when speeds would double every year, and that was so normal that it was expected like the way people expect the sun to rise next morning.

Per core performance has stagnated for a while now.

Clock speeds are running up against quantum mechanical issues that effectively cap them off under 'normal' conditions. Quantum mechanical issues are also effectively restricting feature size and voltage. Most per-core performance improvements are from cute computation design trickery (of which there is only so much you can think of, and returns are limited), not from raw speed increases.

CPUs adding cores does only a little for overall performance in most cases. Most tasks are in-order, and can't be divided and ran in parallel. Adding more cores adds heat, which drives down per-core clock speeds.

GPUs scale almost linearly with core count. Their workload is 'embarrassingly parallel', and they can bump performance by bumping their core count, i.e. bumping physical size (ignoring whether or not it makes economic sense to do so, it's simply 'possible').

Basically, for the current materials and methods and architecture that we have today, CPU single core performance has 'arrived'. There won't be anything more than incremental small improvement until there is a move to a replacement technology.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
5. Re: Morning Legal Briefs May 2, 2017, 21:32 Scheherazade
 
Cutter wrote on May 2, 2017, 11:16:
How the fuck is Theranos still a thing at this point?

[...]

Because there are sufficient intelligent people assessing technological viability.

The news headlines that crucified Theranos were a knee jerk reaction to Theranos' diagnostic statistics, made with the impression that conventional tests are much better.

Little did they know...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8xlOm2wPAA

-scheherazade

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Legal Briefs
2. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Apr 26, 2017, 01:20 Scheherazade
 
Bill Borre wrote on Apr 25, 2017, 22:52:
Interesting article. I wonder what the problem is with just giving this guy his data back?

It would be admitting that megauplaod had legitimate users - something that would go against the government's case.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Overwatch Bastion Nerf Inbound
5. Re: Overwatch Bastion Nerf Inbound Mar 3, 2017, 14:43 Scheherazade
 
As someone who actually played bastion and did well with him, I miss the old bastion.

Removing headshots and adding spread to turret mode nerfed the DPS and effectiveness really hard. Bastion used to be an amazing ambusher, but now it takes 2x as long to kill your target from up close. 35% DR doesn't make up for taking damage for twice as long before you remove the damage source.

He was a much better ambusher before, which is really where he shines. Ambush, reposition, ambush, reposition, etc.

He was already a fine barrier buster before, and was even better when sitting behind a shield. They didn't need to "buff" him (to be clear, the bastion buff was really a hard nerf for turret mode...).

I get that recon mode is now better... but it's not that much better. Heal on the move (while you still can't shoot) is nicer, but you want to grab cover before you heal either way, so whatever.


Same thing with soldier... I preferred the old soldier with less spread. He had more effective DPS than new soldier when it comes to killing small ranged targets. Flanking and taking out supports is where he shined. That gameplay suffered with his 'buff'.


In general, I'm miffed about all the 'add spread' changes that Blizz has been making. If it were me, I'd be doing the opposite. Reduce raw dps and tighten up the spread. Make damage more sensitive to player aim ability. They seem obsessed with reducing the impact of raw hitscan skill and pushing positioning as the major factor for engagement performance.

-scheherazade


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
289 Comments. 15 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo