chungus_khan

Lots of people relate to stories about domesticity, and about being a housewife, but the actual process of becoming one fundamentally doesn't centre aspiring to be one. The work one puts into becoming a housewife isn't about working to become a housewife, it's about finding a spouse. There is a massive amount of media depicting romance, including domestic fantasies, it just isn't targeted at the same audience as many here fall under. A lot of these stories even involve said person not knowing what they want to become and choosing a domestic life out of passion for the romantic interest.

> These days you can't have a woman who wants to be a housewife on your show unless that's being portrayed negatively or being poked fun at.

Is that really true though? If you mean that you can't have a houswife as a character on your show that very obviously isn't true. If you mean you can't make a show where a character aspires to be a housewife, I'm not sure I understand what the narrative purpose of such a story would be. Becoming a housewife isn't really an aspirational achievement in the way having a prestigious career is, and I don't think it's a story many are really interested in, nor one that would be easy to tell in a manner that doesn't seem forced. There is certainly a lot of media (both in the past and today) where a woman aspires to romance or marry someone, and domestic fantasy is a common element in those, but that isn't really specific to becoming a housewife, and the romance is the key aspiration in those.

It also doesn't help that maintaining a family on a single income is not economically viable for most people anymore. People want stories that relate to their own fantasies.

> I wonder when that was, cause pop culture has always cared about that in one way or another. I believe you are projecting.

I see people pining for this forgotten past time a lot, and it makes me realize that none of them remember or think the same way of things like the satanic panic, moral majority, etc, let alone remember the times when people got offended over the mere suggestion of an interracial couple or a woman who didn't want to be a housewife. Oh the scandals that would occur if basically any program run today were to be broadcast then. They don't remember the Television Code or the CCA, nor did they grow up on a diet of classic Hays-code era films, dripping in extreme sensitivity.

Extremely good point. Small forums self-govern as a community and generally just make money (or take donations) to keep the lights on. With big platforms, you are the product and they want you there so they can monetize you. Pursuant to that, the kinds of content they allow, encourage, and prioritize in algorithms and interfaces will be that which maximizes engagement with the platform rather than the community, and advertisers sensibilities rule in terms of what is allowed on the platform altogether.

A lot of forums also have tyrannical mods, but the key difference is that a forum doesn't have the same unique authority that a subreddit with the best name for the topic has. If a forum has bad mods, other forums are on a bit more equal footing as competitors. The discussion thread format is also less prone to bad moderation than reddit's link/image focused post threads are, and usually also forces the mods to actually participate in the community. Plus if someone breaks a forum rule other than one related to creating threads, other users can come scold them for it more easily (necroing is a common example).

Reddit isn't built for community discussion and is getting worse at it as the admins try to turn it into instagram.

Intel iGPUs since gen7, AMD iGPUs since Kaveri. Most laptops have one of these.

Why not? The vast majority of laptops sold today have iGPUs that support it. Both Intel and AMD docs even refer to it using the term "Unified Memory Architecture", and document use, including things like zero-copy. Is being available in most modern computers by sales volume not good enough?

For modern ones it does.

Whoever gets BBC BASIC running on this thing first wins.

Funny they mention ARM though, the original beeb was made by Acorn.

Unified memory is pretty normal on non-desktop systems and has been for a while.

I'm not sure it would, this IP wasn't "prepared or published by or under the direction or control of Her Majesty or any government department".

Even if they don't the notarization requirement is a strong first step to at minimum a games console-style licensing program, or further integration with the existing developer program.

It would be nice for Apple to not do this, but if they can keep their ARM chips highly competitive it would be insanely lucrative to do so. Corporations are for-profit entities first and foremost.

Plus I would like to remind people that there were points where PowerPC Macs were extremely impressive, and that didn't magically reorder the world because existing software and OS ecosystems mean a hell of a lot more than just straight performance.

The immune system isn't that simple unfortunately.

In many cases they can and will if they either feel that the risks are worthwhile (in particular cases where the penalties are far exceeded the potential boon), or if they think they have some sort of edge case loophole that they can throw money at to get through. These are carefully calculated risks planned out by experienced teams of lawyers though.

Something like this though was almost certainly not one of those gambles.

This is something important that a lot of people miss when discussing unethical actions by corporations. It would be foolish from the perspective of Yelp or Google to not exploit the massive power differential here, so of course they will. It isn't a matter of morals, morals don't talk. Money does.

Competition, fairness, and freedom are not free, they have to be defended adaptively against stuff like this.

They should be able to. It would be easy. But it is faster and cheaper not to, and companies are not single omniscient monoliths. Each department has their own targets, quotas, and deadlines, and while I doubt anyone at the top of Apple said anything along the lines of "ignore these devices", the ball was dropped somewhere in the chain of command, and the fact that nobody picked it up (along with experiences with past Apple updates) suggests to me that QA is much lower priority at Apple than some other places.

> We have to win every little battle, but all they have to do is win once.

"Today we were unlucky, but remember we only have to be lucky once. You will have to be lucky always."

-Provisional IRA after almost assassinating Thatcher in a bombing

From the above linked Apple page:

> The primary use of the ME is audio and video copyright protection on Mac computers that have only Intel-based graphics.

It's still in use for DRM though apparently, and so long as it still runs, and so long as we still can't audit it, it isn't trustworthy from a strict privacy perspective.

The US constitution has a very long history of being selectively enforced whenever it is convenient for those in power, be it on issues of civil rights, the HUAC, various CIA and FBI programs exposed in the 70s, mass surveillance and "national security", etc. It needs to stop, but those in power seldom want their own powers curtailed.

That, and Google's products are all data mines, so the Google stuff is probably much juicier.

Certainly, I wasn't trying to suggest that, and was more just raising the point that they did once have a competitive embedded line, but sold it and then came back to the market down the road with a much weaker approach.

It's an ISA licence, so they're allowed to design their own processors that implement ARM, but they would have to design them themselves (which is why they haven't)

I'm not exactly sure what the point of VT-X would be in an emulated environment anyway, and it would be a waste to make Rosetta 2 that much more complicated for it.

They did also used to actually make ARM processors. Originally they acquired StrongARM from Digital, and then went on to replace the brand with their own XScale, and found some pretty good success in embedded systems and were at one point near-universal in PDAs and high-end mobiles (a huge customer at the time was RIM who put them in all of their Blackberries at one point). They sold that off though and it fell behind, but they actually still hold DEC's ARM license.

So they did have some prior experience in that space, but that experience was built on the shoulders of what Digital was doing.

This is widely known and inherent to how hardware encoders work. They are limited by complexity and cannot be improved after they are manufactured, so most of the focus for them generally goes into real time applications. You can check out the blog for the x265 software encoder if you want some examples of the sort of regular improvements that get made:

http://x265.org/blog/

The reason these sorts of improvements are possible is because most of the power of a video encoder doesn't come from the container format but rather how effectively the encoder selects data to keep and discard in keeping with that container format. There is also a LOT of tuning that can be done depending on the kind of content that is being encoded, etc.

For high end work basically nobody uses hardware encoders on the final product.

That's not really true. Every modern Intel, AMD, and Nvidia GPU does actually include hardware to accelerate encoding video, it's just that software solutions end up being preferred in a lot of cases because they produce better output and can be continually improved.

A large body of encoding software is however, perfectly capable of taking advantage of them.

The comparison is kind of silly.

They have such a strong market presence and so much power, they don't have to care for the moment because developers will come to the platform anyway.

Only in the eyes of the law. The RIAA can no more stop people from downloading YouTube videos than the DVD CCA could stop people from cracking CSS. Pirates haven't lost yet, only ever been delayed, and rarely by all that much.

This battle has been going on since audio tape recorders and VCRs became a thing, and at some point various industries will have to accept copying as part of reality, and that it is incumbent on them to have a business model that aligns with reality. A farmer doesn't serve a legal notice to the sun because its setting every day hurts productivity.