megrimlock

> giving folks the ability to wait-and-see for years, with zero risk, before pulling the trigger isn't really fair

Isn't that what an option represents? The freedom to choose later is the inherent value of the option.

And that value isn't acquired risk free: it's compensation for putting time in in lieu of salary.

Perhaps there's room for a rust equivalent of cdecl, a tool to map rust to plain English descriptions, offering a gradual onramp to the syntax.

This kind of thing seems silly to experts but could raise the rate at which folks make it through language learning funnel.

That Niko's text-arrow lifetime annotations are so helpful here suggests a rust IDE could offer similar highlighting or annotations to explain borrow checker errors.

One of the ergonomic hurdles to rust adoption by experienced C++ users is that the language looks similar enough that such people may think they fully understand the semantics even before they've fully internalized all the details. It's a tricky zone when something feels familiar enough that you don't realize the remaining mistakes in your conceptualization.

You are not alone. If you look at the "target retirement date" funds Vanguard etc. run you'll see that by the time the target date is 5-10 years out they have shifted largely to bonds to provide defined income.

Anything with low-effort access will always connote little value in people's minds because endless alternatives exist. Anyone who wants to get paid for doing something hard should avoid channels like that, or only use them to float associated freebie products that can introduce people to the real product.

Thankfully the executive health plan has 100% coverage so the dna regen and orbital massage treatments are gratis. It's the little things.

> If you could point me to a single bank president who says

Why do you think they would say what their true goals are to you? People in positions of power are extremely judicious and strategic about what they say and to whom. They get daily exercise in this and only the best survive. The most effective are excellent at pursuing their goals while maintaining a socially credible exterior. The less effective use coded language (corpspeak or political rhetoric) to try to hedge through via indirection.

Anyone know what they mean by an "inverse modulo" algorithm? That only seems meaningful for numbers coprime to the sensor ceiling value.

You can approximate low frequency light fields with a suitable distribution of virtual point lights.

Neat stuff. It's worth noting that shadow rays don't entirely avoid precision issues either. You still need to handle self-intersections. One option is to add a bias epsilon (which introduces other artifacts, depending on the scale); another is to reject local self-shadowing (which means you can't get finely shadowed surface cracks); another is to give artists explicit control over which sets of objects shadow which others (which adds artist time). Offline rendered movies use all of these.