conciselyverbose @ conciselyverbose @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

1,532

Joined

2 yr. ago

It does a way better job at most frozen food and leftovers than a microwave does, but takes longer.

Almost anything you'd deep fry can be lightly spritzed with oil and done in an air fryer instead.

If it's big enough for a pizza, you can make one from scratch instead of frozen. It's cheaper than anything but the cheapest frozen crap and a lot better.

Have you heard of Minit?

Not really my thing and haven't played much of it, but it definitely fits the bill.

The person you're complaining about made a perfectly reasonable and accurate post.

Correcting clearly false information isn't "gatekeeping", and even if he had been an asshole about it, you pretty clearly don't know what gate keeping means.

There's a huge difference between not butchering your own chickens and buying some fucking nasty frozen crepes full of preservatives and random filler trash.

If it's premade at a grocery store, it's disgusting and way less healthy on top.

Yeah, I'd rather be deaf.

One subject I could manage (psychology/AI if it has to be nonfiction or mysteries if fiction counts), but not one voice.

Mixing Dark Souls-like gameplay with the Star Wars universe sounds good on paper

lol what? It doesn't hold a candle mechanically to dark souls. It's way less consistent and way less polished.

If it's not from scratch it's not good.

It will, but he meant games that have control schemes designed for controller inputs, because that's the easiest way to get started with the deck in handheld.

Steam input is extremely powerful and can be set up to make pretty much anything playable with the inputs the deck provides, but because the game won't tell you the controls (and you might need to manually set it up), it's more of an adjustment.

While I ignore "deck verified", if you want to stay safe until you're more comfortable, valve's "great on deck" part of the store/library is pretty helpful.

I recognize that there is a non-zero audience that buys the lite because they prefer the smaller size.

But I'd be willing to bet a good bit of money that they're outnumbered massively by the people buying the lite for the price difference.

Yes. They're dogshit. Not mediocre, not bad. Complete and utter unusable dogshit without a single redeeming quality. The fact that even mediocre passthrough doesn't exist is the entire reason there are no AR apps.

There's a reason every YouTube tech enthusiast in the space, who routinely experiment with all of them, had their minds blown by the Vision Pro, and it's because there's literally nothing on the market that resembles actual AR regardless of price point.

Of course there will be better. That's irrelevant. The only thing relevant is that it's unconditionally impossible for worse to be functional. My argument wasn't that Apple would be the only AR headset that will ever exist. It's that it's the first where AR isn't a lie. It's the first that a developer with a brain would consider making software for.

The idea that photorealistic rendering is required for AR to be useful is moronic. So is the idea that rendering at full resolution is needed. The resolution is mandatory so your eyes aren't bleeding 10 seconds into looking at text, because you could be blind as a bat and see the giant pixels if you step down much. Nothing more, nothing less.

Existing quality does not exist. There is nothing on the market that passes through the real world with low enough latency to use for literally anything that isn't very slowly repositioning yourself in a room. There are options that are transparent and can kind of sort of do really rough shapes and have them be visible, but that's it.

It should, provided the company still exists.

The space is negligible and selling something to customers without a license that permits you to serve them until the end of time should constitute fraud.

They already have dedicated hardware they call the neural engine, and use for coreML, ARKit, some of the magic they do to turn terrible sensors and lenses into passable images, etc. There's a lot of processing that already happens on your device. Being able to search your images by subject might be something Google does too, but Apple does it locally.

So my guess is they'll just adjust the architecture of the neural engine to accommodate any new requirements, rather than adding a "new core". But it's kind of all semantics. There will be new hardware components and intercommunication at a low level.

What they call it is critical. It speaks to their vision for the product, and Apple does an exceptional job at having their vision stick. Removing the headphone jack launched wireless headphones to the moon.

Zero headsets are meaningfully capable of AR. "We'll show you a high latency low quality poor color passthrough so you can sort of move around the room without removing your headset" isn't AR. Projecting an absurdly low quality image onto glasses that show the world without doing any processing on it isn't AR. Nobody is going to develop AR apps for either of those types of hardware because neither of those are useful. Phones are capable of limited AR, and those are used to the extent a phone is capable of, which is putting objects into your room to visualize them.

The Vision Pro is the first product out there that has the bare minimum hardware to even approach AR. Without Apple's weight behind it, it would still be in a great position purely on the strength of its capability. With Apple and their software (including the already very rich and accessible AR libraries they've had in developer's hands for iPhones for a while now), it's almost impossible for it to fail.

$3,500 is expensive, but it's absurdly cheap for the capability compared to the VR market. Without the passthrough and without the full computer, just the resolution of the display is already in the multiple thousand price bucket at a bare minimum. If they priced it at $10,000, it would still be completely unmatched for what it offers. The $3,500 price point is insanely aggressive.

They're literally not even calling it VR. The focus is all about AR (labeled spatial computing), which is a space that basically doesn't exist because nothing on the market can handle it without massive deal breaking compromise. The goal is the same as the iPhone, though, democratizing app development. Their AR tools on phone lower the barrier to entry enough that solo developers can make and ship AR-capable apps far more easily than they could otherwise, and that's what they're leaning on.

The Vision Pro isn't the mass market device. It's an enthusiast product/devkit. But there's nothing comparable to put it up against. The space can't develop with insufficient hardware, because low resolution in the display or any meaningful latency or quality drop to the passthrough are showstopper flaws to anything but games and movies.

Ok, be wet then.

Thanks for the permission?

And seriously, while you can ignore the pixels on the vive/index in action well enough, they're there, and they're extremely obvious and unpleasant on text. There are a couple third party options that get in the neighborhood on resolution, but shockingly, they're also really expensive.

But, even considering the high-end optics and so on, it should only cost about $2k-$2,500 before offering

Based on what?

There aren't options with just the resolution and high quality low latency passthrough for that price before you add the computer part.

None of those contradict my definition.

Not wanting a company dumping fucking trash in the streets is not and does not even vaguely resemble NIMBYism.

That's not what the term means. NIMBY refers to people trying to prevent other people from using their own property in ways they don't like, not people who don't want shitty companies actively throwing trash in the commons.