Indeed, it’s a very nice boost, and great work, but this clickbait nonsense is just so stupid…

And i’m really bothered how it’s just parrotted everywhere… Doesn’t anybody wonder “94x faster is like… really a LOT… that can’t be true”

Whomever wrote this article is just misleading everyone.

First of all, they did this for other kinds of similar instruction sets before, so this is nothing special. Second of all, they measure the speedup compared to a basic implementation that doesn’t use any optimizations.

They did the same in the past for AVX-2, which is 67x faster in the test where avx-512 got the 94x speed increase. So it’s not 94x faster now, it’s 1.4x faster than the previous iteration using the older AVX-2 instruction set. It’s barely twice as fast as the implementation using SSE3 (40x faster than the slow version), an instruction set from 20 years ago…

So yeah, it’s awesome that they did the same awesome work for AVX-512, but the 94x boost is just plain bullshit… it’s really sad that great work then gets worded in such a misleading way to form clickbait, rather than getting a proper informative article…

It just joined the musescore project, great open source music notation software. For funding the only commercial thing they offer is a site where you can upload & download scores, with the paying part also paying licensining fees for copyrighted music. Imo all looks very legit. I was already familiar with musescore before this drama, and watched some of tantacrul (head of the musescore project, and now also audacity i guess). He’s a very down to earth guy that has quite some insightful videos on the musescore development and figuring out what to keep/remove when going for new versions. But also great videos regarding other topics.

So far i’ve seen nothing that rings any alarm bells. The open source community can sometimes be a bit too sensitive regarding paid services linked to open source software. But in this case as long as the actual software remains open source, and the paid part actually adds value (a nice place to exchange sheet music, without any copyright issues as that’s covered by your payment, so a very legit reason to ask money), why not?

No it doesn’t?

I just googled it to be sure, but i already assumed you meant ‘spyware’ (which is something completely different), referring to the telemetry (which i can get is a sensitive thing, but anonymous usage statistics to know where to focus their development sounds like a decent idea, and afaik they implemented it with respect for the user)

By your definition no closed source company can act responsibly. If that is your definition, they indeed don’t act responsibly, my point is that they appear to ship security updates for at least a decade after the device got released, which seems pretty decent. And they have a good record on quickly responding to any security issues and keeping everything up to date.

So they’re doing pretty good. Would it be nice if they go open source? for sure, but for a closed source system, it’s currently doing great.

I think it’s closed source indeed, but their support window is very long at the moment, so while you’re right, at least until now they’re actually acting responsibly.

But is that the fault of XML, or is the data itself just complex, or did they structure the data badly?

Would another human readable format make the data easier to read?

There are people who find XML hard to read?

I’m not assuming any of the people discussing here are doing the voting, but also in the discussion his points were being ignored. And i love me a good technology connections video too, but someone from the industry dotting some of the i’s that technology connections missed was interesting :)

Btw, thanks for also discussing in good faith :). And your example of awnings in Mexico (and how the most modern technologies are indeed not available/practical everywhere) is also a great contribution :).

I’m no expert on this subject at all, i’m not pro or contra awnings, i just felt bad for someone going into deeper detail on modern techologies getting downvoted for not agreeing with the video because he works in the industry, while making good points (and having his points ignored)

If you have a situation were awnings worked really well, and are cheaper than modern alternatives, awesome, well done :)

No problem :)

Keep posting useful info on topics like this, we need more factcheckers on clickbait videos about how centuries old technology would still be the best.

Yeah, and on a discussion space it’s probably also best that you actually read the comments you’re replying to. He felt that the video wouldn’t teach him anything since he’s considers himself already knowing a lot about the subject.

I just pointed out the irony of you being bothered about him not watching a clickbait video about a topic he believes he already knows more about that such a video can teach. And you then tell him the video makes points he already dismissed.

He might be a bit abrasive how he entered the discussion, but if he works in the industry and knows why awnings are no longer a thing, and already dismisses the points the video made against more modern technologies since he seems to know what modern technologies are actually like… that does seem actually useful to this discussion. I get him not wanting to waste 20 minutes…

Lol, you’re bothered by him not watching the video, and now you’re not reading his comments XD. He already said in the previous comment there are glass coatings that work dependent on the angle of the sun, so coatings that will have different effects in different seasons, so he already addressed the possible issue of glass coatings working all year round, and said that according to him it’s not an issue if you choose the right coating.