• 2 Posts
  • 18 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle

  • As someone who bought Half Life 2 when it was released …

    I only remember people being excited about Steam, Web stores weren’t a thing back then and they were the future! (It was the following years of audio and ebook stores locking stuff down and evapourating that taught us to hate it).

    Game/Audio CD DRM hacking the kernel and breaking/massively slowing down your PC was pretty common back then and Steam’ s DRM didn’t do that.

    The HL2 disc installer didn’t require you to install Steam, once installed it asked you to setup Steam and there was a sticker under the DVD with the Steam code for you to enter.

    You were then rewarded with a copy of HL2 Deathmatch and Counterstrike Source.

    Steam wasn’t always on DRM, back then ADSL/DSL was relatively new and alot of people were still stuck on Dial Up modems.

    Steam let you sign in and authorize your games for 30 days at which point you would need to log into Steam again. This was incredibly helpful feature for young me.


  • stevecrox@kbin.socialtoGames@lemmy.worldWhat's up with Epic Games?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Basically Epic like every other publisher has created their own launcher/store.

    They aren’t trying to compete on features and instead using profits from their franchise to buy market share (e.g. buying store exclusives).

    The tone and strategy often comes off as aggressive and hostile.

    For example Valve was concerned Microsoft were going to leverage their store to kill Steam. Valve has invested alot in adding windows operability to Linux and ensuring Linux is a good gaming platform. To them this is the hedge against agressive Microsoft business practices.

    The Epic CEO thinks Windows is the only operating system and actively prevents Linux support and revoked Linux support from properties they bought.

    As a linux user, Valve will keep getting my money and I literally can’t give it to Epic because they don’t want it.


  • If you signup to social media it will pester you for your email contacts, location and hobbies/interests.

    Building a signup wizard to use that information to select a instance would seemto be the best approach.

    The contacts would let you know what instance most of your friends are located (e.g. look up email addresses).

    Topic specific instance, can provide a hobby/interests selection section.

    Lastly the location would let you choose a country specific general instance.

    It would help push decentralisation but instead of providing choice your asking questions the user is used to being asked.



  • Nvidia drivers don’t tend to be as performant under linux.

    With AMD instead of using the AMD VLK driver, you would use the RADV (developed largely by valve). Which petforms better.

    Every AMD card under linux supports OpenCL (the driver is more based on graphics card architecture) and you install it very easily. Googling it with windows found pages of errors and missing support.

    Blender supports OpenCL. I bet the 2x improvement is Blender being able to ofload rendering to the AMD graphics card.

    Also this represents the biggest headache in Linux, lots of gamers insist they can only use Nvidia cards. Nvidia treats linux as an afterthought as best or deliberately sabotages things at worse.

    AMD embraced open source and so Linux land is much nicer on AMD (and to a less extent Intel).

    The results here will probably be a DxVK quirk, lots of “Nvidia optimised” games have game engines doing weird things and the Nvidia driver compensates. DxVK has been identifying that to produce “good” vulkan calls.


  • This advice isn’t grounded in reality.

    Management normally defines ways to track and judge itself, these are typically called Key Performance Indicators.

    KPI’s are normally things like contract value growth, new contracts signed, profit margin, etc…

    So if the project manager is meeting or exceeding their KPI’s and you walk up to their boss telling them the PM is failing as basic job functions, the boss won’t care.

    This is because the boss might have set the KPI’s or the boss might also be judged on them. In either situation its to the bosses advantage to ignore you.

    The boss will only care if there is a KPI you can demonstrate the PM failing to meet.

    Every person/group will have various incentives and motivations. To affect change you have to understand what they are.



  • A project manager has responsibility for delivery of a project but they typically lack domain specific knowledge. As a result they can’t directly deliver something, merely ask subject matter experts for advice and facilitate a team to deliver.

    Most PM’s cope with the stress of this position poorly.

    This cartoon is an example of micro management (a common coping mechanisim), the manager has involved themselves in the low level decisions because that gives a sense of control. If a technical team then tell them its a bad decison the team are effectively attacking their coping mechanisim.

    The solution isn’t to tell them their technical idea is terrible, when you’ve fallen down this rabbit hole you have to treat the PM as a stakeholder. They are someone you have to manage, so a common solution is to give them confidence there is a path to delivery, a way to track and understand it.


  • If you read the reports…

    Normally JPL outsource their Mars mission hardware to Lockheed Martin. For some reason they have decided to do Mars Sample Return in house. The reports argue JPL hasn’t built the necessary in house experience and should have worked with LM.

    Secondly JPL is suffering a staff shortage which is affecting other projects and the Mars Sample Return is making the problem worse.

    Lastly if an organisation stops performing an action it “forgets” how to do it. You can rebuild the capability but it takes time.

    A team arbitrary declaring they are experts and suddenly decideding they will do it is one that will have to relearn skills/knowledge on a big expensive high profile project. The project will either fail (and be declared a success) or masses of money will be spent to compensate for the teams learning.

    Either situation is not ideal


  • The GAO has performed an annual review of the Space Launch System every year since 2014 and switched to reviewing the Artemis program in 2019.

    Each year the GAO points out Nasa isn’t tracking any costs and Nasa argues with the GAO about the costs they assign. Then the GAO points out Nasa has no concrete plan to reduce costs, Nasa then goes nu’uh (see the articles cost reduction “objectives”).

    The last two reports have focused on the RS-25 engine, last time the GAO was unhappy because an engine cost Nasa $100 million and Nasa had just granted a development contract to reduce the cost of the engine.

    However if you took the headline cost of the contract and split it over planned engines it was greater than the desired cost savings. Nasa response was development costs don’t count.

    Congress reviews GAO reports and decides to give SLS more money.


  • The other person was just wrong.

    Large scale Hydrogen generation isn’t generated in a fossil free way, Hydrogen can be generated is a green way but the infrastructure isn’t there to support SLS.

    Hydrogen is high ISP (miles per gallon) by rubbish thrust (engine torque).

    This means SLS only works with Solid Rocket Boosters, these are highly toxic and release green house contributing material into the upper atmosphere. I suspect you would find Falcon 9/Starship are less polluting as a result.

    Lastly the person implies SLS could be fueled by space sources (e.g. the moon).

    SLS is a 2.5 stage rocket, the boosters are ditched in Earths Atmosphere and the first stage ditched at the edge of space. The current second stage doesn’t quite make low earth orbit.

    So someone would have to mine materials on the moon and ship them back. This would be far more expensive than producing hydrogen on Earth.

    Hydrogen on the moon makes sense if your in lunar orbit, not from Earth.


  • During the pandemic I had some unoccupied python graduates I wanted to teach data engineering to.

    Initially I had them implement REST wrappers around Apache OpenNLP and SpaCy and then compare the results of random data sets (project Gutenberg, sharepoint, etc…).

    I ended up stealing a grad data scientist because we couldn’t find a difference (while there was a difference in confidence, the actual matches were identical).

    SpaCy required 1vCPU and 12GiB of RAM to produce the same result as OpenNLP that was running on 0.5 vCPU and 4.5 GiB of RAM.

    2 grads were assigned a Spring Boot/Camel/OpenNLP stack and 2 a Spacy/Flask application. It took both groups 4 weeks to get a working result.

    The team slowly acquired lockdown staff so I introduced Minio/RabbitMQ/Nifi/Hadoop/Express/React and then different file types (not raw UTF-8, but what about doc, pdf, etc…) for NLP pipelines. They built a fairly complex NLP processing system with a data exploration UI.

    I figured I had a group to help me figure out Python best approach in the space, but Python limitations just lead to stuff like needing a Kubernetes volume to host data.

    Conversely none of the data scientists we acquired were willing to code in anything but Python.

    I tried arguing in my company of the time there was a huge unsolved bit of market there (e.g. MLOP’s)

    Alas unless you can show profit on the first customer no business would invest. Which is why I am trying to start a business.




  • Tesla actually market it as a positive.

    Car manufacturers have to setup different manufacturing lines to provide different feature levels. Tesla argue this makes them more expensive. Tesla cars have all features installed, just disabled and the optional extra packages are cheaper compared to their rivals as a result.

    To be honest there is a certain logic, if you’ve ever been in a Ford Focus LX (bottom range) its pretty clear they had to spend quite a bit of money on more basic systems. I honestly thought each LX was sold at a loss


  • It never quite finds its grove.

    Season 1, 2 & 3 all had fantastic premises I would have loved 7 seasons of but were all unrelated and concluded within a season.

    Season 4 actually demonstrates the missed opportunity, they deal with the fall out of season 3

    For example if you think of the scene set in “A Vulkan Hello”, you would have ended up with an Action focussed version of DS9.

    You didn’t need a spore drive, Jason Isaacs could have stayed the same and we could still have watched scientists struggle to become soliders with the war causing the type of fall out we see in Season 4.