It’s one of my favorite games, and now is a good time to play it! It gives me a similar feeling to Halo where humanity itself is on the backfoot and nearly extinct the whole time, yet enduring as best it can. The difference being that you’re controlling a city fighting the snowpocalypse rather than a cyber-soldier fighting aliens.
jaycifer
joined 1 year ago
There’s a few main aspects to these things I see: the enjoyment of drinking them, the nutrition value, and convenience. For context I’ve ordered a box of Soylent a few times a year for a few years, and my roommate has been using it (or products like Soylent such as Huel) since 2015~2016.
Flavor/enjoyment: Plain Soylent tastes like liquid cheerios. Any flavors you find taste like liquid cheerios with flavor syrup added. To many that sounds gross, but if that sounds bearable to you then it’s worth a try. I like the flavored ones, mainly the creamy chocolate and mint chocolate, which tastes like melted ice cream.
Nutrition: you probably know but each bottle has a decent amount of calories enriched with 20% of your daily value of vitamins and nutrients, which is neat. I’m not a health professional, but I’m guessing it’s probably healthier than taking vitamins but not as good as getting them from a source that naturally has the nutrients. For me who has maybe one bottle in a day it’s a way to keep a baseline of nutrients that I may not get from my normal diet and that aren’t covered by my vitamin supplements.
Convenience: Having bottles is really nice if you commute. I like that when I’m headed out the door I can grab one to drink for work. I won’t be hungry or spend money on fast food. I will often be hungry by the time I’m home but as a person that tends to overeat I consider that a good thing.
My roommate who does the shake blending himself works remote so he can often find the few minutes to put a bottle together. He’s built up a reserve of ~20 blender bottles but usually needs about a third of them for his daily drinking if we keep up on dishes. He’ll use 2-4 a day for breakfast and lunch before a solid food dinner. We also keep space for 2-3 gallons of milk for how much he makes.
That’s all anecdotal, but I hope it gives you an idea of what daily life with the stuff may look like.
It’s very cheesy, but for the 8 hour run I found a map seed online that starts you on a large island with little to no biter presence and all the necessary materials for a rocket. Doing so allowed me to focus only on building as quickly as possible.
Shoutout to the ST: Armada 3 mod for Sins of a Solar Empire. I didn’t play the originals but the mod is really impressive.
As someone who just learned of these a week ago, you’re one of today’s lucky 10,000! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopped_cheese
I remember playing Assassins Creed II on pc with a 9500GT and getting sub 20fps constantly to the point I had to wait for character animations to catch up with the dialogue so the next person could talk. Halfway through the game I upgraded to a GTX 560 and was astounded that everything was in sync and oh so smooth. I always remember that when I start getting annoyed I can’t get over 90fps in a game. As long as it’s playable!
For me it depends on the game. A menu game from Paradox like Crusader Kings? 4k 60fps. A competitive shooter? Ideally the max resolution (for greater pinpoint accuracy) and 144fps, but between the two I’d want maximum fps for the reaction speed and responsiveness. A pretty game like Ori and the Will of the Wisps? Crank the graphics up and I’m happy with 60fps.
That article states people can perceive images as rapidly as once every 13 milliseconds, which they math out to 75 fps, 25% higher than 60.
Looking at the study itself, they were testing whether participants could pick out a picture that displayed for 13-80 ms when “masked” by other brief pictures, with a focus on whether it made a difference if the participant was told what image they were looking for before or after seeing the images. What they found was that participants could pick out the image as low as the 13 ms mark (albeit with less accuracy) and could generally do so better if told what to look for beforehand.
What this tells me is that your source has nothing to say about anything over 75 fps. It also was testing in a fundamentally different environment than a video game, where your brain will constantly expect an image similar to and stemming from the image before it rather than seeing a completely different image. If you were to draw conclusions based on the study despite the differences, what the study would suggest is that knowing what to look for, as your brain does gaming, would make you better able to pick out individual frames. This makes me want to think that your source does not support your assertion, and that in a game you could perceive frame rates higher than 75 fps at a minimum.
From my own knowledge, there’s also a fundamental difference between perceiving reality and computer screens in the form of motion blur. Objects moving in real time will leave a faint blur behind when perceiving it that your brain can use to fill in any blanks it may have missed, making reality appear smoother than it is. For an example of this wobble a pencil back and forth to make it “bend.” Movies filmed at 24 fps capture this minute motion blur as they film which makes it easier for our brains to watch them despite the lower frame rate. Real time rendered video games do not have this effect, as there are no after images to fill in the blanks (unless you turn on motion blur, which doesn’t do a good job emulating this).
This means video games need to compensate, and the best way to do that is more frames per second so your brain doesn’t need to fill in the blanks with the motion blur it’s used to seeing in the real world. You’ll obviously get diminishing returns from the same increase, but there will still be returns.
You know, I remember in middle school learning the art of Google for research purposes and being amazed that I could find almost any information I could want in minutes. It was also in that time that I first encountered the “Let me google that for you” website that just takes text, shows a mouse moving over the Google searchbar, pastes the text, and then returns the search results. Seeing that made me realize I’d feel a fool if it had to be pointed out to me that I could google the answer to a basic question.
So to see someone acknowledge that they could take one minute to find the answer to what an acronym they don’t know, from a more reliable source than an internet stranger (like the gpt answer above), and then outright refuse to do so on the basis that the answer should have already been spoon-fed to them is frankly bizarre. I sure didn’t know what RDT was when I opened the thread, but just to make sure I wasn’t crazy after reading the threads here I typed ‘rdt coffee’ in my search bar and in less time than it took you to write your comment I had the answer.
I need to understand, what is the process behind your thinking here? Why do they need to explain a 20 year old coffee term in a coffee community that takes less than a minute to learn the basics of if you do the thing you think you shouldn’t have to? I’m really trying to understand without letting judgement seep in, I’m just at a bit of a loss here.
13 digit pins? You mean my phone number and birthdate?
If a large chunk of their production is exported the market could be influenced to reduce the amount they can export, such as expanding US chip production to replace Chinese imports. Then their industries would be less profitable and have to spend time scaling down to meet the lower demand, which would also reduce their capacity to develop.
I think that fits between one extreme and another?
Hey thanks, I hate to see when those get misused. I don’t know how that flew over my head. Maybe their is something wrong with me.