Very interesting readup! I have some C# projects I've had in mind to try to compile to AOT. Quite different for complex programs of course, but the perf being very close to C is a great motivator.
Why would you want them in AOT, though? It's great for startup time and native interoperability, but it might be slower in general due to machine specific optimizations.
I would object, I want my containers to be as fast as possible and the JIT compiles for each CPU arch you run it on (supposedly optimally). Docker image size, who cares?
Even that depends. If you use two or more images based on same ie. official .NET image, you have only one .NET image and total images size might be lower.
Thanks for hilariously off topic and deranged reply. If you haven't noticed it's not 2020 anymore and ESG funding is drying up which Bioware had to experience first hand just yesterday with being shutdown by EA just like Maxis before ;)
The only thing the continues historical revision about GG is proving, is that the collusion between game developer and game reviewer/media is way worse than GG ever demonstrated.
If the "right side" is slandering innocent people into suicide for calling out blatant corruption, then i am fine with being wrong.
Edit: rewriting your post with more and more nonsensical claims while decently entertaining is what i expect.
Edit2: I never claimed to have made games but i guess just daring to disagree with your world view warrants genetic fallacies, false allegations and insults, once again what i expected.
>So you're using a dead man's suicide as a weapon against the woman GamerGate already doxxed and drove from her home, against the explicit wishes of his own grieving family.
I was gonna ignore your further ignorant remarks however this is too disgusting to not reply to. I do not need the permission from anybody to mention my own experiences just because they got bullied into silence and accepting similarly unhinged behaviour to finally have there peace.
I always think people like you only follow Tesla and think everyone is stupid.
Why do you ignore all the other companies capable of doing this?
Just because other manufacturere don't put hardware in every car and let pay people for tech they can't use for years, doesn't mean these companies don't have the tech.
Nvidia has the tech, BMW has the tech, Waymo has the tech.
And while a Cybertaxi is still not allowed on german streets, Waymo is coming to munich...
You are free to think whatever ignorant thoughts about "people like me". I follow the whole field quite a bit, so I know what I'm saying when I say FSD has no real competition. For someone with a surface level image like you, it might look like there's a lot, but they are like Via to Intel. Or Google+ to Facebook.
No one else has the combination for affordability, custom silicon, deep hardware integration, market fit, manufacturing, and vertical integration like Tesla. Some people have some of the parts. Like NVIDIA. or Waymo. Or Comma.ai. But no one is even close to being in the same ballpark in ALL the areas required, and that has no easy fixes.
EU being corrupt and regulating themselves to the stone age is sad, but only makes them less relevant for the world of tomorrow.
That's like commenting about needing a Chromebook on a post the newest Blackwell GPU that can serve inference workloads of thousands of people. Just irrelevant.
Tesla's efforts on the original Roadster made them be able to transform the whole EV industry to the point that EV's are nowadays actually affordable. Not everything is exactly about your specific needs, and you shouldn't shout people down when they're lifting the whole field.
Seriously. It’s pretty clear that the new Roadster is not intended to be a practical car for the masses. And that’s Ok. There’s room for a “halo” product in any lineup.
If there is limited supply of memory production, and an 16GB student laptop is $800 instead of $500, then I would say the poor folk are justified with naysaying the new 128GB top shelf exotics.
Back to the K shaped economy, it’s not just annoying that some people have more money than everyone else, but given the gap in economic power, the goods that are produced are made for the people with money. With limited resources to produce material, are you going to sell to the bottom or the top? So the people not buying flying cars are left behind in more ways than one.
Of course a roadster is not the car to "drop kids and get groceries". I think op was not trying to imply that. But Musk stated his big plan was to sell an expensive roadster in order to afford building an affordable car. That was 20 years ago. The closest it ever got was a promise of a 35K Model 3 which at launch cost 50K. So, yeah, from that perspective, op's comment is relevant.
It's a tech demo marketing presentation with a jumping car in it, not a flying one. It does look pretty cool though. Let's first wait and see if/when this will even be available and not just a marketing stunt.
This is what the Roadster is. You will see Roadsters in random parking lots, not just specialized areas, like it would be with the flying pinto (which failed) or some newer options that compromise arguably way too much to have long-term flight WITH driveability.
I make flying stuff all the time. Not as heavy but I don't see a reason why I couldn't and I won't need a couple of billion to do so. This thing 'flies' for a very narrow definition of flying. Call me when it stays in the air for a couple of minutes. Prediction: that will never happen.
Your definition for "flying" is hard irrelevant. Any toy plane that we do call "flying" flies only for seconds, but has concepts like lift / and / or thrust and / or aerial control thru different ways like aerodynamic stability or in-air thrust. So did the first aeroplane too. Hell, even hyper-maneuvering multi-mach air-to-air missiles just "jump" with your worthless definition of "flight".
reply