The implication is that there is (should be) a major speed difference - naively you'd expect the MoE to be 10x faster and cheaper, which can be pretty relevant on real world tasks.
Gemma will give you the most, Gemini will give you the best. The former is much smaller and therefore cheaper to run, but less capable.
Although I'm not sure whether Gemma will be available even in aistudio - they took the last one down after people got it to say/do questionable stuff. It's very much intended for self-hosting.
It will probably lead to more cars traveling at any time, but potentially far fewer cars parked.
However: turn most of the street parking into bus and/or bike lanes, the parking garages into apartments, seems like an absolute win. (Except for Chicago, which is presumably going to have more problems with its privatized street parking.)
VR's problem, in my opinion, is that I can get immersed (fully, exactly as the author describes it) in a 2D game just fine - the lack of stereo vision or head-tracking or motion controls is no more an impediment to my immersion than the limited binocular overlap or peripheral vision or lag in a VR headset. And 2D is a heck of a lot cheaper and more convenient (and less nauseating).
That's not to say VR can never be successful, but I think it needs to offer something more compelling than just "immersion." Exercise or AR might be viable routes.
I feel that's like saying "I can get just as fully immersed in a book so who needs movies?"
They're different experiences. I don't need Tetris or PacMan in VR. Conversely, Half-Life 1/2 etc are not remotely intense as Half-Life Alyx. In the first 2 you're watching a movie. In the later you're in the world of Half-Life
The frequency of choosing to go out to the movies is also about how often I think "I wish I could do this in VR".
Examples:
- Before going on a trip, pre-visiting the destination in Google Earth with VR is very spatially informative & makes directional intuition memorable upon arrival at the real world destination.
- Virtual role-play with environmental cues that cause make-believe to be ever more real.
But most people don't need this very often. Picking up a book or throwing on some earbuds to listen to a book are far more frequent and compatible with simultaneous other activities. VR feels the same--a high-demand focused experience that is infrequently worth the effort.
The most important quality of any successful trend (eg windows, internet, smart phones, cloud computing) has been convenience. Which is also the reason why I think Meta Glasses have a real chance to take off.
There are many games for vr that cannot be done without the tech. It isnt all about immersion but facilitating unique experiences.
What held it back from mainstream imo is an inherent space issue (you need room) and a lack of multiplayer participation (need even more room). Compared to sitting on a couch in a small studio with a few friends, it doesnt stand a chance.
The other problem is most peoples first experience is with some shitty mall vr room where the “game” consists of free unity assets slapped together in a way that makes marky marks horizons look polished. Few people start off with something like the half life one.
I recently started enjoying virtual bike tours on my exercise bike, but vertigo when the camera turns is an issue. I absolutely wouldn't do it on a treadmill.
Exactly. It sounds like a detail that you can‘t eat and drink while you‘re in VR - but for casual experience it‘s friction and you resort back to a screen.
I like VR and immersion in theory. I like being able to look around, but I absolutely hate the movement controls.
I know some people complain of motion sickness, but that doesn't bother me. I just want controls like Mario or Zelda on a regular joystick. Why can't this be done?
It doesn't even have to be first person. I'd play a third person game like Mario or Zelda with a VR camera tracking them. I just want that kind of movement.
Pushing a button to teleport in short hops is annoying as hell. I hate everything about it.
I always thought a great compromise would be games that gave you an overhead “gods eye” third person perspective. People seem to be obsessed with making VR games first person, but that’s where the movement problems come in.
The game Moss did this well for a platformers. But it could also be really fun for realtime strategy/simulation games (StarCraft, sim city) or sports games like Madden.
Yes! After many years of using only linux or windows machines, I was assigned an iMac at an internship and noticed the friction with fullscreening things. I decided not to fight it and spent the next year happily working in little windows and making frequent use of the "mission control" gesture.
However, after the internship I went right back to fullscreen/window tiling in linux, so I can't say I really preferred it. Even now as a Gnome user with a big monitor and magic trackpad on my desk - which gives me ~equal access to either approach - I fullscreen everything.
I don't know what it is, but fullscreen on Mac (even dock-showing "fullish screen") feels wrong in a way that fullscreen on Windows/Linux feels "right".
I think it’s partially because on Macs, the desktop has always been a more pivotal component of the OS thanks to ubiquitous drag and drop support and mounted volumes showing on the desktop, among other things. At least for me, it’s not unusual to grab images, text snippets, and other things from apps and drop them on my desktop, making it more of a workbench than it is on other platforms.
Another component is how ability to overlap windows is emphasized, allowing the currently relevant portion of them to be visible without taking center stage or stealing any space from your main window(s).
Both are part of a larger difference in mentality and workflow style.
If you stick with your OS/package manager-distributed version, installation isn't painful anymore (provided that version approximately overlaps with your generation of GPU). It's okay for inference, and okay for training if you don't stray too far beyond plain torch. If you want to run code from a paper or other more esoteric stuff you're still going to have a bad time.
reply