Awesome! Do you have any resources on, uhhh, "hardware accelerating" a software renderer. i.e. using SIMD (or math hardware like the vector hardware you can access with the Accelerate[0] framework on Apple devices).
I imagine it will still be around for a long time because Apple and a lot of large third party apps use it for simple 3D experiences. (E.g. the badges in the Apple Fitness app).
Apple wants devs to move to RealityKit, which does support non-AR 3D, but it is still pretty far from feature parity with SceneKit. Also RealityKit still has too many APIs that are either visionOS only or are available on every platform but visionOS.
Microrant: I absolutely loathe when I am told "move to new thing. Old thing is deprecated/unsupported" and the new thing is incredibly far from feature parity and usually never reaches parity, let alone exceeds it. This is not just an Apple problem.
Yeah @IBOutlets are generally the one thing that are allowed to be implicitly-unwrapped optionals. They go along with using storyboards & xibs files with Interface Builder. I agree that you really should just crash if you are attempting to access one and it is nil. Either you have done something completely incorrect with regards to initializing and accessing parts of your UI and want to catch that in development, or something has gone horribly, horribly, horribly with UIKit/AppKit and storyboard/xib files are not being loaded properly by the system.
A good tool for catching stuff during development, is the humble assert()[0]. We can use precondition()[1], to do the same thing, in ship code.
The main thing is, is to remain in control, as much as possible. Rather than let the PC leave the stack frame, throw the error immediately when it happens.
There actually is an analytical solution using a power series that actually converges (Karl Sundman's work). Unfortunately, the universe still mocks our attempts. Though the series converges, it does so incredibly slowly. From Wikipedia:
The corresponding series converges extremely slowly. That is, obtaining a value of meaningful precision requires so many terms that this solution is of little practical use. Indeed, in 1930, David Beloriszky calculated that if Sundman's series were to be used for astronomical observations, then the computations would involve at least 10^8000000 terms.
> the computations would involve at least 10^8000000 terms.
Well we could speed up that simulation pretty easily, just arrange the actual masses and velocities somewhere...
Then I thought, is there a way to scale the distances, masses and velocities to create a system with the same, but proportionally faster behavior?
One guess as to perhaps why not: As distances get small, normal matter bodies will get close enough to actually collide. Perhaps some tiny primordial black holes would be useful.
It worries me how many people prefer using AI over doing their own thinking. How much of your life will you "live" on autopilot? Hollowing out your own soul little-by-little when you do things like that.
This is 100 times scarier, and more likely, than the "chatgpt will become skynet and nuke the world" and "Ai will replace every jobs in 5 years" pipe dreams
The even scarier thing is, there are people I know who are well educated etc and in my conversations with them I hear more and more about how they are relying on chatgpt for information re. surgery and illness and so on. As if chatgpt came up with the information itself, as opposed to, being a more superior interface that uses the same data as Google Search - at least with Google Search you actively knew you the source of the information.
I believe this speaks to something deeper about humans - only those with great discipline will be able to prevent themselves from being sucked in and losing their valuable human capital. It doesnt seem to matter whether one is dumb or smart.
We need actual data to decide how significant is "significant." Otherwise you will just have businesses complaining no one wants to work for "significantly" higher pay (a whole $0.05/hour more).
I’m sorry but this is a ridiculous take. $0.05/hr is $104 a year for a full-time job. Zero people are going to have that be the tipping point for them to take on a monotonous, often physically draining job that they’d otherwise turn down.
So why do you think people continue to gamble, even after it has ruined their and their families lives and finances? Slot machine addicts will literally void their bladder rather than stop playing for 5 minutes to use the restroom.
Because people make poor choices and it's usually their own fault.
We used have words like "vice" and "sin" to describe these poor choices, but thanks to post-60s radical individualism, the only vocabulary for describing maladaptive behavior that remains of the language of medicine. Therefore, everything bad someone does is a "disease" for which he needs "therapy" or "treatment". We've utterly lost the capacity for describing deficiencies of the conscience.
Why would many, many, many people choose to piss and shit themselves in public instead of stopping for a few minutes to use the restroom? Why would someone choose the push a button every 5 seconds to the point where it ruins their life?
Put it another way: why would gambling companies continue to develop gambling machines? Why not stop with the mechanical, one-armed-bandit of the early 1900s if what they do has no effect on people?
Perhaps by the time someone's at the shitting at the seat phase of a gambling habit the neurological feedbacks arising from the intermittent reward schedule have become too strong for him to resist on his own.
But who made him start gambling in the first place? It's not like people who start gambling don't know how it ends. The most addictive slot machine in the world can't compel someone to sit at it for the first time. People KNOW these machines are addictive and choose to use them anyway.
It used to be cultural common knowledge that the wages of sin is death.
Perhaps by the time someone's at the shitting at the seat phase of a gambling habit the neurological feedbacks arising from the intermittent reward schedule have become too strong for him to resist on his own.
Bingo. The machines don't play themselves, of course. But at the same time, the manufacturers and casinos know exactly what they are doing. I would say:
We've utterly lost the capacity for describing deficiencies of the conscience.
applies to those the manufacturers and casinos as well.
Psychology and medicine have a bad habit of describing something, giving it a name, and then pretend it's also an explanation of the something. "Addiction" is one such thing. It's both a description of behavior and a (circular, deficient) explanation of behavior.
But then again, so is "vice" and "sin". You're not helping.
[0] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/accelerate
reply