Correct country (in the EU) but off by hundreds of kilometers. I find it rarely to be correct whenever I get a "new login from..." mail from Google or others.
Technikmuseum [0] has many different technology-related exhibitions. And the Spectrum (separate building) has a lot of physics- and science experiments you can actively try out. Loved it as a kid.
Nice to see the Mengenlehre clock in Berlin. Coincidentally, directly in the adjacent Europa-Center is also the clock of flowing time, which I found fascinating as a kid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_of_Flowing_Time
Used to use it in university (CS) for cramming before tests, mostly when there were lots of definitions to memorize. Also summarizing stuff and writing your own cards for it helps already with learning itself.
.NET can create self-contained executables pretty easily (via _dotnet publish_), both including the required framework assemblies and without them. But they'll still be comparatively large.
Not necessarly, that is a possible option if you want to keep the JIT around, other one is to AOT compile, 100% straight machine code, like any other compiled language.
For JIT binaries it’s best to apply /p:PublishTrimmed=true which (sometimes massively) reduces their size. Applications written in AvaloniaUI or, nowadays, WinUI 3 can be compiled with NativeAOT which reduces the size and memory usage even further.
Be aware that this is what you're getting into when you pick dotnet for GUI applications. It's been that way for decades at this point, there are many unfixed bugs in WPF for example, in spite of it being touted as the final word in GUI development in its time and still being used for some Microsoft applications like VS.
Meanwhile, with Delphi you were using VCL 20 years ago, and you're still using VCL today, and its development velocity and performance is light years ahead of anything Microsoft put out during that time. This also applies to Lazarus's LCL.
Even so I would still pick WPF over VCL/LCL today if I don't need cross-platform support. It just does so much more, especially when it comes to data binding.
The funny thing about Windows GUI story is that the older the framework is, generally speaking, the better it is supported. WinForms still gets bug fixes and improvements; so does WPF. OTOH if you were early on the WinRT bandwagon, tough luck, and it's been meaningless churn ever since.
Wait what? AvaloniaUI is not WPF, neither is WinUI3 which is new and maybe something you'd consider if you only target Windows (I presume it's better than using it through Uno, otherwise you'd probably choose Avalonia to support all OSes).
I was going to complain how Avalonia still has issues with large binaries even with NAOT but I just tested it on https://github.com/sourcegit-scm/sourcegit on Windows, and the resulting size of the folder without symbols (the binary and like 4 dlls) is ~55MiB. The binary itself is 41MiB which is as much as Qt6-based qBitorrent binary takes on Windows. So it seems while Avalonia works well enough on macOS, the size of binaries and memory consumption are higher than on Linux and Windows huh.
Fair enough, although I trust them more to sort out those issues, than to keep waiting for Project Reunion to deliver what was promised at BUILD 2020, or by C++/WinRT team at CppCon 2017 (which is WinUI 3.0 foundation).
It's for streaming on platforms like YouTube or Twitch, usually when streaming games or doing art. Instead of using a webcam to show yourself (mostly in a small overlay in a corner), you show a PNG image of yourself or an avatar. To give these static images for variety, you can change them based on voice input (i.e. as if the PNG was talking), or emotions like laughing. Related: V-Tubers which use 3D models or more intricate methods like motion capturing to animate a virtual version of themselves.
Etymology is youtuber -> virtual youtuber (Kizuna Ai et al) using motion tracked 3D models -> shorten to vtuber -> people develop 2D models as cost reduction -> even further cost reduction by just representing yourself with a static image -> "pngtuber".
It also places things in a cultural context, like most language. Nobody would describe a news broadcast with a static image of the news anchor as a "pngtuber" even if technically it's similar.
nitpicking but etymology isn't exactly what you think it is, what you did is explaining how a slang came to be, which is not etymology.
Anyway, according to your definition Max Headroom should be regarded as a virtual Television host or a "Vhost", except a host is a host, so a vtuber is just a youtuber and a youtuber is just a host.
> Nobody would describe a news broadcast with a static image of the news anchor as a "pngtuber" even if technically it's similar
exactly the point: a host is a host, an anchor is an anchor, that's why nobody would use "pngtuber" for "a news broadcast with a static image of the news anchor" because we already have a name for that that is good enough and generic enough to be understandable by anybody.
Instead now we got terms that are so specific that are useless in any general sense
and that's why etymology doesn't fit here, the word pngtuber is not "in the language" it's a slang and it wants to stay like that, if it eventually reaches mainstream status, pngtubers will start calling themselves jpeg2000vimeoers to separate themselves from the peasants
p.s. anyway this is nothing new, it's just a new name for something old, there was a time when internet and the computing devices in general were very limited resource wise and you had to do sh*t like this because it was the only way to do it.
Because that's how language works. vtuber/pngtuber describe a specific form of avatar, and people aren't gonna say 'they're a streamer that uses a 2D reactively animated animator' when they can say 'they're a pngtuber' and be perfectly well understood by the audience that is actually going to watch them instead of telling them to get off their lawn.
I may be using the terms incorrect, but in my understanding the pngtuber/vtuber is "the person doing the streaming/video", while the "avatar" refers to their representation in video. So saying "pngtuber is different term for avatar" would be like saying "person is a old term for selfi" right?
This discussion is complicated by the fact that a vtuber in character is identical with his avatar, so he will refer to his avatar in first person, e.g. "My camera broke, I'll be a png-tuber today."
The {png,v}tuber is the character. For many such streamers there's relatively little difference, but some of the bigger vtubers are actually a team of people who may take turns playing the character. (Think like Hatsune Miku)
Because "avatar" isn't specific enough - some creators use fully dynamic rigged models with motion controls (those got a name of VTubers, because they started as Virtual YouTubers, see: Kizuna Ai), some use static images (so your traditional avatars, often being commissioned artwork of their OCs) to just fill the video feed while discussing topics with no relevant footage to show (often seen with content creators covering animation). PNG-tubers, being dynamically controlled static images, are in the middle of the two, and the term appeared somewhat naturally as a result. It has a very clear definition in the area it's being used in so I wouldn't call it non-descriptive honestly
It is wise to show at least a little deference to the field a term comes from. If you are not already deeply familiar with the subject matter, it is going to be hard to appreciate why particular names have caught on and why your own ideas might not be better. Immediate comprehensibility by outsiders with no prior familiarity is usually not the most important criterion.
> If you are not already deeply familiar with the subject matter, it is going to be hard to appreciate why particular names have caught on
and if you're introducing a niche term to a broader audience who might lack that context, in an asynchronous or static medium like an HN post or repo README, providing a definition that describes it in more widely used terms is a low-effort way to help unfamiliar people learn about it without forcing them to ask
Not really. And "finding one's voice" doesn't require a galling display of ignorance of already-available words. Fun slang makes sense; but now we have an upwelling of slang that's just ignorant.
Here and there we see exceptions; take "rizz," for example. You can see that this comes from "charisma." OK, cool. But that's an outlier now.
I know nothing about diving. Why can't you pee in a dry suit (except that one might find it gross)? I assumed that you could just rinse the suit afterwards. Or is being underwater a factor, because it gets too cold or the pressure does something with it or...?
Except for the gross factor? The author seems pretty clear that, yes, you can:
> For those of you asking, what are my options for diving in a dry suit? Well… you can just hold it (again, if you have a bladder of steel), nappies/diapers, the p-valve, or just pee in the suit (which is gross and defeats the whole purpose of the dry suit, right?).
The "purpose of the dry suit" is to keep you dry. If you're literally wetting yourself, and with a fluid that is rather more chemically offensive than water, then you're probably going to have a bad time. (I don't know how temperature-controlled dry suits are, but you lose heat a lot more easily through contact with a liquid (that's what sweat is for!), so the urine puddle probably makes heat retention harder, too.)
I live where the water barely gets warm enough to swim in during the summer, so kayaking is often a dry suit activity. When I was taking a class I had quite a time staying cool. Some people flip on purpose, or you just shove as much of an arm into the water as you can and wait. A dry suit makes 50°F water feel like a crisp morning with still air, instead of torture.
Water inside reduces that insulation. I wore my synthetic base layers underneath just in case.
When I started diving I still didn't understand the difference between dry and wet suits. Although a dry suit could look pretty similar to a regular wet suit to a non diver from far away, the way of wearing it is way different.
A wet suit is used in warm/hot weather were the insulation provided by the neoprene and the wather that gets trapped between the suit and your body is enough. If you pee on a wet suit, well, your wet anyway, and it's not much of a difference.
A dry suit is what is used for really cold weather, and it's really dry inside. It's watertight. For keeping yourself warm inside the suit, you just wear some layers of "regular" dry clothes. So if you pee in a dry suit, your peeing on your dry clothes.
Would be like peeing in your flight or space suit (without a catheter like system like the described in the post)
You're generally not wearing just a drysuit if the water is cold. Under the outer shell, you often wear multiple undergarments to keep warm. Think a base layer, underwear, socks, 1-piece.
I once did a cold water dive in a drysuit without fleece undergarments.
We were loading our gear onto a charter boat for a week's dive trip and the boat captain dropped his keys through the dock and into the water. I volunteered as tribute, threw my drysuit over my t-shirt and jeans and went down in search of the keys.
I quickly found the keys which was a blessing because it was the coldest I have ever been; I would never do a drysuit dive without the layers again.
When I was much younger, we would go surfing in a wetsuit. When the water was cold, taking a piss would be a nice little break from freezing while the layer of water inside the suit warmed up. Sounds gross but it gets replaced over time while you're in the water.
Oh yeah, 'charging up' your wetsuit is great. The replacement is fairly limited with a good suit especially if you have booties and a hood, but who cares, people pay a lot of money for skin care products with urea in them.
https://www.window-swap.com/
reply