The leveldb page shows mixed results wrt sqlite3 - I would say that it is generally faster that sqlite3 based on the results. There is no comparison to sqlite4.
Most notably in large value operations, and also slightly in random reads, sqlite3 wins. In in other benchmarks however, leveldb is faster.
The leveldb page notes that they perform poorly with large values due to the increased I/O that is done. The relatively poor random read performance isn't discussed but my guess is that it's due to having to fetch a compressed page of data that contains values for other keys, thus leveldb is doing "more work" than strictly necessary.
Pixel artists will probably use nearest-neighbor scaling to display their art on high-resolution screens (so one pixel would become a sharp 3x3 block of pixels, or 4x4, 5x5, etc). That is already the technique being used to create games with an “old-school” aesthetic on modern gaming consoles.
I don’t think that drawing 1920x1080 (or larger!) images pixel-by-pixel will ever be practical, and it probably wouldn’t even look like pixel art to the eye at that point.
Using a vector representation may be a more practical approach as retina-style screens become more pervasive. Microsoft Research has an interesting paper on this from last year's SIGGRAPH: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/kopf/pixelart/
That said, once you switch over to more advanced scaling, the artist loses a lot of the fine control over the result that can really make pixel art shine.
The technique in that paper kills the effect completely. Its a way to de-pixel the pixel art. Also, vector representations quickly become much more CPU intensive. Would be more efficient to scale the pixels as suggested above.
Most property has value without artificial legal limitations.
I agree that 5-10 years is probably too short of a period for intellectual property to be protected. Honestly, putting an arbitrary span of time on the duration is a suboptimal way of accomplishing the goals of copyright law. Why not protect an artist’s creation as long as he or she is alive, and then release it into the public domain upon his or her death? One of the main problems with the current system is that corporations (e.g. Disney) can monopolize culturally-significant works for decades after their creator’s death.
One of the main problems with the current system is that corporations (e.g. Disney) can monopolize culturally-significant works for decades after their creator’s death.
So? How is it a problem that Disney has a monopoly on Pocahontas or Aladdin?
> How is it a problem that Disney has a monopoly on Pocahontas or Aladdin?
Because if you try to tell any of those stories today, you'll have Disney's lawyers knocking on your door (if not the FBI knocking down your door). And don't forget those stories were already old when Walt Disney was a little boy.
We’re willing to shift our clocks by an hour twice a year to “save daylight,” whatever that means. Correcting for 500 years of clock drift is a far more tangible reason. It’s rather pessimistic to assume that the people of 500 years from now would be unwilling to implement this.
Correcting for clock drift is not tangible in a practical sense though. We (allegedly) have good reasons for changing our schedule twice a year. Changing it because that's how people lived 500 years ago is not any kind of reason, and I think our ancestors will just laugh at the idea when it comes time for the leap hour.
So if these leap seconds are causing problems, I don't see any reason to keep them. By the time the consequences of getting rid of them are noticeable, they will no longer be negative consequences.
I'll be spinning in my grave, cryogenic storage tank, or positronic simulation matrix if our ancestors 500 years' hence are still observing (and thus familiar with) "Daylight Savings Time".
The future of casual gaming, sure. That’s already true, I would say. However, there are a lot of games that are far better suited to be played on a couch or sitting in a nice comfy chair with a mouse and keyboard, and PCs/consoles are much better suited for that. If anything, the iPhone and iPad have only stolen the market from portable devices like the Nintendo DS and Sony PSP. “Real” consoles are hardly threatened.
I definitely agree. Casual gaming has its place, but hardcore gamers and consoles have a market that is no way threatened by gaming on portable devices.
While, Angry birds and Zynga brought large sections of population into gaming, their involvement in hardcore gaming is still minimal. I will possibly be downvoted for this, but the amount of research that has been contributed by hardcore game development companies far surpasses the amount that casual game developers have produced. There is a visible differentiator between the two segments of gaming - and it will probably always be there.
Mobile and online casual games have been pulling in very impressive profits for the last 3-4 years while many companies have seen console and PC retail profits decrease in the same period. The demand for hardcore games isn't being threatened but the supply might face harder competition for funds with casual games now.
"Might" as in I don't know how these AAA game publishers are organised internally. If the console division of Capcom sees decreased profits while the mobile division sees increased profits [1], does that mean that people and capital can get reallocated from the console division to the mobile division?
If we're going to be talking about the future, that doesn't necessarily mean that Apple won't enter the hardcore market some day. After all, it's all up to the developers and game studios, and with everything merging into the living room, it's a real possibility.
