Yes, that’s precisely my point. The difference is in what the algorithm is trying to do, traditional DLSS uses the image rendered in resolution X as output and scaled down to X/2 as input (for example), so it’s trained to upscale images, whereas this new thing uses who knows what as either, and clearly outputs something that is not an upscaled version of the frame.

Because a pixelated circle being upscaled is a circle, but a pixelated circle being turned into a high definition pie is no longer a circle, and that’s especially problematic if the circle was just a cross hair or some other random circle like thing the AI thought was meant to be a pie.

Yes, both things are the same, but that’s like saying you had a tiny spider in your house and you were okay because it killed mosquitoes in your house, so you should be okay with having a colony of bats since they are also animals and eat mosquitoes. Yes, both are the same, but the scales and the amount of intrusion are completely different.

What do you mean unused bandwidth? Is that not the normal? Most of the time I’m not using my bandwidth so I guess I have lots of unused bandwidth too.

But what is a trusted provider? How can you trust it? How sure are you that you’re not being MitM? Have you fully manually verified that there’s no funky flags in curl like -k, that the url is using SSL, that it’s a correct url and not pointing at something malicious, etc, etc, etc. There are a lot of manual steps you must verify using this approach, whereas using a package manager all of them get checked automatically, plus some extra checks like hundreds of people validating the content is secure.

To do apt get from an unknown repo, you first need to convince the person to execute root commands they don’t understand on their machine to add that unknown repo, if you can convice someone to run an unsafe command with root credentials then the machine is already compromised.

I get your point, random internet scripts are dangerous but random internet packages can also dangerous. But that’s a false equivalence because there are lots of safeguards to the packages in the usual way people install them, but less than 0 safeguards to the curl|bash. In a similar manner, if this was a post talking about the dangers of fireworks and how you can blow yourself up using them your answer is “but someone can plant a bomb in the mall I go to, or steal the codes for a nuclear missile and blow me up anyways”.

But those are two very different things, I can very easily give you a one liner using curl|bash that will compromise your system, to get the same level of compromise through a proper authenticated channel such as apt/pacman/etc you would need to compromise either their private keys and attack before they notice and change them or stick malicious code in an official package, either of those is orders of magnitude more difficult than writing a simple bash script.

You didn’t knew that the tool to handle URLs written in C (very creatively named C-Url) was handling URLs? It’s also written in C if you didn’t knew.

That review is no longer there, probably someone reported it. I think lots of these suffer from bystander effect, where people see it get indignant about being there but don’t report them, so they stay there.

Sure, but which OSD criteria is being broken here?

Open source and FOSS are two different things though. I think Mattermost is open source, just not FOSS and the licencing they mentioned might be wrong (GPL is invasive so they couldn’t have a closed source part IIRC), but it’s still open source as the code is freely available.

That’s overkill, a couple of passes with dd and it’s irrecoverable.

That’s a very cool idea, seems great for receipts and quick stuff.

If only they explained why I’m the article snippet posted…

I guess If I were an article snippet I would also like an explanation

While I understand what you’re talking about, I would argue it’s bad metaprogression that you dislike. I liked Rogue Legacy when I first played, but didn’t enjoy the second one even though it’s essentially the same. Let me give you an example of good metaprogression: Dead Cells.

There’s the metaprogression that allows you access to new areas and new mechanics, but that’s fairly quick compared to the length of the rest of the progression, and I would argue it’s not the sort of thing you’re complaining about.

What could be similar is the way you unlock equipment, although you don’t become stronger with each run, you unlock more weapons. This gives you variety, but the vast majority of the progression happens in your head. If you have enough hours in Dead Cells and think the metaprogression is what made you so good at the game that you couldn’t finish one level when you started and now you play for hours, do me a favor and start a new save. After being on the second cell I bought the game for a different platform, on my first run I got to the first cell.

Which brings me to the second metaprogression in the game, cells. They make the game harder, not easier, and it’s the way to progress, you have to purposefully make the game harder to progress. IMO this is how metaprogression is supposed to be done, you need to be better, and when you think you’re good enough to beat the game it lets you know “you’ve only just started”.

Also with a rumble enabled controller, but you need to wipe your memory of that feature so the magic becomes real.

Sure, but that’s more about Valve not pursuing violations than anything else (in other comment I also mentioned how they turn a blind eye to Humble Bundle as well). But legally they could go after silent hill f and demand it be sold for a similar value to $31.49 since some time has passed and stem users have not been offered a comparable offer. I think what’s in the clause they make people sign is more important than whether they enforce it or not, because if it was about price parity with other stores then it would be abusive (even if they didn’t enforced it always), but if it is about selling something they provide then it’s not abusive even if they do enforced it always.

That’s not true, it only applies if you’re selling a steam key. Devs are free to set the price on any platform they want, want proof? Check out the currently free game on epic which has never been free on Steam.

Steam provides developers with infinite steam keys that they can sell outside of steam for 100% profit, however those keys cannot be sold at a lesser price than what it’s sold on steam. Which honestly sounds like common sense.

How does it do that?

What?

Except that’s not what their terms say. Their terms prohibit you from selling a steam key cheaper than on Steam, they don’t regulate your game price on a different store if you’re not offering a steam key together.

All of my systems are Linux, launching Windows games on Linux is not trivial, Steam takes away almost all of that complication. It also provides an excellent ten foot interface for me to use on my TV and buy/install/launch games from my couch without any hassle. Speaking of controller usage, Steam provides excellent support to remap controllers even if a game doesn’t support it, and provide amazing features at that (for example multiple layers, gyroscopic mouse)

Games getting updated automatically is a great feature, I still remember having to download patches and applying them one by one after a fresh install. Similarly Steam also provides a workshop that allows you to install mods and keep them synced across different systems automatically.

Finally, the convenience of cloud saves for someone with multiple systems or who uninstalls a game and reinstalls it later is not easy to achieve without a launcher (I still have a saves folder backed up somewhere from before).

Besides all of that Achievement and other social features are important for some people. And for some games being able to easily play online with friends is amazing (if you’re not old enough to know what GameSpy is you don’t know what it was back then), although I don’t play too many online games so this one is not that important for me, but when I need that feature it is very handy.

In short there are many reasons, but if you’re playing old single-player games with mouse+keyboard on only one windows PC, then none of my reasons apply to you. Still I would argue that buying games on steam is easier than pirating them, so there’s the convenience factor still (e.g. at a friend’s house and they mention a game, open my phone, and in 5 min with a very intuitive flow I have the game downloading on my home PC so when I come back it’s ready to play).