zlsa

I'm not sure where you're located, but the Pico 4 isn't being sold in the US which automatically excludes a huge number of people who might otherwise consider it.

I don't think these are very comparable to the Quest Pro.

It appears neither of those have face tracking, and the Pimax doesn't have eye tracking. Besides that, both of those are PCVR (not standalone) and the Aero doesn't even come with controllers despite costing nearly $2000.

Quadcopters have short flight times because they need to use batteries. Commercial helicopters regularly have 3+ hours of flight time.

(Of course, Lillium's aircraft is battery-powered. But it's not fair to say that an aircraft capable of VTOL will always have a dramatically reduced endurance compared to a non-VTOL aircraft, especially since this one can transition to fixed-wing flight.)

From TFA:

> An online software update will fix the problem, Tesla says.

Here is the original comment [0] and the relevant quote:

> Godot is below average in quality compared to Unreal

Quality != featureset; I've used Godot extensively (and dabbled with Unreal) and Godot just isn't as solid a product as Unreal, and it's not a small gap either. (I fully acknowledge that Godot necessarily cannot be expected to have the same development velocity and focus that a multibillion dollar company can, but nevertheless, that doesn't really factor in very much when it comes to choosing between the two.)

There are countless gotchas and footguns in Godot (some of which are being fixed for 4.0!) that directly impede my ability to use it day-to-day. Some examples that come to mind:

* No strict typing in GDScript (type annotations aren't robust enough and lots of type errors can sneak past) * No strict typing of node types (for example, Unity components can require the presence of component "X", and this relationship can be guaranteed since it's checked at build time.) * No strict typing of resources/scenes: they're referenced only by string paths, and it's not possible to check types at build time. * GDScript performance (this one's a killer; unless you resort to GDNative, scripting performance quickly becomes a serious bottleneck.) I've heard that performance is significantly improved in 4.0!

I've also encountered a number of arcane bugs (some fixable, some requiring arcane workarounds); notably, I recall a bug where there were multiple texture files with the same name (but in different directories); this worked perfectly on all platforms except for Android, where in one case only, the wrong texture was used.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32357248

It's not a direct comparison, but there are definitely many games that could be feasibly built in any one of Godot, Unity, or Unreal. There's a lot more to consider beyond just the engine features, such as the asset pipeline, the tooling ecosystem, and the availability of third-party assets and scripts.

I can concur - the stated position is that GDScript should only be used for non-performance-critical tasks, but even with a hundred objects running a simple script every frame, performance absolutely tanks in 3.x. The performance wall is so easy to hit that GDNative is almost a requirement to get good performance in non-trivial projects.

> as long as it's a real standard already installed and kept up to date on 99% of potential user's systems.

Unfortunately, by far the closest thing we have to this is Google Chrome.

It's worth noting that even a cheap, used 3-year-old iPhone 11 [0] is faster in benchmarks than a new flagship Samsung S22 Ultra [1], and the disparity is much larger when comparing flagships of the same generation head-to-head. This is no excuse for slow software, but it does go some way towards explaining the speed of the iOS app.

[0]: https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/iphone-11 [1]: https://browser.geekbench.com/android_devices/samsung-sm-s90...

Agreed, this is a crazy outcome. I don't actually use the engine; I evaluated it a while ago for hobby projects but never went beyond that. So this doesn't directly affect me.

Termination email: https://host.zlsadesign.com/rkHpL6ET5.png

Email about the EULA change that added the termination clause two days ago: https://host.zlsadesign.com/SkfpU6ETq.png

That's not surprising considering the brand-new price is $299, and refurb units are semi-regularly available for $250.

> specific ground-up custom OS

There are no doubt huge changes made, but Quest 2 runs Android underneath.

Rift S felt like an in-between step to partially satisfy PCVR users, and it was dropped disappointingly quickly. It's obvious that Facebook is moving towards standalone headsets now.

Quest 2 is designed to hit a very low price point, and it certainly shows. But despite that, it's a very competent high-resolution, high-framerate (90, with experimental 120Hz support) VR headset; the only major drawbacks are low FOV, poor color quality on the display, and lack of uncompressed PCVR.

Antecdotal:

Oculus Go and Rift S were the only fixed IPD headsets they produced, and I was able to use the Go comfortably with my abnormally wide IPD (69-70mm.) Quest 2 has 3 digital settings for IPD, and that also works fine for me at the widest setting.

(And both of the other consumer-release Oculus headsets (Rift CV1, Quest 1) had analog variable IPD.)

I'm aware benchmarks don't tell the whole story, but Geekbench shows the iPhone 13 Pro[0] significantly outperforming the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra[1] - about 60% faster multicore (presumably thermally limited?) and ~80% faster singlecore.

[0]: https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/iphone-13-pro [1]: https://browser.geekbench.com/android_devices/samsung-sm-s90...

The stage was released by the pilot soon after capture:

> Rocket Lab says the recovery helicopter “offloaded” the Electron first stage for splashdown after catching the booster over the Pacific Ocean.

> The pilot noticed different load characteristics than experienced during previous testing, Rocket Lab said.

https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/152127608482158182...

Yeah, it kind of sucks that every current VR headset has a focal range somewhere between 1.3 and 2m (depending on which headset.) I wish there was some kind of aftermarket lens swap to make that infinity; it would make things like Space Engine in VR way more impressive I think.

Starship itself has ~1000 cubic meters of payload volume, and ISS has ~900 cubic meters of pressurized volume. It's not too much of a stretch to expect >500 cubic meters of pressurized volume in a crew-capable Starship, in which case two Starships would provide a broadly similar amount of pressurized volume in orbit.

Absolutely - there's grind, but if you just want to fly spaceships in space, it doesn't really affect you.

"I never shoot raw. Why would I? Raw is a waste of time and space, and doesn't look any better than JPG even when you can open the files. [...] Image quality is the same in JPG and raw." [0]

"I know no pros who own a tripod. Why would they want one? Who wants to carry it around, much less have his compositional options encumbered by having to move this big rig from spot to spot?" [1]

[0] https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

[1] https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/carry-less.htm

And it's worth noting the Ethernet adapter is only $20, and appears to be a power supply as well:

https://api.starlink.com/public-files/Accessories_Guide_Rect... (page 8)

I think this might be possible with a phone that has AR support - you'd scan a QR code on the sound camera to capture its position relative to the world, then the phone could display a 3D view through the camera of where the sound source(s) are.

Because the 140W charging adapter supports USB-C EPR (extended power range) [0], which allows compatible USB-C chargers, cables, and devices to work at up to 240W. (Obviously Apple's 140W charger only supports up to 140W.) However, the spec is so new that there's currently no USB-C to USB-C cable that supports 140W. I don't think we know yet if the MacBooks can charge at 140W with an EPR USB-C cable, not least because nobody is selling that cable yet. But I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't work because that'd require all three USB-C ports to support it.)

The MagSafe 3 cable goes from 140W USB-C to MagSafe, but the USB-C charger is 100% standards-compliant USB-C EPR.

[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/UsbCHardware/comments/qat7ej/new_ap...

In fairness, I've seen font rendering in Cura on Linux as well.

Yes.

On paper, the M1 Pro 10-core CPUs are faster multicore than any Mac ever except for the Mac Pro and iMac Pro. They're faster than the i9-11900k.

It remains to be seen if they are as fast in practice as they are in theory, but if they are, I don't think they're overpriced.

But the notch on the MacBook Pros is on top, not on the left.

There is a large selection of 2m+ USB-C to HDMI cables.

I can't find a source for this info at the moment, but I believe Gwynne Shotwell saying that they'd actually approached NASA (and possibly other customers) and asked if they'd like to fly anything on the Falcon Heavy demo mission. Clearly, nobody took them up on the offer.