• 0 Posts
  • 17 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 14th, 2023

help-circle





  • Here’s the most important part IMO:

    He admits that — in general — when AMD pays publishers to bundle their games with a new graphics card, AMD does expect them to prioritize AMD features in return. “Money absolutely exchanges hands,” he says. “When we do bundles, we ask them: ‘Are you willing to prioritize FSR?’”

    But Azor says that — in general — it’s a request rather than a demand. “If they ask us for DLSS support, we always tell them yes.”

    SO developers aren’t forced contractually to exclude DLSS, but outside the contract language, they are pressured to ignore it in favor of FSR. That explains why these deals tend to result in DLSS being left out, and also why there are some exceptions (e.g. Sony games–I imagine Sony knows what features it wants its PC releases to have and has decided to push back on DLSS inclusion). I think AMD is being honest this time, and I’m surprised it admitted publicly that it’s doing this. Hopefully the word about this will get out and more developers will insist on including DLSS.



  • BlinkAndItsGone@lemm.eetoAsk Lemmy@lemmy.worldIf it's acceptable...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I don’t think the usual portrayal of the issue is that animals can exploit any other animal that is less intelligent; it’s more like, there’s a minimum level of intelligence or consciousness for human rights. You might call it a cutoff. Which could be seen as a contrivance to give humans the right to exploit other animals, but the problem with dismissing this view as self-serving is that the logic cuts both ways. Humans are the only animal that is expected to care about morality in the first place; nobody is getting mad at cheetahs for eating ostriches. So it’s hard to argue that there is no cutoff relating to morality at humans, the question is exactly what that cutoff entails.





  • For those who aren’t aware why errors are an issue because all they’ve seen is wacky LTT videos where they mess around with stuff–Linus is the most popular (and profitable) computer hardware Youtuber, and he’s always done hardware reviews, but to some degree this whole scandal came about because of him wanting to be taken more seriously. Recently he’s been using his millions in an attempt to become the most authoritative PC hardware critic by building and staffing a state-of-the-art testing lab. It was one of his lab technicians who made the comment about how their testing was better than that of more respected channels like Gamers Nexus and Hardware Unboxed that kicked this whole thing off. And the whole lab thing makes the continuing inaccuracy of the videos seem that much more egregious.


  • BlinkAndItsGone@lemm.eetoTechnology@lemmy.worldGamers nexus on LTT
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    (if it really is one).

    I mean, I’m not a journalist, I’ve just been reading them for decades. It’s a thing.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/policies-and-standards/

    No story is fair if it covers individuals or organizations that have not been given the opportunity to address assertions or claims about them made by others. Fairness includes diligently seeking comment and taking that comment genuinely into account.

    Just as an example that came up in a quick web search–the Washington Post is a major US newspaper and this is its stated policy. Seeking comment from story subjects is an important practice in journalism, and if you consider yourself a journalist and don’t do it in a given case, you should probably have a good reason. This is why Steve felt the need to explain himself on that point.


  • BlinkAndItsGone@lemm.eetoTechnology@lemmy.worldGamers nexus on LTT
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    It’s a customary practice, and I think it’s a good one because it makes the story less one-sided and can diminish the appearance of it being a hit piece if it’s negative. Bottom line, it’s natural to want to know what the person the story is about thinks of it and what their perspective is. Obviously not all journalists seek a comment from every subject, but if they do, they often mention that they asked for a comment even if they weren’t able to get one, because people want to know that they at least tried.




  • BlinkAndItsGone@lemm.eetoTechnology@lemmy.worldGamers nexus on LTT
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    The one real point that I thought Linus had here was that Steve didn’t talk to him first. That part is getting a lot of ridicule, because it sounds petulant, but it’s valid–it is accepted journalistic practice to give the subject of a story a chance to comment before publishing.

    Since we can now see what that comment likely would have been, it doesn’t seem to change the conclusion much. From experience I can guess at Steve’s likely response–he would have tentatively given LMG credit for compensating Billet for the loss, pending verification and comment from Billet, and ripped all the rest of Linus’s excuses a new one. But that still doesn’t change the fact that Steve didn’t quite live up to the journalistic standards that he touts on his channel.

    That failure gives things a bit more of a “drama” flavor (It’s hard not to suspect that this is primarily a response motivated by that clip of Linus’s lab tech attacking GN’s and HUB’s testing methods). But of course it doesn’t absolve LMG and its vaunted lab of milking the Youtube algorithm first and being a source of real information a distant second–which was argued pretty convincingly by GN and which a lot of us started to notice long before this video came out.