RivieraKid

Member
  • Content count

    938
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

699 Good

About RivieraKid

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Personal Information

  • Interests
    Programming
  1. When did immediate mode take over the web?

    fewer higher quality websites can find other revenue sources, the 1 you mentioned is a possibility. Subscriptions, donations, patreon as well. These are quite popular with video because its a well understood format with a massive industry of tools & techniques. A quick idea of the top of my head - a video game review in video format and 1/2 way through the review the host says "why don't you have a go?", through the power of streaming content we are able to briefly take over the gameplay for 10-20 seconds. The technology just simply isn't there to do this. Sure there are other barriers such as download rate and existing of a gpu but we can't even get to that point to test the waters, not without some heavy plugins/custom tools (mostly rejected by web gurus) Remember when you first saw a HD video on a tv within a video game? We are constantly amazed by the new techniques that video games throw at us but unfortunately this level of innovation is not present in websites. Imo there should be seamless integration between desktop/web/gaming, the user experience should not be vastly different as you transition between mediums. I ask for a lot, maybe I am naive, but we should shoot high. Maybe VR can bridge the gap.
  2. When did immediate mode take over the web?

    web development is such a mess. Why must something as simple as rendering text / images and controls be so fricking complex. Im really praying webassembly gets some traction, if they can give us an api to render basic ui elements without manipulating the DOM the sky is the limit. Build custom render engine that downloads on the fly (cached long term). A simple version check for any site that uses that engine. Commercial tooling can then compete and drive some progress. The same paradigm as video game dev. I think we would see some very interesting user experiences. Immersive content rather than add laden click bait.
  3. Star Wars: The Last Jedi

    no problem, i wasn't directing it at anyone specifically. Just throwing out some sources.
  4. Star Wars: The Last Jedi

    as requoted by the bbc. Empire's Helen O'Hara explains: "There were many more characters in this instalment that weren't white men, and that has been a shift that some fans have found unconsciously upsetting or alienating. They've felt excluded by that. "And some men have openly complained that there are too many girls running around the Star Wars universe, which I personally think is crazy." http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-42424445 given that princes leia has been a hero to most of the star wars fans its a real stretch - journalists quoting journalists quoting a journalistthat read 1 fan say that they didn't like the female roles. How about some evidence (is mentioning ghostbusters evidence?)? Critics are quick to mention the exit polls despite the questionable accuracy one would get from mildly tipsy / tired viewers trying to enjoy their evening. There is something wrong when the critics are the ones inventing conspiracy theories about the audience. more of the same nonsense in here: https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/12/18/16791844/star-wars-last-jedi-backlash-controversy
  5. Star Wars: The Last Jedi

    regardless of what you think of this movie you cannot claim the critics are reviewing this fairly. Clearly, whether through side contracts for advertising/marketing deals or because critics don't want to be "that guy" or because they don't want to lose their premier passes - Disney have weight to throw around. Professional critics are just not that wedded to honesty, they would rather not make waves for their employer. It is even more a slap in the face that the media is claiming that sexism is why many fans don't like it and there have been bots/trolling. This is demonstrability false (rotten tomatoes have stated it looks like normal review/voting behaviour) - how they managed to drum this up I don't know. Having watched countless youtube reviews there are clearly some big F-in problems with this movie (and no one is mentioning sex/race) that most of professional critics have just glossed over. Captain phasma + casino while not the biggest problems with this movie should have been enough to bring the average down to 7-8ish. You would probably enjoy this movie if you don't care about internal consistency or believable characters. 1 last point: Stop saying things will be explained in the next movie. The 3rd movie hasn't been written or planned, it is being written and directed by someone else and there is no planned story arc - they are literally making it up as they go along. "It might be explained in the next movie" is bs. As of this moment no backstory for any of the new characters exists beyond what you have seen on the screen.
  6. I said it was not relevant to technology. It is not a single argument though. My argument is that he made decisions to push javascript forward because he created it, a position of complete bias. He has acted from this view point inspite of sound technological reasons to do the opposite. If he is willing to hand over money to enforce his religious beliefs then I think it says something about his character, that is the only relevance it has. 1) JavaScript runs everywhere because A LOT of people worked very hard to make it run everywhere. It was designed to run in netscape, end of story. In fact it currently doesn't run to an acceptable level in the majority of real life cases (e.g. IE8) (all users must constantly upgrade to the latest edition or face poor performance), i actually stopped using firefox because for a long time it had aggressive hard barriers to upgrade every week. There are still differences between implementations. 2) Maybe in the past but these days if something in JavaScript fails you are pretty screwed. 3) Most languages have an asynchronous method for I/O. For a long time you couldn't do any significant processing in the front end because it would freeze the browser. You could ONLY response to events. It is still very painful to deal with a large volume of visual elements. JavaScript was designed to do async data fetches and chuck that into the UI (and yet it didn't come with any concept of data binding), under the hood it stored hashTable<obj> where obj could be another hashTable, a primitive type or a function (maybe some other junk too). Types were evaluated based on the operation on that line at the time of interpretation. A class was just functions and values in a hashTable. Any graduate can write this without any fore knowledge of this field. I have done so. I'm sure someone could pick out 3 paradigms/tools that when used correctly make JavaScript a "Dream" but that is really beside the point - clearly there is something wrong if you need some dev guru with 5 years experience to direct you to some random corner of the internet for some 3rd party tools that patch up all of its short comings. Anything good about JS is too little too late imo, it makes me not want to be a developer anymore.
  7. [rant] I personally blame this guy https://brendaneich.com/ He wrote the 1st version of javascript in a mad dash in 10 days (and donated to anti-same sex marriage campaigns, unrelated but gives an idea of the kind of ideological bs that goes on in his head, he's a zealot). Knowing that the core of javascript (at the time) was a sloppy joke he still went on to champion it through Firefox and Mozilla. To this day he still riding that broken train. Web assembly is next which I think would be a great improvement but tbh I think it will be another 5 years before we see it making a difference. Its HIS baby, he's biased and has led millions of uninformed developers for decades with bugger all progress. Look at the advancements in gaming compared to web. Its laughable. Web developers get excited when CSS supports rounded corners or they can draw lines on a canvas. Even today rendering a 100 column * 100 row table in html/js will grind any browser to a halt. Oh and if you want the best experience you have to target JS, Java, C#, Swift (maybe C too!), a different UI model for each and physically test on hundreds of handsets. Have I mentioned that modern websites do little more than present rectangular images and text? There is no competition between web technology vendors, no incentive to make things better. [/rant] On topic: Who cares if C++, in gaming, is dominant or not, you can still choose to use something else if you desire.
  8. An important difference to note is that JavaScript is forced onto the largest subset of user-facing developers. If google/ms/apple could get their fingers out and agree on a common vm JavaScript would die off practically overnight. Unfortunately MS already have a perfectly capable sln that they are prevented from using because of political. Google / Apple don't want to go down that road - they would end up delivering something very similar to .net and they know it. Server side JavaScript only exists because JavaScript is a must on front end. People want to share their code base and that is the only practical way to do that. No sane developer would have independently developed JavaScript for server side if it didn't already exist.
  9. 15" dell xps from the prior gen 2nd hand.
  10. Trump and Russia (take 2)

    trump supporters have been moving the goal posts since day 1. You can't seriously expect an honest answer.
  11. I played Resident Evil 1-3 + Code Veronic to death, making it through them knife only or no saves etc.
  12. Thoughts on the new XBOX One X?

      I agree with everything else you said. I would like to see a comparison on the business model of 3rd party games vs 1st party games (i mean the figures/profits and incentives to invest). Supply will meet the demand for great games. Would Halo have been made? Probably not but the developers / creative people behind it would have worked for another studio and something else would have been made. We are not short on 3rd party games or investment.  I would prefer it if consoles producers would focus on great features that the customer wants - keyboard/mouse, custom controller support, mulitple monitors, modability (software), tradable games. I would trade up the slight posbility that we see less flashy inch deep launch title cannon fodder for these features in a heartbeat. I say - support great hardware, support great developer tools, support a fantastic os and features don't support corporate sales structures that restricts consumer choice or you'll just see the same crap released year in year out (oh wait...)
  13. Thoughts on the new XBOX One X?

    I don't understand the problem with 1080p. I've been pc gaming for 20 years with a resolution of at least 1024 * 768. For a period i ran at 1600x1200 (~2000-2005)  and now i run at 2560*1080. I have never been one to go for the cutting edge gpu's, usually settling on a good value mid-high £200-£250 mark. I've never struggled with frame rate. What is it about consoles that has led to this 60HZ/1080P selling point? Why is this so hard to achieve? It should be easier to target a specific framerate for a console because you know the hardware. I think this move to different version of the same platform will result in 1 of these scenarios for any give game. 1) The game will be optimised for the lowest common denominator and then they will just see how far they can crank the resolution on the beefier version.  2) The game will be optimised for the beefier versions then resolution and possibly quality settings will be lowered on the lowest common denominator until 60HZ is achieved. Both are bad for different reasons. I cant see a developer micro optimizing for both - the QA is too much. Maybe someone could back me up: due to the complexity of algorithms some algorithms will scale upto 4k (LOD draw distances will also change) no problem while others will not and thus different techniques may have to be developed for the low and high versions. Also, I hate exclusives - why should i have to shell out £400 to play games when i already own a computer that can do it. There were technical reason in the past to make games exclusve (radically different hardware is 1) but now is it just a way to sucker people in. Please don't tell me exclusives help great games get made - sure it helps somewhat (debatable) - but it's not necessary. All xbox games are available on windows so comparing PS4 sales to XBOX(x) is not fair - there are customers that are not buying xbox's (and to an extend PS4's) because they have windows pcs (a microsoft product obvs) so I really think a fair comparison is (Windows + Xbox) VS PS4. I think exclusives are the only thing consoles have got going for them now. MS want to sell a great piece of kit, Sony want to sell the right to play certain games - I'm with MS even if it is a losing commercial position.
  14. I have been centrist/centre-left, Now I am going Right Wing

    Chiming in: Many, if not all, of the terror attacks are perpetrated by people born in the country they are harming.  I think the problem is that many people today feel isolated in society. This isolation turns to spite and this gives terror groups the opportunity to turn them against their own country. We need more community centres and things for people to do to help them form solid relationships in their community - they need to be cheap to access aswell. Go to the root cause.
  15. Social media, AI, anonmyous posts. Thoughts.

    Signs of internet immaturity. When the internet becomes mature, users will stick to their ideologies and values in life rather than be swayed by the opinions of others simply because they are loud.  [Note this is different from the effect of fake news]     that doesnt really work out so well when people (social media is a multibillion $ industry) are interacting with said content from a very young age. Fake news and fake comments are coming from the same source. Mob mentallity is a real thing IRL and online.   Do you know if I am a real person?  Do I know if you are a real person?  Probably both are 'no'.     due to site history, fairly strict moderation (compared to news comments / facebook / youtube) and the fact that AI isnt that sophisticated (yet) I am 100% certain you are a real person with real views.  But in a few years If I  (or an impressionable child) reads the comments section on one of the mentioned social media sites all bets are off and I really think allowing our society, especially children in it, to be mislead by opinions that do not reflect that of actual society is very dangerous.  Fake news, bots / fake accounts - this is all under the same banner of misinformation and manipulating the opinion of the masses. We need to know the source of the information and people need to understand that the source is important.