Why do people in this thread detest that a pacifist with conviction exists? I’m not like them, and nobody is telling you to be like them. But having people like that in a population is important lest we become drunk on our ability to destroy our enemies.
I'm fine with there being pacifist. What makes you think I'm opposed them?
What this person is arguing is not for pacifism, its an argument that to be their friend you must agree with them on pacifism.
I have my own thoughts and beliefs. My friends have theirs. They arent all the same. Thats how it should be, and thats healthy. Thats diversity. This "you're dead to me if you dont believe what I believe" culture is idiotic and is not inclusive at all.
A logger working for a company cutting a few trees to make furniture is not the same thing as a logger working for a company shredding the whole forest to circulate money.
Elon put everything he had into spacex and tesla. Against all odds, both worked out. He's now betting tesla on optimus. People are willing to believe him given his extremely successful track record of beating the odds. Is it guaranteed? No. If it was guaranteed it wouldnt be an investment. You take on risk for the chance at a reward. Calling it hopium is ridiculous--if there's anyone on the planet that has a track record of pulling off the near impossible its Elon.
I’m moderately long on Optimus. At least for US based robotics. When I look at the list of companies that can deploy moving stuff at scale, and I intersect that with those that have autonomous ai experience, .. there’s only one company in the us and it’s way way ahead of competitors considered as a joint probability. Boston dynamics is “sold out” next year with 25k industrial preorders. Tesla has the experience to launch a hyper scale factory out of the gate.
No... its people choosing to spend their hard earned money on a tesla product. It literally proves the claim that his companies produce bad products is false.
The biggest trap parents fall into is they buy devices assuming there will be ways to enforce parental controls on them. The reality is it's impossible to do on many devices, and extremely difficult to get right on the remaining ones. Many of the platforms offering "parental controls" just do lip service and provide a false sense of security.
The corruption is allowing illegal immigrants into the country in the first place. Its a mess that needs cleaned up. I dont condone excessive use of violence unless it's warranted, but open your eyes. Biden allowed the flood gates open. You have to recognize this reality.
Trumps deportation numbers are not out of trend with prior presidents. Its on par with Obama.
Make immigration easier for law abiding productive members of society. Dont reward those who cut in line.
Trump's deportation numbers, despite being wildly disrespectful of the Courts and lacking legality, are way down from Biden and Obama. Instead he's arresting and harassing citizens and people with legal status based on their ethnicity.
Trump is pushing to deport people fleeing authoritarian dictators and war zones, and stripping resources from counter narcotics and people smuggling operations. People smuggling is actually increasing and communities will no longer co-operate with police, leading to increased gang activity. This suits Trump perfectly.
If the video is encoded using a codec your hardware doesn't handle, it would be left up to the CPU to decode. Av1 can slow everything down to a crawl over CPU. You'd think the browser would be smart about the stream selection though.
That's intentional on YouTubes end, they aim to serve more bitrate-efficient codecs wherever possible, even if it's a high burden on the client due to a lack of hardware acceleration. They'll only fall back to older codecs if the client is completely incapable of handling the modern ones. It's annoying but at their scale it no doubt saves them a shitload of bandwidth.
It also encourages users to upgrade to newer hardware since older devices are known to get slower as they age due to software increasing complexity and hardware mitigations (yes, they are also for phones). Most users will just blame the device.
Not saying that is the cause of this slow down, but since the mpeg4 patents don't expire till 2027(?) (and one of those patents prevents hardware decode on Linux) we as a society have given Google every incentive to do this and I welcome them to make mpeg4 irrelevant.
I believe Youtube's player is driving codec selection, not the browser (i.e. the player requests a list of supported codecs and then picks the one most beneficial for Google, not the other way around).
That said, I've solved this problem for myself on macOS and Firefox by setting media.webrtc.codec.video.av1.enabled to false on about:config, as all other codecs used by Youtube are hardware accelerated on my Mac.
> I believe Youtube's player is driving codec selection, not the browser (i.e. the player requests a list of supported codecs and then picks the one most beneficial for Google, not the other way around).
The way the browser can still participate in choosing is by e.g. not listing AV1 as supported when there is no hardware decoder on the local system. Both Safari and Edge took (approximately) that style of approach, but it comes with the downside that if the server only has AV1 video then the client gets nothing.
Practically, that downside isn't a big deal until codec support is high enough sites start assuming the codec is just supported and they don't need to host alternative options.
Yes, I think Safari even did so dynamically based on the mac being plugged into external power or not for a while, which I think is a nice compromise.
Apparently, there's even an API attribute that indicates whether a given codec is power efficient (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/MediaCapabi...), which Google must also be ignoring – not their problem, after all. (I wonder if anybody did the math of the opportunity cost of losing a few ad impressions due to the user's battery dying early vs. the incremental bandwidth cost?)
I run an extension that allows to automatically request h.264 streams from YouTube even when av1 is also available. Saves a lot of CPU, at the cost of some bandwidth.
It’s funny that this kind of browser extension has recurred over the years. Originally it was to replace the awful CPU hog flash player with an HTML5 h.264 player[1], then it was to sidestep YouTube’s insistence on VP* codecs, and now it’s to sidestep AV1.
In a beautiful world, there would be a link to each codec to let the user decide, or the browser itself would override the web site's preference and provide such links. It's sad that we keep having to resort to browser extensions to circumvent terrible web site and browser software.
Assuming you have hardware support for VP9 as well, setting media.webrtc.codec.video.av1.enabled to false on about:config achieves the same outcome without an extension.
Yep, that's what I use. It took youtube from using 100% cpu, to the point where my little xps13 was thermal throttling, to 50% cpu running 1080p at 2-3x speed.
It's pretty old, like from 2016 so it's only got an i5 7200U (2 core 4 threads) @ 2.5ghz.
Mostly fast enough for what I use it for (content consumption, web browsing, light gaming and coding). It's mainly limited by it's 8gb of ram which isn't upgradable.
I looked now and noticed that I actually reject VP8 and VP9 and accept AV1. I run Linux on a Ryzen 4750U, for the record. It did not have trouble chewing through VP8 / VP9 without skipping frames, but it ran unpleasantly hot.
