tekato

Why is he a threat to the power of billionaires?

You are allowed to suggest sentencing. This isn’t preferential treatment to Google. Of course, the judge doesn’t have to listen to anybody’s suggestions, but you are definitely allowed to make them.

Manganese dioxide is used to decompose ozone. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1001074222005083

Mining is easy, but most countries don’t want to deal with the problems that come with refining.

This exists. In fact, Intel GPUs do not actually support HDMI, they convert to DisplayPort in GPU.

The material itself cannot be magnetized, which is what they mean by not “being magnetic”. However, these do have spin currents that can be measured and controlled, so they sustain “magnetic activity”. Kind of like a hybrid between ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic.

Good. That means you can buy them for cheap in a few years from Ebay.

Hardware hasn't changed in the way you think it has for quite a while. For shits i span up a compatability check on my fifteen year old file server and it qualifies for w10.

Your 15 years old system is Windows 10 compatible because Windows 10 was released in 2015, meaning that it is actually a 5 years old system when compared to Windows 10. You can run Windows 11 with any device from 2019.

The big wank issue with win10/11 is microsoft trying to enforce corporate hardware requirements on home users. Mostly so they can start trying to garden wall their shit.

You keep saying this line about corporate hardware. What’s “corporate” about TPM 2.0?

It is not the same. The government won’t even allow you to drive a car without a seatbelt if you somehow managed to buy one. Anyways most cars will provide you support for 5 years. A car is worth tens of thousands of dollars yet you get less support than a computer and nobody is complaining about that. Just like you can use your car with its 10 years old software, you can use your 10 years old computer with your old OS (Windows 10). This is a very simple problem.

I mean, in an academic sense, if you possess the ability to implement the method, sure you can make your own code and do this yourself on whatever hardware you want, train your own models, etc.
But from a practical standpoint of an average computer hardware user, no, you I don't think you can just use this method on any hardware you want with ease, you'll be reliant on official drivers which just do not support / are not officially released for a whole ton of hardware.
Not many average users are going to have the time or skillset required to write their own inplementations, train and tweak the AI models for every different game at every different resolution for whichever GPUs / NPUs etc the way massive corporations do.
It'll be a ready to go feature of various GPUs and NPUs and SoCs and whatever, designed and manufactured by Intel, reliant on drivers released by Intel, unless a giant Proton style opensource project happens, with tens or hundreds or thousands of people dedicates themselves to making this method work on whateverhardware.

Yes, this was never intended for the average user, the average user doesn’t even understand what is being explained in the paper. This is for video game studios to include with their games, or driver and OS developers to implement this system wide. The user gets provided a working product as usual. How many users do you think go and play with the FSR code which is totally open source? Not many (I’m inclined to say zero).

I think at one point someone tried to do something like this, figuring out how to hackily implement DLSS on AMD GPUs, but this seems to require compiling your own dlls, and is based off of such a random person's implementation of DLSS, and is likely quite buggy and inefficient compared to an actual Nvidia GPU with official drivers.

I’m not aware of somebody trying DLSS on AMD, but I don’t think it will ever work. Anyways, this is precisely why this isn’t intended for the average user, because even the average developer doesn’t know how to work these things. There’s very few people who know what to do with the information that was provided, as is the case with most academic papers.

Which would mean that the practical upshot for an average end user is that if they're not using a GPU architecture designed with this method in mind, the method isn't going to work very well, which means this is not some kind of magic 'holy grail', universal software upgrade for all old hardware (I know you haven't said this, but others in this thread have speculated at this

Yes, new technologies are never guaranteed to work with old hardware. That’s just how things are unfortunately.

And also the overhead of doing the calculation of predicting pipeline render times vs extrapolated frame render times is not being figured in with this paper, meaning that the article based on the paper is at least to some extent overstating this method's practical quickness to the general public.

The real-time arbitration is not the focus of this paper so that’s expected. Here they describe the framework, and the patent is just a particular use case for it.

I think the disconnect we are having here is that I am coming at this from a 'how does this actually impact your average gamer' standpoint, and you are coming at it from much more academic standpoint, inclusive of all the things that are technically correct and possible, whereas I am focusing on how that universe of technically possible things is likely to condense into a practical reality for the vast majority of non experts.

I guess that makes sense.

What is a single word that means 'this method is a feature that is likely to only be officially, out of the box supported and used by specific Intel GPUs/NPUs etc until Nvidia and/or AMD decide to officially support it out of the box as well, and/or a comprehensive open source team dedicates themselves to maintaining easy to install drivers that add the same functionality to non officially supported hardware'?

Unfortunately that’s the case with any advanced technology, no matter how open it is. We depend on companies who are willing to pay somebody to figure it out.

TPM is required for Windows 11 because it is used for security purposes. The world is filled with things that aren’t “technically required” but they are actually required because they help prevent things. The web doesn’t “technically require” HTTPS, but modern websites require an HTTPS connection. A seatbelt isn’t “technically required” to drive a car, but you are required to wear one anyways.

I would disagree given that two of the most efficient computer chips are based on phone SOCs (Qualcomm and Apple). Anyways, the fact that your system is powerful doesn’t mean anything from a support standpoint. Supporting old hardware means you need different versions for devices with different capabilities and architectures, which is not feasible for a company that also wants to focus on new technologies. Again, out of all top operating systems, Windows is giving you the most support.