aruametello

+1 to sarcasm.

i find it quite amusing that some people forget that opensource software is a double edge sword in these cases.

> "why can we run windows games the way we want and often better than windows?"

its because we can fiddle with anything in the system, from even before the kernel boots up to the software itself.

> "why cant we stop people tampering with their own systems to stop cheating?"

its because we can fiddle with anything in the system, from even before the kernel boots up to the software itself.

but my addendum is:

> I suppose the only good solution is like those "game streaming services": move all the logic to the server and use the client only as a rendering device.

we are in the "dark ages" of AI/computer vision usage and this wouldn’t stop aimbots that are screen readers. Overall the proposal is the "lesser evil" but still quite fucking evil.

faster than a zergling early base rush.

> I just fear that HDCP is a Trojan Horse.

yep.

overall what I expect to happen in a few years:

* more people get more fed up with microsoft + gaming on linux gets more popular * some few distros will be very oriented for closed source drm heavy software.

in this scenario the regular Debian "i wont install binary blobs on my machine" folks wont get affected, but certainly there will be "blackbox linux" distros with the "i have no idea what i am running" binary blobs kind of environment.

If the word is: "hey, you need this distro to play netflix drm content at 4k" a lot of people would pick that over the regular "opener source" stuff.

if it were viable to have some sort of "witchcraft, undecipherable, untamperable" linux pseudo variant that allows for intrusive anti cheat software for the games that dont support regular linux, we would be there already. I know I would be using that for being the "lesser crap than windows 11" that lets me play my comercial multiplayer games.

on the other side, if the day comes that "Linux from now onwards officially forces HDCP" the regular purist would ignore that without many problems... thanks to open source! and we would probably call this fork something else.

... therefore maybe this trojan horse is sign of the end, but mostly as the end of the "main brand name" and not of its forks.

some people want to implement this DRM support and some others want to use this support.

freedom in this scenario is more akin to "you are free to choose" above "you should pick one of the free choices".

some people will decide for paid products and some people will consume closed source "evil corporation" software.

... while it IS "anti ethical" to some of its founders, it should be an individual choice of each user, after all its my machine, and i don’t have to care about what Stallman/whatever says I should or shouldn’t do with my stuff, the same way they have their right to tell me to go fuck myself for my choices.

i can vouch for desec.io for having the option to have TXT, NS, CNAME, etc dns entries on their free tier! (limited to 1 domain, up to 50 entries)

i really had a bad time trying to get a letsencrypt certificate through the regular auth because it does require ports 80 and 443 tcp that by ISP blocks.

(you can get a letsencrypt cert through a TXT entry too, but most free DDNS´s providers dont seem to offer that)

out of the box, I imagine that surfaces can be lit, but probably not shadowed correctly. (structures aren’t solids, more like particles in 3d space)

it could look like the real-time lighting of an old game engine on rather modern assets. (quake 2-3 era)

or perhaps some "occlusion pre-pass" could be done to create a voxelized sparse volume from the splats that set a "voxel opacity value" for each to absorb light? (not far from how prebaked GI works nowadays)

note: not an expert on rendering, just a nutjob that did stuff in opengl in the old days.

perhalps ublock origin could merge this as an easter egg in the config?

(like a very poorly maintained easter egg, not a problem if is broken by something else)

> is it worth the headache of supporting way more hardware combinations?

no.

Probably is one of those of "because its fun" type of projects.

to be fair there are some degree of "hand curation" of the data so while "it is the internet", the actual trained data is a derivation of that.

in a mild but productive analogy:

I could actually hand a K&R book C programming book + lots of specs to say "this is the linux source code" (the raw data that were all observations were made, aka "the internet") ...or just send them the "kernel the source code" (the refined training data, after a LOT of manual stuff) ... that your compiler consumes to generate the kernel. (the Open Weights model, what they actually shared)

Mildly related rant: honestly its a bit shit to say "open source model" in a "open weights" model, its like saying World of Warcraft is opensource because they gave you an executable of the game. (you can still change it, but in more restricted ways)

> Fork the kernel!

pre "clanker-linux".

I am more intrigued by the inevitable Linux distro that will refuse any code that has AI contributions in it.

4000 certainly did, the "shader execution reordering" gave an meaningful uplift to tasks that "underutilized warp units due to scattered useful pixels".

it seems to have helped path tracing by a lot.

its a very honorable mention in my eyes because its more appropriate of the tile of "first independent Graphics unit" than the Geforce 2. (did more than just blast already projected triangles at the screen)

not that it was an awesome product, but certainly it was flexible.

a good (albeit tiny) demo of that is that vquake has the same wobbling water distortion of the software renderer quake but rendered entirely through the gpu. Perhaps with some interpretation this could be called the "caveman discovered fire" of the pixel shading era.