How feasible is it to build web games with this? I’d like to build something with this treating it like you would Pixi.js, it looks to me like it’d be as performant if not better but with the amazing advantage of having a vector asset pipeline built into the system. Using vector graphics with Pixi, especially when rendering in a web worker, is a pain in the ass.
That was my question as well some weeks ago and my resume was, to wait a bit more. I could not find ressources on how to bind from the web at all, but maybe I missed it.
"Using vector graphics with Pixi, especially when rendering in a web worker, is a pain in the ass."
I currently load SVGs on the UI thread, draw them on a canvas, and then use `createImageBitmap()` to convert the canvas into an ImageBitmap, which I send back to the web worker. This method allows for scalable vector assets to be rasterized on-demand, even at high resolutions like retina, maintaining quality comparable to the browser's rasterizer. Third-party libraries didn't offer consistent or satisfactory results.
Update: I just received the StarTech adapter, connected it to the monitor via DisplayPort and plugged it into my Satechi Thunderbolt 4 Hub.
All seems to work well. Picture quality appears good, the input lag is minimal (slightly higher than on the default screen, but not overly noticeable). I ran the UFO test[1] on it and couldn't notice any major issues, besides extremely subtle jittering.
I plan to use this screen for my text editor mainly, so I think it will be okay.
Awesome, I'll keep the Dell hub in mind if the adapter I bought doesn't work.
Out of curiosity, do you notice anything out of the ordinary when using the DisplayLink monitor? I.e. mouse lag, compression artifacts, or anything else?
I am being sarcastic ;) the guy is supposed to be a freedom fighter for privacy/security but is trying to ban boycotts, the most basic form of protest, and integral to US democracy.
Your previous comment came off very genuine. If clarity of statement is important, it might be worth ensuring your actual intent is made unambiguously clear somewhere in message, if that message is otherwise ironic or sarcastic.
Everything is allowed to do that. You're right that it's not good security-wise which is why Apple blocked that sort of thing years ago. On Windows unfortunately the whole Win32 ecosystem is very dependent on programs injecting things into other processes, the API makes it quite easy and there's lots of sample code for it. It's a major source of stability and crash bugs there.
For example, antivirus products do this all the time, as do many video drivers and other system utilities.
Also, Explorer has various plugin interfaces where it'll load third party code and run it in-process since the very first version.
And this has been the case since Windows NT in 1993 according to a presentation I saw from Sami Laiho where he strongly argues that you don't need and should be a admin account as default.
From microsoft's documentation [1]
> Administrator-to-kernel is not a security boundary.
Yes and no. Windows has a very fine grained permissions system, including at the admin level. The problem is that it was designed for multi-user systems in the 90s, so the permission and security systems are mostly concerned about keeping users safe from each other, and having administrator roles for managing those users and doing system-wide tasks. Preventing a process from injecting code into another process by the same user running in the same session just isn't in the original threat model, since it's just the user screwing with their own stuff.
The shift towards protections from malware happened mostly as a consequence of Windows XP. There are now better controls, like assigning low-trust processes like a browser's renderer a low integrity level to prevent them from doing that. But it's also late enough that it's hard to rock the boat too much without breaking existing applications. Microsoft tried to make a clean break and offer more sandboxed applications with a user-friendly package manager (called the Microsoft Store) but this wasn't well received by app developers: most didn't use it at all, and those that did often opted out of the sandboxing.
Uninstaller likely running with admin privileges or as system. Despite it's huge surface area, explorer is not a super privileged binary on windows and is essentially a userspace program that has tons of open ports to plug in for many many apps. Locking it down like this would likely cause a lot of apps to break. I know for a fact microsoft keeps very close eyes on crash reports of their core apps such as explorer, and if your app causes a fault in explorer and you're registered on windows developer portal you'll get notified of this when they roll out beta insider preview releases.
I’m not AI researcher, and I only barely understand the theory, so I’m just looking to keep slightly ahead of the curve so I can adapt to whatever is coming next, try new things and projects, and add these new tools to my belt before others.
reply