sleep_deprived

If we stop doing business with SpaceX, we immediately demolish most of our capability to reach space, including the ISS until Starliner quits failing. Perhaps instead of trying to treat this as a matter of the free market we should recognize it as what it is - a matter of supreme economic and military importance - and force the Nazi fucker out.

I'd be interested in setting up the highest quality models to run locally, and I don't have the budget for a GPU with anywhere near enough VRAM, but my main server PC has a 7900x and I could afford to upgrade its RAM - is it possible, and if so how difficult, to get this stuff running on CPU? Inference speed isn't a sticking point as long as it's not unusably slow, but I do have access to an OpenAI subscription so there just wouldn't be much point with lower quality models except as a toy.

Bevy, cause I'm a sucker for Rust

They have concepts of an ICBM.

Well they said .NET Framework, and I also wouldn't be surprised if they more or less wrapped that up - .NET Framework specifically means the old implementation of the CLR, and it's been pretty much superseded by an implementation just called .NET, formerly known as .NET Core (definitely not confusing at all, thanks Microsoft). .NET Framework was only written for Windows, hence the need for Mono/Xamarin on other platforms. In contrast, .NET is cross-platform by default.

Honestly, after DOS2, I'd play a Larian game in any setting just based on them being the devs - and that goes double after BG3. Their handle on storytelling and environments is so good I'd trust it would be enjoyable even in a setting I'm not interested in.

I've found it depends a lot on the game. In CP2077, DLSS+frame gen looks great to me with full raytracing enabled. But in The Witcher 3, I found frame gen to cause a lot of artifacts, and in PvP games I wouldn't use regular DLSS/FSR. In general I've found the quality preset in DLSS to be mostly indistinguishable from native on 3440x1440, and I'm excited to try FSR 3 when I get the chance.

This is seriously wonderful news. DLSS was just head and shoulders above FSR 2 in my experience, so if this comes close it's a huge deal. DLSS is (hopefully was) Nvidia's biggest advantage over AMD in my opinion.

This is a use-after-free, which should be impossible in safe Rust due to the borrow checker. The only way for this to happen would be incorrect unsafe code (still possible, but dramatically reduced code surface to worry about) or a compiler bug. To allocate heap space in safe Rust, you have to use types provided by the language like Box, Rc, Vec, etc. To free that space (in Rust terminology, dropping it by using drop() or letting it go out of scope) you must be the owner of it and there may be current borrows (i.e. no references may exist). Once the variable is droped, the variable is dead so accessing it is a compiler error, and the compiler/std handles freeing the memory.

There's some extra semantics to some of that but that's pretty much it. These kind of memory bugs are basically Rust's raison d'etre - it's been carefully designed to make most memory bugs impossible without using unsafe. If you'd like more information I'd be happy to provide!

That's the point. Malicious compliance.

IIRC it's an APU thing, and last I heard it was just a rumor (could be out of date). Either way, non-LTSC is EOL in a year and a half. If you're putting in a Zen 5 CPU, the best choice is realistically either Linux or Windows 11 Pro, since Pro can turn off all the bullshit through group policy. My Windows machine I have to have is on 11 Pro and it's basically Windows 10 with a slightly different taskbar. No Copilot bullshit, no ads, no Bing in Windows Search. If you're ok your taskbar on the bottom of the screen, IMO it's the best choice as long as you have to use Windows.

I was very intrigued by a follow-up to the recent numberphile video about divergent series. It was a return to the idea that the sum of the integers greater than zero can be assigned the value -1/12. There were some places this could be used, but as far as I know it was viewed as shaky math by a lot of experts.

As far as I recall the story goes something like this: now, using a new technique Terrence Tao found, a team was seemingly able to "fix" previous infinities in quantum field theory - there's a certain way to make at least some divergent series work out to being a real number, and the presenter proposed that this can be explained as the universe "protecting us" from the infinities inherent in the math.

It made me think about other places infinities show up in modern physics (namely, singularities in general relativity) and whether a technique something like this could "solve" them without a whole new framework like string theory is.