coffinwood @ coffinwood @feddit.de

Posts

0

Comments

104

Joined

2 yr. ago

I like chromatic abberation too. And film grain, vignettes, scan-lines, dirty/wet camera effect, lens flares. The lot.

Not all at the same time and not on max settings. But when having a helmet equipped or using something like a Scanner or spectacles in a game, why not? If it suits the purpose and / or the aesthetic, I'm fine with it.

Personally I draw the line at motion blur, which simply makes me sick.

Has getting nominated become something like a curse or what?

Who would buy stuff from a person they never heard of? How did they get popular?

You’re under no obligation to watch anything.

The one with Sandra Bullock? Concept-wise it was quite realistic. But the hacking itself, man that was some unbelievable stuff. I don't think they got any fact or term right. Almost as if the OG Clippy helped: "It looks like you want to make a hacker-related movie..."

Man, Mark Zuckerberg's gotten old.

Seen the stars last night We're only vehicles for life So should your mind begin to shine Say, "Hey, alright", say, "I got mine"

TV on the Radio - Lazerray

I like to imagine this song being a fever dream of the band, them writing it down and recording it on the same evening. It’s a psychedelic banger with this cute message right at the end.

Facebook / Meta is one of the few data hoarding companies that doesn't have "full control" of how their products are consumed / used and how much data gets collected in which way. Apple has the Mac, TV, Watch, and iPhone platforms. Google has the Pixels, Android, and Nests, Amazon has Kindles, Fire, Alexa devices, and so on.

Facebook doesn't have any of these. The best they can do today is being a parasitic add-on to a platform they have no total control over like "the others" do.

Making their own hardware is a key element, not a burden. But they're still treating it like the latter. If the Metaverse would already have been the New Thing (tm), they'd have been the quasi-dominators of that territory because they're pioneering the hard- and software. But along came AI which doesn't need it's own hardware platform, and still nobody wants to live in the Metaverse.

Benchmarks could become interesting in seven years when the Pixel 8 will still get software support. Making this big promise and starting off with this mediocre SoC is either brave or....not very foreseeing.

That's quite a bottleneck and efficiency can't tackle every software challenge from here to the year 2030.

Wasn't there already a feature or two that the "old" Pixel predecessor won't receive?

640k ought to be enough for anyone.

Bill Gates didn't even say it. And even if one only takes the spirit out of that quote whereupon software and hardware should be planned with foresight, it's so overused.

The same company that shamed Apple for omitting the charging brick from the phone package (or the headphone jack) just to do so themselves shortly after?

They also made fun of Apple for the "notch" only to incorporate it in their own devices (though differently)?

3 inch isn’t compact. I bet this phone drives a big car.

The headline says it’s the lowest-rated game in the series, not that Mirage is a bad game. The article bases itself on a single data point, which leaves a lot of room for interpreting. Which the author does a little.

But it’s nowhere mentioned or claimed that Mirage is a badly-reviewed game or doesn’t sell well. It’s just the lowest entry so far. And that’s what everybody should take away from that headline, followed by ignoring the hollow clickbaity article altogether.

Valhalla is a nice action game but it’s no AC game. Especially the stealth part and name-sake Assassination gameplay take up too little space. And the skill tree they copied from PoE is just ridiculously overloaded - symptomatic for Ubisoft‘s approach to the whole game: it’s so convoluted.

I really enjoyed Valhalla but as an AC entry it disappoints.

But your "solution" sounds like you don't contribute at all. Especially none of the content creators gets a dime out of your consumption.

Look at all the free image / video services that either never took off or went bust. Especially streaming is quite expensive and isolating only this single aspect of Youtube - cost to operate: what do people expect? Everybody wants few to no ads at all and no subscription either.

As I said, I don't want to even touch any other topic here like Youtube's (perceived) quality or their (spicy) business decisions. If you don't like the product, don't use it. There is no right to free consumption of entertainment videos. Imagine paying for a taxi like you (don't) pay for Youtube.

And if you know better, start your own platform.

CarpetCara?

Didn't ask for them, won't use them. WhatsApp is not Twitter, is not Insta, is not TikTok, is not [insert social media name].

The family might as well sue the local medium that failed seeing the incident in their crystal ball.

There has never been a guarantee for a map to be absolutely precise and correct. Just because maps today are digital and get updated automatically - or are even something like "live" - does not mean that there can't be any inaccuracies.

And that's the reason one never relies on a map alone, but uses it as a guide.

I've seen road signs that were simply wrong. Always use a combination of informational input and always be aware of possible flaws.