> But it looks like they would have spared Anthropic if they capitulated to the regime's demands and bent their back over.

Yeah dude, that's the point.

That's the opposite of corporatism. Corporatism would be if the corporations made demands of the government, and the government bent over backwards.

The US government has lots of corporatism, but this isn't an example of that.

There are always winners and losers in political discussions not every corporation could have control over decision making. But that doesn't mean companies aren't playing a major rool in decisions. I'd imagine companies owned by Larry Ellison (fox and soon cnn) have a much larger role in decision making and agenda setting that most people are comfortable with.

Corporatism/corporatocracy is about representative groups from industries being embedded in the state and their interests shaping state policy.

The current US administration's relationships with corporations is more seeking to maximise how much bribe money it can extract from them, whilst undermining them with counterproductive policies no matter how big the tax breaks are.

Lyte2D is a game engine for 2D games with a very small and tight API. It's scripted in lua and it's easy to make tiny self contained executables for Windows, Mac, Linux and the web.

It lives at https://lyte2d.com and the source is at https://github.com/lyte2d/lyte2d. Check it out at your leisure!

Well that's terrifying

Yeah I love it when people start defining their own operators all over the place and give them all inscrutable names. "Dude just use the eggplant parm operator: <<=-=>>"

^ This meme is from 10+ years ago when Scala was at the peak of its hype driven by the FP craze. Nobody seriously writes cryptic-symbolic-operator code like that nowadays. Scalaz, the FP library most notorious for cryptic operator/method names, hasn't been relevant for many years. Today everyone uses Cats, ZIO, or plain Tapir or Play, all of which are quite ergonomic.

This is the type of thing that a good PR review culture will handle. I love that this is an option in some languages. But in a company, you need to decide what cool features should be used and when and how much.

Good PR review isn't really enough unless the organization is only large enough to handle around one PR at a time.

With languages like Scala I think its a clearer necessity that someone or some small group in an organization maintains a dominance of expertise or you have different groups that are only using the same language in name or facing overhead to keep in agreement where a lot of the best developers might be basically doing ambassador work.

yeah a small group of experts can leverage scala, its not a language for a corporate environment

One reason why I keep bouncing off of Haskell.

Is your argument that it's now someone else's problem? That it must be paid, just by someone else? Thanks, I hate it.

You will probably be able to just keep throwing AI at it in the coming years, as memory systems improve, if not already.

I don't have anything insightful to add but I do want to say that after years of ansible et al, pyinfra is an absolute breath of fresh air.

How does it compare to fabric ? I used neither of those. I'm quite proficient in ansible and fine with it but always interested in alternatives.

They're sort of different things. I think of fabric as more of a remote shell, but pyinfra is exactly analogous to ansible.

I'm not super familiar with this area so I don't follow... Why is animation any more difficult? I would think you could attach the basic 3D shapes to a skeleton the same way you would with polygons.

There are lots of reasons you don’t see a lot of SDF skeletal rigging & animation in games. It’s harder because the distance evaluations get much more expensive when you attach a hierarchy of warps and transforms, and there are typically a lot of distance evaluations when doing ray-marching. This project reduces the cost by using a voxel cache, but animated stuff thwarts the caching, so you have to limit the amount of animation. Another reason it’s more difficult to rig & animate SDFs is because you only get a limited set of shapes that have analytic distance functions, or you have primitives and blending and warping that break Lipschitz conditions in your distance field, which is a fancy way of saying it’s easy to break the SDF and there are only limited and expensive ways to fix it. SDFs are much better at representing procedural content than the kind of mesh modeling involved in character animation and rendering.

One possibility, a little backwards maybe, is to produce a discrete SDF from e.g. a mesh, by inserting it in an octree. The caching becomes the SDF itself, basically. This would let rendering be done via the SDF, but other logic could use the mesh (or other spatial data structure).

Or could the engine treat animated objects as traditional meshed objects (both rendering and interactions)? The author says all physics is done with meshes, so such objects could still interact with the game world seemingly easily. I imagine this would be limited to characters and such. I think they would look terrible using interpolation on a fixed grid anyways as a rotation would move the geometry around slightly, making these objects appear "blurry" in motion.

Sampling an implicit function on a grid shifts you to the world of voxel processing, which has its own strengths and weaknesses. Further processing is lossy (like with raster image processing), storage requirements go up, recovering sharp edges is harder...

But isn't this what the author is doing already? That's what I got from the video. SDF is sampled on a sparse grid (only cells that cross the level set 0) and then values are sampled by interpolating on the grid rather than full reevaluation.

Posting an AI summary is about as useful as posting Google search results. We can all do it, we don't need anyone to do it for us.

> But the collective efforts of some government agencies, academia and the private sector helped reverse the trend.

Well that's the key. The current administration is doing its best to sabotage science.

I get it. But what I'm saying is that the impact of a single misguided administration, while can be very devastating, is not enough to write off american super power status in research.

With appropriate planning and funding, the next administration can definitely reverse the trend.

> The information to properly land the plane is in the manual. The required air speed and altitude have never been a secret, if you read the manual (which I guess most kids didn't).

It's also on-screen. What's missing is the acceptable ranges -- +/- 100 for altitude, +/- 50 for speed, per the post. Knowing that the slop for altitude is much higher is definitely helpful information.