stevestevesteve

In my experience it's much more likely to CAUSE frame drops than mask anything in a good way. It sure masks visual detail though

Motion blur in film does that, but with video games, in every implementation I've seen, you don't get a blur that works the same way. Movies will generally blur 50% of the motion between frames (a "180 degree shutter"), a smooth blur based on motion alone. Video games generally just blur multiple frames together (sometimes more than two!) leaving all of the distinct images there, just overlayed instead of actually motion blurred. So if something moved from one side of the screen all the way to the other within a single frame, you get double vision of that thing instead of it just being an almost invisible smear across the screen. To do it "right" you basically have to do motion interpolation first, then blur based on that, and if you're doing motion interpolation you may as well just show the sharp interpolated mid frames.

On top of that, motion blur tends to be computationally very expensive and you end up getting illegible 30fps instead of smooth 60+.

Porque no los dos?

Definitely US, but I'm not positive on state. Feels Southwest, maybe New Mexico

Well that's horrible

The last point should be the first one - take something unique if you're going to. Don't just take more bland photos of fireworks

Interesting to see such old games getting any attention in terms of licensing

Even with your simplistic fossil fuel car in your example the alternator within can also be used as a motor.

Not by "simply reversing the flow" it can't. You'd need to remove and replace many components, just like the example of changing an Rx to Tx system

Possibly one of the worst takes I've ever seen.

If you're doing bridged networking on your laptop with VMs, they should get addresses the same way the laptop did. If not, you'll be doing some pretty application specific networking anyway which is an entirely different argument. Basically nobody says "ipv6 must never be NATted even in test networks etc" - people don't want NAT-by-default architecture and none of these scenarios change that.

An LED (or photodiode used as one) is a fairly simplistic device compared to an assembled receiver / transmitter. Just like you can burn gasoline in a car but you can't push a car to turn the engine to make gasoline - it's a complex system that really only works one way.

if you invert the flow of electrons, a receiver becomes a transmitter

Ehh not really. That's kind of like saying if you invert the flow of photons, your eyes work as flashlights.

"It could be possible with some changes" the changes would amount to removing the receiver and replacing it with a transmitter. In this specific case I'm not sure if a transmitter already exists at this antenna and it's definitely possible one does, but that's not a guarantee at all

"RTFM" My irritation is that most recipes make a huge amount of assumptions - at least as many as code that assumes a certain version of library. You can get recipes that say things as vague as "prepare the chicken" and aren't at all clear what they mean, unless you've seen someone do it first, but it's published in a book like you should just know. I hate that. I also frequently see quantities like "1 can" which just drives me insane as though that's a standard unit.

There's also plenty of cooking specific jargon, so densely packed that beginners might spend the majority of the recipe looking up what the terms mean. "Chop" parsley - how finely? "Mix the ingredients" how long? What the fuck is Golden Brown actually?