• 0 Posts
  • 62 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 12th, 2023

help-circle


  • Most people prefer more fps over image quality, so minor artifacting from DLSS is preferable to the game running much slower with cleaner image quality.

    I don’t think we’re not much different in this portion. AI upscale is passable enough that gamers will choose it. If presented with a better, non-artifacting option, gamers will choose that since the goal is performance and not AI. If the stat is from PS data, and not from a poll, I think it just strengthens that users want performance more.

    There will never be a set performance target again.

    It’s not that there’s no set performance target. The difference is merely one, on the CounterStrike era, vs. many, now. Now, there’s more performance targets for PC than Counter Strike days. Games just can’t keep up. Saying “there will never be a set performance target” is just washing hands when a publishers/ directors won’t set directions and priorities which performance point to prioritize.

    It might be that your point is optimizing for scalability, and that is fine too.


















  • While the proposed bill’s goals are great, I am not so sure about how it would be tested and enforced.

    It’s cool that on current LLMs, the LLM can generate a ‘no’ response like those clips where people ask if the LLM has access to their location – but then promptly gives advices to a closest restaurant as soon as the topic of location isn’t on the spotlight.

    There’s also the part about trying to contain ‘AI’ to follow once it has ingested a lot of training data. Even goog doesn’t know how to curb it once they are done with initial training.

    I am all up for the bill. It’s a good precedent but a more defined and enforce-able one would be great as well.