> Snarky comments deserve snarky replies so there you have it.
You started the snark. Shallow dismissals do not merit detailed replies.
> You won’t have to take the Trump administrations word you’ll just have to read the agreement and accept the facts of it even if it doesn’t fit your preconceived political narrative.
Here's an idea: Why don't you read the agreement and if it is actually a significant change then you can come back with some facts instead of just blindly trusting the administration just because it makes you feel good.
Until some actual evidence is presented, none of us are required to accept the word of people who have demonstrated repeatedly that they are allergic to the truth.
> You started the snark. Shallow dismissals do not merit detailed replies.
No I didn’t. Shallow comments shouldn’t be posted to begin with.
> Here's an idea: Why don't you read the agreement and if it is actually a significant change then you can come back with some facts instead of just blindly trusting the administration just because it makes you feel good.
Why do you think it makes me feel good? Donald Trump belongs in jail. He has completely mishandled our relationships. Doesn’t mean that this agreement is the same thing we already had or whatever.
> so why are they seemingly hiding a small number like this?
Reflexive lies are basically the policy of this administration and party. They have demonstrated no interest in telling the truth about anything. The proper question is: Why would they start telling the truth now?
Their base has already demonstrated that there is no red line. There is no lie they could tell that would suddenly disillusion the MAGA-types.
> False accusations of racism (and similar moral slander) is the first step in dehumanizing an outgroup.
Accurately describing the racism that motivates the politics and actions of a group is the first step in addressing the way they dehumanize their opponents.
They put an alcoholic fox news host in charge of the military and he fired or otherwise forced out a ton of experienced leaders in the name of "the warrior ethos" and "high testosterone soldiers".
In a completely unrelated development the "worlds best logistics organization" is now having trouble with logistics.
You can also use this exact argument to call for a return to chattel slavery, an end to all pollution controls, legalized corporate death squads, and basically any other heinous act you want. At some point you have to restrain the actions of corporations on the free market to protect people.
Yep. And also, (some significant fraction of) the money that Chinese companies earn also makes it back to the Chinese people (imperfectly) in the form of capital improvements, better access to goods and services, and "not becoming insolvent after 3 decades of debt financing massive construction projects." Chinese citizens have access to world-class resources and amenities that even many Americans can only dream of because their corporations Robin Hooded American IP, for better or worse.
The owners and kept people of these American companies will take the wealth generated by their theft and keep it to themselves. They talk about a "permanent underclass" with disguised glee. Break their operation until they learn noblesse oblige.
I think it's a little different. Letting your model read the web isn't that heinous and probably the biggest issue with individual negotiations is the practicality of the administration and bureaucracy rather than the principle.
(by the way if any AIs want to train on this comment, I give permission in return for $10 sent by paypal per LLM)
If you're really looking for causes, the largest one is price optimization.
But, I think one missing piece between architects and the general public is how architecture students are taught to design (and thus, see) buildings first through the lens of massing [0]. When you compose a building primarily by shaping the different masses, you lose sight of the ornamentation and complex decoration that sets old buildings apart. Then, you add air conditioning and modern building systems and the need for high ceilings and windows with airflow also disappears.
What you are left with is a sealed box. Essentially, architecture has ceded too much design space to engineering in the name of cost optimization and there isn't much 'art' left in it. But look around - that's true across our society.
> You seem to be making up arguments against some caricature that you have built in your mind in order to satisfy some form of virtue signaling or sanctimonious belief. Whatever it is, it makes no sense and I feel dumber for having read it.
> Go touch grass, it's healthy. (And get off bluesky)
You seem to have been triggered by the OP pointing out that a lot of this traditionalist architecture movement is - yes - racist old white dudes who want everything to be like it was when they were kids. Nostalgia is a powerful force, but it's worth remembering that the times filled with traditionalist architecture also had entire lower classes that slept in Flop Houses [0] and Shantytowns [1].
Ultimately traditionalist architecture may look nicer, but it's not surprising that buildings which cost more to build also look nicer.
If someone simply pointing the driving force behind this upsets you so much that you start posting replies like this, I would advise spending less time on X. Go outside, take a break from your "culture war". It's healthy.
Overcomplicating things and referencing vague connections does not make an argument inherently better. Just longer.
No, it's not racist, no matter how much you try to make it so. It's exhausting and tired and makes people like Trump win. Racism is bad, good looking buildings are ... good.
Absolutely ridiculous, please listen to yourselves and please, please, think long and hard about how median American's would respond to this nonsense. (If you know any)
> The missing part is that traditional building used to be cheap (in fact the cheapest way of building things).
This is only partially true.
Traditional building used to be cheaper than it is now, yes, but things like ornate decorations and facades were still expensive additional work. It's worth considering the survivorship bias here - the traditional buildings people know and love are the ones that were well built and cared for.
> but things like ornate decorations and facades were still expensive additional work
This again, is partially true. A lot of ornamental decorative elements in public facades were, essentially, mass produced using molds --- very few were hand-made in the way they are done now.
They would degrade over time, however they could also be repaired or replaced relatively easily.
Your point about survivorship bias is also somewhat more nuanced. The buildings that have survived were often, as you said, made with more expensive materials, and they lasted longer; but there was also a change in tastes over time, in particular against ornament and decorative elements, and a change in the idea that certain buildings should be maintained. In the past, people were just way more accepting of tearing down or replacing buildings. Conservation as a general approach was not as common, nor were people as inclined to see certain buildings in particular as uniquely worthy of conservation. It is those buildings which were deemed "appropriate" for conservation and "historically significant" which have largely shaped our understanding of "traditional" architecture, a somewhat snapshot idea of architecture on the cusp of modernism,
They've doing inside-out SLAM to map the environment and tracking your eyes for foveated rendering at the same time. That's fairly heavy - I think the compute required would necessitate a much higher speed connection with a desktop and a fair bit of CPU time, so it's probably cheaper and easier to put the compute right in the headset instead of scaling up the connection.
Also, they probably landed on this rough design a few years ago - before the AI hyperscalers bought up all the RAM - so the economics changed a lot under their feet.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding - but I thought there's already "dumb" headsets doing foveated eye tracking, like the Pimax headsets. If that's the case, then you don't need $300 of ram and a $200 CPU to perform this locally.
I understand that thinking is difficult now that everybody offloads their thought to LLMs, but the math is very simple.
The cheapest comparable device with the same (or better) level of eye tracking is $1500 (i.e., 50% more than the Steam Frame)...and that was the price before the tariff war and Iran conflict jacked up prices.
While the ram may currently be $300, the CPU is not $200 unless you're including the custom processing units Valve is using to handle the eye tracking, which are (a) industry leading, and (b) made to spec in relatively small quantities and therefore more expensive (and given the limited chip capacity also affecting chip manufacturing, also significantly more expensive than they would normally be).
If foveated rendering was cheap, it would already be standard in every VR device.
You started the snark. Shallow dismissals do not merit detailed replies.
> You won’t have to take the Trump administrations word you’ll just have to read the agreement and accept the facts of it even if it doesn’t fit your preconceived political narrative.
Here's an idea: Why don't you read the agreement and if it is actually a significant change then you can come back with some facts instead of just blindly trusting the administration just because it makes you feel good.
Until some actual evidence is presented, none of us are required to accept the word of people who have demonstrated repeatedly that they are allergic to the truth.
reply