1
* English: https://www.theverge.com/news/759016/tesla-in-car-graphics-unreal-engine
* German: https://www.golem.de/news/fahrzeugvisualisierung-tesla-soll-wechsel-zur-unreal-engine-planen-2508-199152.html
...that Tesla might be switching from the "Godot"- to the "Unreal"-engine.
Are there any REAL reasons known for such a switch? (eg. about bad_support/bad_performance/bad_adhoc_customizations/bad_overall_approach/whatever...)
Reason: I just started this week looking for a 3D-engine (candidates so far are Godot & Bevy, other options tbd) and this news made me wonder if I should be "more careful" about Godot... ?
I then focused & programmed & played for a while with the model of the "backpropagation" network, until the early 2000' => it was fun, but not usable in my context. I then stopped fiddling with it and became inactive in this context.
An important property of a backpropagation network was (as much as I know) that it had to be fully re-trained whenever inputs changed (values of existing ones changed or inputs/outputs were removed/added).
Question:
Is it still like that for the currently fancy algos (the ones developed by Google/Facebook/OpenAI/Xsomething/...) or are they now better, so that they can now adapt without having to be fully retrained using the full set of (new/up-to-date) training data?
Asking because I lost track of the progress in this area during the last 20 years and especially recently I understand nothing involving all new names (e.g. "llama", etc...).
Thanks :)
1) A user sees some character on his/her screen => that's a "grapheme", which is a collection of...
2) ...1 to N "Unicode code points", where a single "Unicode code point" can use...
3) ...1 to 6 "UTF-8" bytes.
Is that right (in the case of UTF-8 storage)?
(I feel like that I'm missing an intermediate step...)
(indirectly related to "You can't just assume UTF-8" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40195009 , comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40206149 , link mentioned in that comment being https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2003/10/08/the-absolute-minimum-every-software-developer-absolutely-positively-must-know-about-unicode-and-character-sets-no-excuses/ )
Thx :o)
As a starting point I'm thinking about the global market share of mobile smartphones being split between just 2 companies: Google's Android (X manufacturers & X vendors) and Apple's iOS (1 manufacturer & 1 vendor).
If any of those two companies would cease to exist...
(for any reason/event, it doesn't matter what would be the reason/event or if it would be predictable - e.g. Apple getting a crazy CEO that makes a continuous series of bad decisions or Google becoming outdated because competitors deliver better search results with their Artificial Intelligence frameworks, whatever - something like this happened to some established companies in the past, no reason to believe that the future will be different)
...then we would probably have an impact on a planetary scale due to the amount of users that each party/company has?
This gets then linked as well to the services that they offer (not just on mobile phones) like e.g. 2-factor-authentication, email, hosting and/or data-processing, whatever - a LOT of people/businesses rely on those companies for one or multiple reasons.
Therefore, in my opinion, Google and Apple (their OS + their services) are "too big to fail", maybe even more than "too big to fail"-banks are => what do you think?
Cheers :)