Very much this. Fast is very important for usability, but it doesn't matter if it doesn't work correctly. Time and time again in my consulting engagements it proves far easier to get it right first, and then refine and optimize later.
How does this have anything to do with the new Microsoft? Unreal has always been a windows based engine. Of course it currently runs on many more platforms but Windows/Visual Studio is where its roots are.
There was a long article about one of the supporters who had paid in $30k towards SC. It was very clear he did not do so purely for the virtual ships but rather identified closely with the project and simply wanted to support Chris Roberts and his vision. I don't think you contribute at that level without understanding that you aren't buying virtual ships but instead supporting a vision that may or may not work out.
I've backed roughly $2k (a lot of it which I re-sold to other players, fwiw) and I'm in the same boat - couldn't care less about the actual ships. Game-wise, I worked on a space sim myself and was faced by a lot of challenges I see CIG tackling correctly. Studio-wise, I've explained in my post above that CIG's transparency is the reason I'm rooting for them so hard. I want the model, or at least parts of it, to be successful - not just the game.
It's not trivial to take any existing algorithm for training and scale it not only cross-GPU but also cross machine. Training tends to be very bandwith intensive. In fact that is the entire reason Nvidia is so heavily focused on this with their upcoming GPUs (Pascal). I am not saying it's not possible, just that it's a lot harder than "distributed makes it scalable".
That's what my 'mostly' meant. You can simply pay a 12 month fee and buy it 'in advance' and just use what you get, vs thinking about it as "I'm losing bug fixes". I'm still using PHPStorm 7.1 from a couple years ago, and it still works. Same concept would apply going forward, but... I still think they handled this wrong.
You should check out Dr. Lustig's youtube videos and his papers. He cites plenty of evidence. He also explains the mechanism by which fructose is processed by the liver, and why the fructose in fruits does not cause problems.
In its natural form sugar is not singled out and thus other molecules from the fruit influence its absorption. For example, vitamin C in its oxidized form is transported by the same receptors as glucose (GLUT4) and quercetin is very good inhibitor of glucose transport.
I still doubt tho, that high quantities of fruit are good for you. One of the reasons is that current forms of fruit we eat are selected toward sweater taste.
I've read a few papers that suggest our bodies absorb sugars differently in the presence of other chemicals that are present in the fruits themselves, but not in the processed versions? I think this is one of those papers?
If the only change 32 miles a week had on your body was blisters then you must of been in rather great shape to begin with. No cardio improvement? No muscle gain? No weight loss? For the vast majority of Americans I have a feeling this would not be the case.
I transitioned to running in college when I got too old for most basketball leagues so I was in pretty good at the time.
I started running again a few years ago after a 5 year hiatus from any regular physical activity. I logged my Time, Avg/Max HR, and Calories burned for each run and there really wasn't much of a change in metrics over the 3 year period I tracked them. My heart rate was surprisingly stable and run times reduced gradually but only about a minute a year.
Maybe if I was incredibly unhealthy but I generally eat well and at my worst I've only been 20-30lbs over weight. I know that sounds like a lot but I'm 6'5" and my "ideal" body weight is 190lbs which is kind of ridiculous.
Skepticism is fine. But that doesn't mean you can't take someone's advice and just try it. Sometimes it works out, some times it does not. But it's just optimizing what works for "you". This is something you'll never find in a clinical study no matter how good.
Actually, it almost always works out, at least initially. The problem is, the benefits go away; that's how placebo works. I'm just wary of getting my hopes up these days so I'm very careful about what drastic lifestyle changes I make now. Beyond that, I'm also tired of people guilt-tripping everyone else every time they make one of these lifestyle changes. Everyone rushes from one fad to the next and along the way we all feel a little worse about ourselves.