Isn't that up to the reader/visitor/user to decide? As it stands right now, Cursor are publishing results they won't say how they got them, and compares them against aggregate scores we don't know the true results of, and you're saying "it doesn't matter, the tool is better anyways".
Then why publish the obscured benchmarks in the first place then?
Don't we have more internet submarine cables and less single points of failure in our internet infrastructure today than years ago? If so, shouldn't that make it easier to route around failures?
> IOW, they're not dumping, they're doing the opposite. I don't know why.
If they're doing the opposite yet end up a lot cheaper with higher quality and more features, I'm really not sure what's going on. Don't see how they could be cheaper either.
I'm a European with an Audi car, been looking at switching to EV and I can't lie and say BYD doesn't look like more value for the money than the Audi alternatives, so doesn't really surprise me.
Are you using it over Ethernet or WiFi? I remember I tried Moonlight to a local computer two or three years ago over Ethernet and the latency was still too bad, any ideas if that's better today?
> Any computer can generate a private/public key pair, which is all you need for identify.
Right, but once you've generated those, then what? You need a global registry of sorts so people can lookup each others keys for example, which is why DNS kind of is the best we have available today.
I don't think there is any perfect solution here, but it's hard to come up with something that has better trade-offs than DNS. Sure, ICANN might be based in the US, but so far DNS been relatively safe to rely on, and if ends up not reliable in the future, I'm not sure social media profiles is the biggest worry at that point.
I think where I grew up (Sweden) it started with the Sony Ericsson "Walkman" family of phones that could record 320×240 videos I think or something like that, and I think I was around 15 when they became almost ubiquitous at school, so must have been around 2006/2007.
Any possibility of getting all of those things except the animations themselves? Mostly curious about the auto rigging, auto bone structure and layered image output so I could do the animation myself with Spine yet use the tool so I can skip the annoying rigging/setup steps :) But currently it kind of forces me to generate the rigging + animation together.
Also, being able to touch up the model between Step 1 and Step 2 would probably be a neat addition, I could see some minor faults I could quickly clean up if I could download the generated .glb and import a new version, so Step 2 doesn't rely on a model containing mistakes.
Otherwise, this looks pretty damn good, the UX is slightly confusion at first, and the colors all over the place on the website itself, but it does seem to work better than I expected. Kudos for making the life of animators easier :)
Edit: two minor notes, the download URLs doesn't actually trigger a browser download, but instead shows it in the browser, and the uploaded files seems to end up being semi-public, no authentication at all. Might want to tell people to not upload private content just yet, or put uploaded/generated data behind auth. Might want to zip up all the files (so the directories for the image is correct too) and offer a download of that instead.
Edit2: Looking at the generated .atlas, are all the names correct? I'm seeing "animated_Orc Idle_7328aa0f" even in the .atlas files generated from my own characters, using a walking animation. The attachments in the skins also reference "animated_Orc" in the generated .json, maybe it's just some static string that isn't supposed to change?
If there was no way of moving away from it, probably yeah. But since you can migrate from a did:plc to did:web, I don't feel like they're very similar situations at all.
I kind of do this, semi-manually when using the web chat UIs (which happens less and less). I basically never let the conversations go above two messages in total (one message from me + one reply, since the quality of responses goes down so damn quick), and if anything is wrong, I restart the conversation and fix the initial prompt so it gets it right. And rather than manually writing my prompts in the web UIs, I manage prompts with http://github.com/victorb/prompta which makes it trivial to edit the prompts as I find out the best way of getting the response I want, together with some simple shell integrations to automatically include logs, source code, docs and what not.
> The fact that the AT Protocol relies on everyone having a domain name
Well, either that or someone else hosting their identity (see did:plc), which seems to be the part you say should exist?
Probably DNS is the most decentralized centralized system we have available today that most people can actually use, unless I'm missing some obviously better way of doing the same thing?
> Having a kid myself, I think life is much worse now. There is the constant unconscious fear of getting filmed, etc. It was much easier for my generation to just experiment, do stupid stuff, etc., you know being a child/teenager, without the fear of repercussions.
I don't know what generation you belong to, but I was still in school when mobile phones that could record video became "good enough" that most of my peers in school had them, today I'm ~33. But we were also thinking about that sort of stuff, especially when we were doing stuff you kind of don't want to be public, and there was a few cases of embarrassing things "leaking" which obviously suck.
But I'm not sure how different it is today? Maybe it's more acceptable to film people straight in their faces, and less accepted to slap the phone out of people's hand if they're obnoxious about it? In the end, it doesn't feel like a "new" problem anymore, as it seems like this all started more than 15 years ago and we had fears about being filmed already then.
Meh, as long as you're contributing more than you upset people, it seems to balance itself out. I've made some egregious comments in the past (judging by the downvotes at least), yet you can still see this comment and probably my future ones too.
And even though some comments I've made been downvoted, they've stilled spawned interesting conversations, so I count that as a win regardless.
Sure, not doubting that, I'm also a developer, and use Windows. But not because I want to, which I feel is a pretty common position to be in, at least around me.
> CAD programs aren't just a different set of operations on the same data, they use an entirely different representation (b-rep [1] vs Blender's points, vertices, and polygons).
So with that in mind, there should be something that is possible to build in CAD, but impossible then to build in Blender?
I know the differences between the two, I understand they're fundamentally different, yet I seem to be able to produce similar results to others using CAD, so I'm curious what results I wouldn't be able to reproduce in Blender.
Then why publish the obscured benchmarks in the first place then?