This looks to me like something resembling a 65 mustang.
If you look at some 65 mustangs they only had a driver side wing mirror as that was the law back then. The wider rear tire also makes a lot of sense, as it's a RWD car that needs wider rear tires to support the traction.
If the car in the photo is a 65 mustang, I think the AI did pretty good.
From what I could gather the resolution on the Rift S is 1,280 × 1,440 per-eye (2,560 × 1,440 total) and the Quest is 1,440 × 1,600 per-eye (2,880 × 1,600 total) [0], shouldn't the one rending on a desktop GPU have higher resolution? Maybe the source is nor right as it's slightly outdated, but I couldn't find actual numbers in the website.
Also, it would have been nice to get the snap855, but probably would have made the headset a bit too expensive for the target market. The only thing that is miles ahead of the Go is the tracking from what I can see. Not worth updating for how little I use it.
The Go is 3x3 (3DOF HMD, 3DOF simple controller) and the Quest is 6x6 (6DOF HMD, dual 6DOF touch controllers) which is a quantum leap of a difference.
While the former is only good mostly for 360 photo/video and some not-so-immersive experiences, the latter lets you basically have VR experiences w/ with full hand and head tracking on par with the best PC VR out there. I have a CV1 and a wireless Vive (a Go and Focus as well) and I'm incredibly impressed by the Quest - the polish on the setup/intro app (the dancing robot is my new favorite demo showcasing the potential/visceral impact VR can have), and personally, I think the Quest is the first true "mainstream" ready VR product - I hope everyone at least tries it for themselves before completely dismissing it.
In physics, quantum leap is used specifically to describe discontinuous state changes, which is why I like the term - IMO 3x3 vs 6x6 are almost completely different mediums experientially (that'd be its own conversation), but your comment did lead me down a bit of a pleasant linguistic-curiosity rabbit hole as I double checked, since I can see why "quanta" might imply something small, but colloquially quantum leap does not.
Bitcoin is getting harder and harder to mine. Small players (e.g. students/hobbyists) cannot afford to invest 70% of whatever revenue they generated, and will sensibly be forced out of the game. It's easy when you play against Villabajo, and it gets more expensive when facing Barcelona :)
I would assume that with the current technologies, the game will end being played only by the big players, when the currencies will be reaching their top tier (getting more and more difficult to generate).
Reading the comments I feel like there are 2 polarized sides that state that everyone they work with uses some sort of stimulant or that they have never encountered it during their career.
It's hard to get a sense of how common it is to encounter stimulants in the tech sector from reading this thread.
I really think it's that drug users are very good at recognizing who's "cool" and who's not. I wouldn't be surprised if half the people at my undergrad CS program weren't even aware of the stimulant phenomenon because they just weren't friends with people who did that kind of stuff
There's also a huge age gap in that older people are probably less likely to abuse drugs for maturity/responsibility reasons, and that no 25 year old developer in their right mind would mention their/their friends' drug use to their 40 year old colleague. And older people didn't grow up in during the era where stimulants were being handed out like candy to kids to get them to shut up
Would really like to find something similar but that teaches how to implement the layers and the network too. I feel like I'm not going to become familiar with NN's until I understand how it's built underneath too.
NN as a concept is hard since it is taught with math, however, I found his book to be easier than any other books I've read as it uses minimal math and down to earth explanations. Since NNs can implemented in most languages, I wish that a universal NN language could be developed that anyone could use vs having to learn it from other languages.
If you want to render at 2560x1440 inside of VR and not lose quality the VR resolution has to be bigger per eye than display resolution. You would need a VR headset that has 4k per eye rather than a better GPU.
If you look at some 65 mustangs they only had a driver side wing mirror as that was the law back then. The wider rear tire also makes a lot of sense, as it's a RWD car that needs wider rear tires to support the traction.
If the car in the photo is a 65 mustang, I think the AI did pretty good.