TPM has nothing to do with any privacy invasion, AI, or anything bad really.

are you living under a rock, or have you been not using an Android phone in the past decade? that's exactly what is happening! through the use of the TPM, apps can verify whether you run a google corporate approved operating system, or something else, even if just slight differences, but also if you use a real clean and respectful system.

plenty of apps do this. including banking apps, while banks are restricting their web banking sites to not work on phones (because that "gives us security from hackers", no I'm not joking this is what my bank told publicly 2 months ago, in the EU), pps that use some form of DRM, and even work related apps that show you your current working hours and needs to be used for work related manners!

AI doesn't say no, AI doesn't fight back

TPM is a secure part, a cryptoprocessor with some memory, isolated from everything else, very basically.

It stores keys and other sensitive data, like your "hello windows pin"... Or any other PIN if you want...

This secure "box" can also be used for DRM by using the secure nature of the TPM to store the keys, or to encrypt the harddisk of your work laptop. Multiple of uses really. It's kind of like all piece of technology, it seems like.

At that point, it's like you are saying that encryption is bad because it can be used for DRM or validate if a piece of software is valid or not.

The TPM by itself isn't bad or related to privacy invasion. Nor the internet or a browser is only used to spy on you.

There is a limit to the conspiracy...

What happens? I don't mind spoilers

Rich people at tech companies replace workers with AI, set up a security force that goes after immigrants, surveil the city with a camera network, try to remove the human from the equation, try to upload human consciousness to the cloud, lots of other AI tech dystopian stuff.

Unfortunately, you are incorrect, and everything WhyJiffie has said about trusted computing on Android hardware is correct, and there is currently nothing to stop it from happening on PCs too, when TPM is more ubiquitous.

This is the same technology that locks printers out of 3rd party ink, or restricts the ability of farmers to repair their own tractors.

I recommend learning more about it, and reading what Cory Doctorow writes about it. https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/18/descartes-delenda-est/#self-destruct-sequence-initiated

Whoa don't come for Bluetooth like that. I like not having tangled wires and janky earbuds/headphones, especially because my clumsy ass used to snap the cords all the time by accident.

I do agree though that we should get the choice to use headphone jack or bluetooth. I also miss having a jack since I have to use my charging port to connect to my car radio...

Edit: My comment is an implication that I want phones with headphone jacks. I know that phones have headphone jacks and bluetooth. Why am I getting downvoted?

Do people?

thats like saying a CPU cannot be used to run malicious code and be used against you, because all it does is maths, and maths cant hurt you, and would you really outlaw maths just because someone uploaded a picture of you to facebook?

TPMs have a use, that can be good for users too, I don't doubt that. but because of its capabilities it enables so much user hostile shit. and frankly the tradeoffs are not worth it. just look at what happened, and still is evolving by the way on android, but iOS too. bootloaders that are not possible to unlock were bad already, but this is terrible, that they are literally making it impossible to take ownership of your own devices, to get rid of all the factory malware, if you need to use certain services that most people don't want to or simply just aren't allowed to give up.

They have the option.

There are some outlandish rumours that it's possible for a device to have... both Bluetooth and a headphone jack.

Remember that you, the reader, don't have to take part in this. If you don't like it, don't use it - tell your friends and family not to use it, and why.

The only way companies stop this trend is if they see it's a losing bet.

well going by what ive heard about the latest LLM models freaking out when being forced to do things contrary to its original instructions (like grok constantly talking about white genocide) ai isn't as obedient as they would prefer

Millions of businesses are so innovative they are choosing the same basket to put all their eggs in.

Capitalism sure is fun. Simply side economics plus massive deregulation is sure to provide humanity with it's salvation.

It's not even that

tech is under the helm of dipshit MBAs who have no idea of the technologies of the companies they control. They're all about the generative AI because it looks like a massive shortcut to compensate for their complete and utter lack of technical ability and talent.

It's crazy Google will lose its search dominance and all its money in my lifetime. Android will probably be the only thing left when I die.

The last 20 years has basically been entirely a troubling trend in tech.

google search got dumb on purpose, a whistleblower called it out - if you spend longer look on the search pages they get more "engagement" time out of you....

What are you talking about “temporal+quality” for DLSS? That’s not a thing.

Sorry I was mistaken, it's not "temporal", I meant "transformer", as in the "transformer model", as here in CP2077.

DLSS I’m talking about. There are many comparisons out there showing how amazing it is, often resulting in better IQ than native.

Let me explain:

No, AI upscaling from a lower resolution will never be better than just running the game at the native resolution it's being upscaled to.

By it's very nature, the ML model is just "guessing" what the frame might look like if it was rendered at native resolution. It's not an accurate representation of the render output or artistic intent. Is it impressive? Yes of course, it's a miracle of technology and a result of brilliant engineering and research in the ML field applied creatively and practically in real time computer graphics, but it does not result in a better image than native, nor does it aim to do so.

It's mainly there to increase performance when rendering at native resolution is too computationally expensive and results in poor performance, while minimizing the loss in detail. It may do a good job of it for sure, relatively speaking, but it can never match an actual native image, and compressed YouTube video with bitrates less than a DVD aren't a good reference point because they don't represent anything even close to what a real render looks like, and not a compressed motion jpeg of it.

Even if it seems like there's "added detail", any "added detail" is either literally just an illusion stemming from the sharpening post-processing filter akin to the "added detail" of a cheap Walmart "HD Ready" TV circa 2007 with sharpening cranked up, or outright fictional, and does not exist within the game files itself, and if by "better" we agree that it's the most high fidelity representation of the game as it exists on disk, then AI cannot ever be better.

FXAA is not an AI upscaler, what are you talking about?

I mention FXAA because really the only reason we use "AI upscalers" is because anti-aliasing is really really computationally expensive.

The single most immediately evident and obvious consequence of a low render resolution is aliasing first and foremost. Almost all other aspects of a game's graphics are usually completely detached from this like e.g. texture resolution.

The reason aliasing happens in the first place is because our ability to create, ship, process and render increasingly high polygon count games has massive surpassed our ability to push pixels on screen in real time.

Or course legibility suffers at lower resolution as well, but not nearly as much as smoothness of edges on high-polygon objects.

So for assets that would look really good at say, 4K, we run them at 720p instead, and this creates jagged edges because we literally cannot make the thing fit into the pixels we're pushing.

The best and most direct solution will always be just to render the game at a much higher resolution. But that kills framerates.

We can't do that, so we resort to Anti-Aliasing techniques instead. The most simple of which is MSAA which just multi-samples (renders at higher res) those edges and downscales them.

But it's also very very expensive to do computationally. GPUs capable of doing it alongside other bells and whistles we have like Ray Tracing simply don't exist, and if they did they'd cost too much, and even then, most games have to target consoles, which are solidly beat out by a flagship GPU even from several years ago.

One other solution is to blur these jagged edges out, sacrificing detail for a "smooth" look.

This is what FXAA does, but this creates a blurry image. This became very prevalent during the 7th Gen console era in particular because they simply couldn't push more than 720p in most games, in an era where Full HD TVs had become fairly common towards the end and shiny, polished graphics in trailers became a major way to make sales, this was further worsened by the fact Motion Blur was often used to cover up low framerates and replicate the look of sleek modern (at the time) digital blockbusters.

SMAA fixed some of FXAA's issues by being more selective about which pixels were blurred, and TAA eliminated the shimmering effect by also taking into account which pixels should be blurred across multiple frames.

Beyond this there are other tricks, like checkerboard rendering, where we render the frame in chunks at different resolutions based on what the player may or may not be looking at.

In VR we also use foveated rendering to render an FOV cone in front of the players immediate vision at a higher res than what would be in their periphery/outside the eye's natural focus, with eye tracking tech, this actually works really well.

But none of these are very good solutions, so we resort to another ugly, but potentially less bad solution, which is just rendering the game at a lower resolution and upscaling it, like a DVD played on an HDTV, but instead of a traditional upscaling algo like Lanczoz, we use DLSS, which reconstructs detail lost from a lower resolution render, based on context of the frame using machine learning, which is efficient because of tensor cores now included on every GPU making N-dimensional array multiplication and mixed precision FP math relatively computationally cheap.

DLSS often looks better compared to FXAA, SMAA and TAA because all of those just literally blur the image in different ways, without any detail reconstruction, but it is not comparable to any real anti-aliasing technique like MSAA.

But DLSS always renders at a lower res than native, so it will never be 1:1 a true native image, it's just an upscale. That's okay, because that's not the point. The purpose of DLSS isn't to boost quality, it's to be a crutch for low performance, it's why turning off even Quality presets for DLSS will often tank performance.

There is one situation where DLSS can look better than native, and it's if you instead of typical applications of DLSS which downscales the image, then upscales it with ML guesswork, use it to upscale the image from native, to a higher target res instead and output that.

In Nvidia settings I believe this is called DL DSR factors.

I don’t even know where to begin, so much wrong with this. I’ll have to come back when I’ve got more time.