elgordino

Yeah this article is woefully uninformed. Author seems to be butt hurt about GPU pricing rather than any serious interest in how the protocol actually works.

I meant a diminishing number of PC players without RT.

The PC with RT + console market is increasing. The PC without RT market is only decreasing.

The reason the new Doom and Indiana Jones games require a card with ray tracing is a consequence of the consoles all having ray tracing and an increasing number of PC users do too.

So to support a diminishing number of PC players would require the game to be lit twice, one with RT and one with traditional methods. Obviously this costs more in development and testing and studios are increasingly deciding it’s just not worth it.

It’s got to be the biggest dividing line we’ve seen in years. I suspect things will settle down for a while, now.

I wonder how many millions they need to be inspired to update their platform so it doesn’t need a regular outage every Tuesday.

All hotels reserve the right to inspect your room whenever they need to. The privacy sign just means you don’t want room service, it’s not some magical lock.

They’d still knock, not just burst into your room to catch you in flagrante.

That said seeing the black hat conference in this way is daft.

Just saw this a few hours ago. If it wasn’t for this post I think I’d have forgotten about it already.

I guess it’s fine, just entirely unremarkable.

Because it’s actually really hard to achieve technically. When ads are served outside the stream you can easily serve different ads to different viewers based on their profiles. When the ads are baked into the stream you can either

A) Create a whole bunch of different copies of the video asset with different ads baked in and then rotate these on a regular basis. Which would be expensive to update and store and limit the range of adverts that could be served to a particular user.

B) Dynamically create a stream on the users request, which while possible means standard CDN caching isn’t going to work so there’s a distribution challenge.

Or some other alternative they’ve come up with. I’d be really interest to know what their approach is here.

Yeah. If this restriction exists it’s pretty clear it only applies to selling steam keys on another platform, not for selling generally. Pretty often games are cheaper on Epic or GOG and don’t use steam for delivery.

I imagine SMS authorisation texts are Telegrams biggest single expense, they are for Signal https://signal.org/blog/signal-is-expensive/

Telcos know that authentication is about the only remaining use case for SMS and are not going to turn down the revenue stream.

That said this idea from Telegram sounds absurd. Not least I expect most contracts prevent reselling free SMS’s like this. The security implications have got to be significant too.