Yeh, axis was the wrong term. I was thinking degrees of freedom.
However, I misunderstood the concept.
The extra dimensions are basically optical manipulation, like the other comment says with the red and blue lenses.
I thought it was more about the crystals attitude. So in addition to x, y and z, you also have alpha, beta, gamma.
Which would be 3 dimensions/axis with 6 degrees of freedom
Seems more like 5 axis than 5 dimensions.
Sounds like a slice through the crystal that can be moved up and down and rotated through 2 angles (eg roll and pitch)
That's like any FPS game ripping off any other FPS game.
Fight, capture, tame, train, breed animals.
Base building, research tree, enemy raids.
Exploration, resource gathering, survival.
I don't think Nintendo has a monopoly on enslaving animals.
I know what you mean, tho. It's always described as "Pokémon with guns and 3xE gameplay".
But does Nintendo actually have a case that will hold up in courts?
Pocketpair seems confident they can defend against it. So either they have done their research and are up for a fight. Or they (think they) are calling Nintendo's bluff.
But Nintendo has a whole pack of lawyers.
Unfortunately there are no details on what the patents being infringemed upon are, just that they relate to "Pocket Monster".
You can set a static IP on the router, disable it's DHCP, and have pihole manage DHCP with the routers static IP as the gateway
This is what "cutting red tape", "smarter regulation" and "taking back control" means.
The financial insensitive to ensure only paying users can access the content offsets the cost of the different infrastructure.
YouTube needs to make money as cheaply as possible. They can't afford the processing to guarantee ad delivery and secure content like that.
If the infrastructure/delivery cost of securing content goes up, streaming services can raise their prices.
YT can't really serve more ads. The platform is already pretty packed with ads
It's probably the whole "yeh, still capitalism. Still big oil. Still big pharma. Still genocide and world-police".
And you show that Dems are better on all those things. But because Dems don't fully SOLVE 4/4 of them, it doesn't matter who you vote for because you still get fucked.
It's bullshit.
Dems have more social benefit policies and track record of social improvements than reps.
ACA, vet funding/care, insulin etc pricing, student loans. Hopefully things like unions, but idk if I have been caught up in propaganda that Dems don't care about unions.
Like I said, impressive work.
Converting science to shaders is an art.
I guess your coding standards follows scientific standards.
And I guess it depends on your audience.
I guess the perspective is that science/maths formulae are meant to be manipulated. So writing out descriptive names is only done at the most basic levels of understanding. Most of the workings are done on paper/boards, or manually. Extra letters are not efficient.
Whereas programming is meant to be understood and adapted. So self-describing code is key! Most workings are done within an IDE with autocomplete. Extra letters don't matter.
If you are targeting the science community with this, a paragraph about adapting science to programming will be important.
Scientists will find your article and go "well yeh, that's K2". But explaining why these aren't named as such will hopefully help them to produce useful code in the future.
The fun of code that spans disciplines!
Edit;
Om a side note, I am terrible at coding standards when I'm working with a new paradigm.
First is "make it work", after which it's pretty much done.
Never mind consistent naming conventions and all that.
The fact you wrote up an article on it is amazing!
Good work!
GPT and the whole AI bs we have at the moment excels at being convincing. It's even prepared to back up what it says.
The problem is, that all of that is generated. Not necessarily fact.
It will generate API methods, entire libraries, sources, legal cases, and science publications.
And it will be absolutely convincing as it presents and backs up those claims.
For example, GPT gives some API function of some library that magically solves your issue. Maybe you aren't hugely familiar with the library, but you don't trust GPT - so you research this made up API method and find the actual way to do it. Except you have GPT saying this exists and it works the way you want it to. So you research more, dig deeper.
Eventually you end up reading the source code, have a deeper understanding of the API in general and how to actually find useful answers (IE how to search query for it), and end up using the method you found while trying to find the mythical perfect API method.
I mean, I guess that's a win? You learned some documentation, you solved the problem... Who cares?
Maybe I'm just bitter because that was how I first tried any of the new AI things. And I wasted 2-3 hours instead of actually solving the fucking problem by consulting the facts.
Reminds me of the story of the old engineer asked to come in and fix some machine in a factory.
The engineer inspects the machine, marks it with some chalk, then strikes the chalk mark with a hammer.
The machine works again.
The company asks for an itemised invoice after seeing the initial invoice for $10k.
To which they received:
- hitting chalk mark with hammer: $1.
- knowing where to place the chalk mark: $9,999
GPT suffers from garbage-in garbage-out just as much as a search engine does.
Knowing how to find search results to fix your specific situation is a skill.
Utilising GPT for such a task is equally a skill. With the added bonus of GPT randomly pulling the perfect API/Library out of its ass
I presume the investigation is taking official testimonies and gathering actual (and traceable) evidence in order to legally confirm what we all know.
The only way to look after land is to build a parking lot or use it to add another lane to a 32 lane highway.
You can get off with just a fine if you dig up the land and put down lawn turf. The fine is reduced if you use 5 gallons a day of water to keep it green.
(/s)