addie

The plural of faux pas is also faux pas, because you know, French. But this is less one false step in the dance, than doing entirely the wrong dance altogether.

Yeah, Fark used to be great. That bear headline is a beast.

And then they got rid of the 'foobies' (ie. nudity) links off of the main page in order to appeal to advertisers, then they got rid of lots of extra stuff that upset advertisers, then they started shadow-banning paying subscribers if their posts didn't fit the narrative. And then all the users got fed up of it all and moved ever to Reddit, where the mods were more transparent and there was more of a sense of community. How ironic.

If your core site content is users posting links and commenting on them, then there's probably a lesson to be learned about how important it is to treat your users well and have a welcoming, inclusive community. Probably a lesson that Lemmy users have already learned, mind.

There's two kinds of motion blur, really - camera based, and model based. Camera-based requires calculating one motion vector for the whole screen, which is basically free. Model-based requires projecting the motion of each vertex of the model in the projected view; one matrix multiply per vector is not 'expensive' on a modern graphics card. Depth of field requires comparing the depth buffer, which you'll have already created as part of rendering, and then taking several 'taps' around each point on the screen to calculate the blur for the 'focus distance' compared to the actual distance. The final image post-processing will generally process the whole screen anyway, so you're just throwing a couple of extra steps in for the two effects.

Now, what does it save you? If your engine is using TAA (temporal anti-aliasing) then that's performed by 'twitching' the camera a tiny amount (less than a pixel) every frame. If nothing's moving, then you can merge the last several frames to get a really high-quality anti-alias; all the detail that wouldn't be caught with a 'completely static' camera will be captured, and the result looks great. But things do move; if you recalculate 'where things were' then you can get a reasonable idea of what colour ought to be at each pixel. Since we need to calculate all the movement vectors to do that, then using the same info gives us the motion blur data 'for free' - we can add a little blur in post-processing to hide the TAA mistakes in post processing, and when implemented well(*) then it looks pretty effective. It's certainly much, much cheaper to calculate that 'proper' antialiasing like MSAA.

(*) It is also quite easy to not implement TAA well, and earn the ire of gamers for turning everything into a blurry mess. Doom (2016) does a fantastic job of it - it's in the engine at a low level - and I've never seen anyone complain about that game being blurry or smeared.

It takes time to load high-quality textures and models from disk, and it uses up the RAM budget for each frame. Using lower-quality textures and models for distant objects greatly helps rendering speed and prevents stutter, and a bit of depth-of-field hides the low-quality rendering with a bit of a smear.

Now, if your graphics card greatly exceeds the design requirement (which was probably some kind of console) then you can switch these effects off and the game will look even better, which might make you question why they're there in the first place. To help consoles look better with some 'cinematic' effects, is why.

Although you should give the egg to the thief (he can open it and you can't) and then kill him and retrieve it from his dead body later, otherwise you can't win the game. Obviously.

Broke my first one on the final boss of Sekiro, which can be quite intense in places. Bought another one immediately when they announced they weren't making them any more.

Hesitation is defeat. Although, wish I'd got three as well...

Is that Windsurf? My lot have just added that. Keeps suggesting making the path to every target in the build pipeline the same so that they'd overwrite each other, or perhaps implement the worst null-checking code I've ever seen.

The problem with suggesting 99% stupid shit is that I'm going to ignore the 1% that it identified correctly. If it limited itself to trivial syntax errors then it might have quite a useful hit rate, but we already have tools that do that.

Thinking about it a bit more, would make a great deal more sense if they swapped the characters over? Then you get Catra's "Hey Adora" catchphrase, Catra is a bit less book smart, and Adora gets the blushing response.

Catra's response in the first panel should surely be "Hey Adora" rather than "Yeah", and losing her chill over the offer of a quickie doesn't seem in character either. Did the artist actually watch the show?

English does have some very good bits:

• easiest adjective declension rules of any language, ie. none.
• verb conjugation rules can be scribbled down in their essence on the back of a napkin and there's not that many exceptions; probably the easiest of any Indo-European language.
• no "grammatical" gender; only pronouns are changed for gender and they're mostly as expected from biology
• no polite vs. informal forms of "you" and rules to remember
• loads of words, for subtle nuance and meaning

...and some less good bits:

• loads of words, to confuse learners.
• the spelling rules are the fever dream of a madman. Many words are distinguished by stress, which is not marked. Want to learn the language by reading it? Ha ha no. Also, loads and loads of vowel sounds compared to most languages.
• massive reliance of "phrasal verbs", where the meaning can't be guessed from the parts. A "hang up" and a "hang over" have nothing to do with hanging and nothing to do with each other, despite up and over describing similar concepts
• grammatical concepts that don't exist in other languages, like "do support" for forming questions or negating a statement. Mood and tense of a sentence might be difficult to parse for some learners as that's indicated by "trigger words" rather than anything more concrete
• the native speakers do like to come out with some nonsense, too.

Alas no. Sur-rip-tish-yis-ly. Apparently you can blame Latin for sub + rapere = "secret snatch".

Not very easy, even then. Very pure water will absorb CO2 out of the air to make carbonates, it will strip ions from the surface of most materials you'd want a make a distillation column from. It's a very aggressive solvent.

We used to do that in industrial automation. If you make any changes to the PLC / HMI / SCADA software, burn a DVD with what you changed and leave it next to the rack. No danger of bringing in viruses on a USB stick (the whole system was air-gapped) and you'd still have a backup available.