It's kinda hilarious when the best formula only handles large numbers, not small. You'd think it would be the reverse, but sometimes it just isn't (something about the law of large numbers making it easier to approximate good solution, in many cases)
He's saying the same thing. Because it's not an integer power of 2 you can't have a integer square solution. Thus the densest packing puts some boxes diagonally.
OTOH I only have a PS5 because of Sony's marketing budget, lol (non-slim version included with a Sony phone on contract, so technically also a way for them to clear stock, lmao)
But yeah, I don't know any people with a recent Xbox here in Sweden. In the original Xbox era and the 360 era I think they had a big lead here, but after that I've seen much more Sony represented.
The only viable competition to LIDAR is structured light (see Leap Motion, there's equivalent sensors for cars), which uses an IR source with patterned light and multiple high frame rate cameras to calculate depth from the reflections. In theory light field photography with special lenses is possible too, but far more computationally heavy for real-time use IIRC
There's some safety issues with LIDAR at close range (it's a laser! it can damage cameras, etc), which is basically the main reason to not use it. But Tesla are dumb enough to try to replace them with cameras alone, and not even using proper multi-camera techniques to calculate depth
This case didn't cover the copyright status of outputs. The ruling so far is just about the process of training itself.
IMHO the generative ML companies should be required to build a process tracking the influence of distinct samples on the outputs, and inform users of potential licensing status
Division of liability / licensing responsibility should depend on who contributes what to the prompt / generation. The less it takes for the user to trigger the model to generate an output clearly derived from a protected work, the more liability lies on the model operator. If the user couldn't have known, they shouldn't be liable. If the user deliberately used jailbreaks, etc, the user is clearly liable.
But you get a weird edge case when users unknowingly copy prompts containing jailbreaks, though
The ruling explicitly does not allow pirating. It only lets you run ML training on legally acquired media.
They still haven't ruled on copyright infringement from pirating the media used to train, and they haven't ruled on copyright status of outputs (what it takes to be considered transformative).
This is judge Alsup, same guy who ruled in Oracle vs Google
1: SteamOS don't run unnecessary services in the background. (especially stuff like print services and other random shit)
1b: Even regular Linux, which does run a bunch of extra services, still generally has less overhead because it's still being optimized for lighter weight systems, and it idles more efficiently too. Meanwhile Windows doesn't have a good way to tell your printer driver and its corresponding services to shut up when you're gaming.
2: Antivirus programs
3: Drivers, graphics system. This is both a plus and minus, but for performance mostly plus. More efficient driver model, less overhead again. Sometimes the performance comes from lacking features which doesn't get executed fully, though. Sometimes it comes from translating to Vulkan, because DirectX has some more overhead (and in these specific cases you can get the same performance boost on Windows by switching to Vulkan).
It's kinda hilarious when the best formula only handles large numbers, not small. You'd think it would be the reverse, but sometimes it just isn't (something about the law of large numbers making it easier to approximate good solution, in many cases)