I am wondering if engineering simulations for fluids take advantage of GPUs? I studied CFD back in 2005 or so and we used ANSYS Fluent as a solver and it took forever to converge with sufficient accuracy.
If anyone in engineering has insight into this, I'd love to know.
Technically, non-fluid simulations could also be sped up using GPUs? Dynamics, solid state mechanics, thermal simulations, etc.
I couldn't disagree with you more. Everyday, I read articles about VC. How to pitch, how to prepare, how to strategize a startup to ensure future growth, scalability, etc.
Quoting the article, "Growth is always a focus for startups, since a startup without growth is usually a failure." This is article doesn't apply to folks who want to stay small (the discussion of this topic ~ 3 people company).
You could have approached your argument a little less strongly - simply stating your opinions. Authoritative didactic statements require data to back it up otherwise it just sounds abrasive and completely unproductive.
I found your comment a bit abrasive, yet you’re lacking the grit to support it besides just anecdotal evidence (just as the parent comment).
I have yet another opinion - I’ve seen a wide variety of articles on HN from how to grow fast to how to stay small. We’re not going to stay productive by arguing without data.
This kind of thing drives me crazy! But, for a small project that’s not obvious to anyone - this makes sense.
Look at Apple’s full iPhone landing page. It’d be silly to explain at the top “iPhone is a wireless digital communication device.” It’s obvious that dude is wearing glasses that look like AR/VR headset. You ain’t gotta spell it out for people.
Thank you, absolutely fascinating talk. It was hard to develop video games back in the day and just as it was hard to beat those games. What a wonderful era of ingenuity, creativity and passion.
Of course you should be talking about yourself on your resume but a couple of this that are different here:
- Wtf is up with music
- 51%/49% thing.
- Publicly asking to be hired that reflects poorly on his current job at Google.
- Excessively loud self marketing
why not have a simple site with your accomplishments? Why all the excess bullshit?
Checking his website, it reeks of narcissism. There are better ways to assert yourself than to do all the corny things he has done on his self promotion website.
Also don’t forget - we still have to write certain routines in Assembly even after so many years. Number of abstraction layers doesn’t mean complete automation.
It is not even good for beginners as so many things he does is completely and utterly wrong. People who do not have the expertise in their domain should not be teaching and perpetuating wrong methods and creating a generation of bad engineers/makers.
If you get a chance, please watch his YT series on KiCAD. Finally, he gets a PCB made and fumbles his way through.
Teachers are supposed to be domain experts that can lead students in the best-known-method path. This guy doesn't even come close.
If you want solid tutorials on Embedded Electronics, I recommend Patrick Hood Daniel's Newbiehack channel.
Not only does it skip the Arduino framework, he goes to a great length to explain fundamentals of embedded electronics. He is a fantastic teacher and above all, an expert at what he does.
Ever read a description or a brochure for an art show? An artists' biography?
It is full of infuriating bullshit.
It was so refreshing to read Francis Bacon's newly released Catalog Raisonne. All descriptions and biographical information is factual without any discussion of some pseudo-profound meaning. Same goes for good art critics such as David Sylvester[1]. He was one of the very few art critics that tried go past the pseudo-intellectual bullshit and truly understand Art and the Artist behind it.
I have read dozens if not hundreds of art catalogs, brochures and biographies. As an objective person, it is so difficult to get past the bullshit to actually understand and approach art.
I went to Georgia Tech and took the Renassaince Art course. About 98% was bullshit to the point I thought that it was some kind of a joke. I couldn't believe it.