• 0 Posts
  • 1.11K Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle




  • They are unrelated things. It has nothing to do with “what we feel”

    I didn’t say it did. I just said it’s more useful for that. Whether it was on purpose or not, 100 and 0 are when it’s dangerous. Before those it can still be, but beyond them you really need to be careful.

    Celsius is also arbitrary. There’s no particular reason water, at sea level, is used for the scale. It was just chosen. If you’re measuring water, it’s great. Otherwise, there’s nothing that makes it “better” than F. It’s not easier to convert to scale to higher or lower numbers or anything, which is what the metric system usually has an advantage with. They’re both just scales.

    I’ve been playing Stationeers a lot lately. (It’s a game about managing a station on another planet, and simulates liquids and gasses really well, following the ideal gas law, and phase changes, and all that good stuff. I highly recommend it, and the devs are great.) In that you use Celsius and Kelvin, with you often needing kK or even larger. It wouldn’t make sense to use F, because it’s hard to switch between F and K, but C and K are the same, with K just being 274.15 higher. I have no issue with C, but this type of use is the one place it’s better, and no one I know would ever have to do this.




  • For temperature, not really. Both Celsius and Fahrenheit are useful for different things.

    Fahrenheit is great for what we feel (it’s related to body temperature for the high end, and the freezing point of brine on 0).

    Celsius is great for cooking, or applications where you care about what water is doing (0 is freezing, 100 is boiling).

    Neither uses different scales, like other metric units increasing by 10s (at least, I’ve never seen anything like kC). If you’re doing that, you’re using Kelvin, which is a fundamental base temperature, where 0 is actually 0, which makes more sense for physics and math, but is less useful for what we feel.

    I think the US should switch, just to make it easier to communicate, and other metric scales actually are better. C and F are both equally useful for different things though. Neither is actually a better scale.








  • I don’t know, but I’m willing to bet that economies of scale actually mean data centers are more efficient. This isn’t to say their use is justified, just that they’re able to take advantage of things a home computer can’t.

    However, having to run it locally means it needs to be much more limited. This is doubly true if you want to run the game and the LLM at the same time. The LLM is easily able to consume all resources your system has available if you allow it to, which means the game won’t run well (if it runs at all). This limits the use so it can’t just be shoved everywhere and constantly running, like it could if it’s sent to a data center. It’s not more efficient, just less consumption.



  • It depends on how it’s done, and what’s important to the game, if you can do this. If you can see outside the elevator, it obviously has to be really moving a fixed distance. Also, if you’re supposed to know the height you moved it needs to be fixed, so the experience conveys that. The key is to just make it as long as, or longer, than your longest expected load time, or make the door stay closed until it’s done.

    For an example, Dark Souls 1 has to have fixed length elevators. The length is totally tied to the physical world. If it changed length to suit loading times, it’d throw off your sense of where you are. Dark Souls 2, many of the elevators are just trying to convey a sense of traveling, not a specific amount of it. The world is abstract, and the transitions are more about a feeling than the actual physical scale. (These two use the exact same system though obviously, but it’s a good example of different goals.)