Funnily enough, that video talks about the pain of implementing a VST3 host at around the 25 minute mark. "If you're planning on doing it, set aside a lot of time."
3,236 karma · joined May 29, 2009
Initially this was just a vehicle for me to get stuck in and learn some WebGPU, so no doubt I'm missing lots of opportunities for optimisation - but it's been fun as much as frustrating. I leaned heavily on the SMPTE specification document and the FFMPEG proresdec.c implementation to understand and debug.
The ProRes bitstream spec was given to SMPTE [1], but I never managed to find any information on ProRes RAW, so it's exciting to see software and compute implementations here. Has this been reverse-engineered by the FFMPEG wizards? At first glance of the code, it does look fairly similar to the regular ProRes.
[1] https://pub.smpte.org/doc/rdd36/20220909-pub/rdd36-2022.pdf
"These islands" refers to the British Isles, in the context of Anglo-Irish relations.
It's some fascinating wordplay, born out of the Good Friday Agreement, trying not to step on various people's buttons.
You can actually insert your HTML into a SVG foreignObject, and then drawImage() that onto your canvas. But your HTML-in-SVG document will need to load all its own resources, fonts, CSS etc.. which makes this process rather tedious.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/22/crisis...
"Germany is the only country where immigration is clearly in the lead when people are asked which crisis bothers them most when they think about the future. Estonians and Poles are focused on the war in Ukraine. Italy and Portugal see the economic crisis as their biggest threat. Spain, Britain and Romania are the countries where Covid-19 is seen as the biggest trauma. And in France and Denmark the climate emergency is considered the most important crisis."
If AI is cheap, then by using AI generated content to cut costs, you will cheapen your brand by association. There are examples of brands doing this to themselves already.
"As of 2020, 78.7% of Singapore residents live in public housing, down from a high of 88.0% in 2000."
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-the-omega-bannister-stopwa...
Sure, I can pick up the awesome Casio F-91W today for £10 and it would do much the same job. But for the modern day money equivalent of that gorgeous Omega piece I'm going to be able to afford a high-end GPS watch. There's nothing comparatively exponential about it.
Accuracy requirements will depend on training context - if you're running 60 second laps on a track and trying to shave 1 second of your mile PR like Bannister was, then you'll be wanting a certified track and decisecond accurate clock. If you're training for the marathon and running 5K repeats on the road, a few 10s of meters or seconds here or there doesn't really matter.
I can understand why some people don't want to run with a smartwatch, measure themselves, broadcast their progress to all on social media, judge themselves against others, and so on. (I also don't generally judge those who do, unless they're truly awful!)
I can also understand why some people would rather not run with any measure of time or distance at all. They feel it gets in the way, they'd rather just run free, they'd rather just run for fun, or they'd rather just race others for places in the spirit of pure competition.
I just can't get my head around the concept (and this isn't the first time I've heard it), that somehow old-school watches are acceptable but modern watches are bad. It smacks of neo-luddism (or sometimes hipsterism).
"Several days [per week] consisted of 10x440 in 66 seconds with a 2 minute rest. During the following months they were gradually speeded up ... to 59 seconds per 440." [1].
So aside from accuracy, what's the difference between training with the feedback of timed laps on a track (be it Bannister's mechanical stopwatch and cinder track measured in imperial units), or a modern athlete running kilometer repeats on the road via their fancy Apple or Garmin smartwatch?
If one is that much of a running purist, why measure time or distance at all?
Maybe try reducing the dose of running (duration x intensity), until you don't suffer so much, and then slowly build up if you can over weeks. You can walk & run, couch-to-5K style, if it helps.
This little-by-little approach applies to most things in running - from training your VO2max to coming back from an injury, so it may help you. The key is to understand that the timeframe of adaptations can be weeks to months, and not to rush things.
Sounds awfully like a front for political organisation of some stripe or other rather than a genuine news outlet.
https://ourgeneration.news/about
edit
Also kind of interesting: the "ourgeneration.news" domain was registered 11 April 2022.
https://who.is/whois/ourgeneration.news
The linked Twitter account seems to have first tweeted on 20 April 2022, doesn't get a huge amount of engagement yet already has over 15K followers:
"At 9pm, with only the faintest glow left in the west, the birds stopped singing. Venus blazed and, as darkness deepened, others joined: Arcturus, Procyon, the Plough. A breeze riffled ink-black trees. Bats swooped. Something scuttered in the hedge. I knew exactly where I was; I’d walked this circuit of country lanes many times, and since lockdown almost daily. But I’d never done it at night. This time I wasn’t just walking with my legs; I was walking with every pore, every nerve. ..."
Could almost be written by Boris himself.
[1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/unite...
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04516746
In this case, US regulators took issue with the company's press release, rather than the results of the trial itself.
"[T]he Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine was very nearly the Oxford-Merck vaccine - and under the terms of the agreement with the American pharmaceutical giant, there were no guarantees of supply.
The episode played out against the backdrop of the first phase of the pandemic. During March and April 2020, the University of Oxford negotiated a deal which would allow Merck to manufacture and distribute the vaccine it was in the process of developing.
The arrangement made sense. Unlike British-Swedish AstraZeneca, Merck had experience in making vaccines. Its senior executives had links to Oxford scientist and government adviser Sir John Bell.
Yet when the contract reached Matt Hancock's desk, the former adviser said, the health secretary refused to approve it, because it didn't include provisions specifically committing to supply the UK first."
[1] https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-rejected-contracts-and-a...