Posted by vintagedave 8 hours ago
Even the title of the video is straight up clickbait ("The Worst Bug In Games Is Now Gone Forever") since the context is all wrong, the metrics on the top left even shows "time/frame: 3.38 min", how could that be useful for games? The problem with physics in games is in real-time simulations, not in cached/animated "physics".
Don't get me wrong, the simulations are impressive, and hopefully will have a big impact on simulation stability for real-time and not, I was just taken aback by the video.
I usually don't like too much sensationalism, but he gets a pass. That's just his style and I think he does it well without compromising on the information content. He acknowledges that the technique is slow by the way, but that's late in the video.
But I agree that the title is poorly chosen in this case and I think it would be more appropriate for the previous video about a similar paper [1] where the simulation is less accurate, but runs in real-time. It is as if the titles were swapped.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NF3CdXkm68
Edit: And of course, it is entertainment, what did you expect of a YouTube channel covering state-of-the-art research in less than 10 minutes! If you want to get serious, read the actual paper. Short(ish) YouTube videos is simply not the right format for serious work, sensationalism or not.
I disagree. For example SIGGRAPH presentation videos manage to be short, informative, and largely non-sensationalist. You can see some of them in this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1PdIP1lGMJJzRFjlDajK...
StiffGIPC presentation makes good contrast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TBoTX2vag4
The titles and thumbnails are getting clickbaity though.
Also, based on my first message in this submission, how on earth (like exactly) would an LLM or something else be able to leave a comment like that? Do spambots on the internet have entire backstories now or what?
Several years back, they sent me a special spandex shirt/leggings combo, black with spaced white dots. Then you use their app to take many photos of yourself, and they have a profile of your body to be used for automatic fitting.
The shirt they eventually sent did fit well, but wasn't anything special several years ago.
This shows that they are still at it, and as someone that hates shopping for clothing, I hope this is a sign that the dream of a custom tailored fit at a mass production price is getting nearer.
Or perhaps they'll pivot..
I hope that it is closer to the latter, because I'd kill myself if I was forced to look for emojis so much. From other hand to memorize dozens (hundreds?) of different emojis doesn't seem fun either.
<edit> forgot hn doesnt show emojis, so ill just link to the paragraph: https://github.com/st-tech/ppf-contact-solver?tab=readme-ov-...
8 emojis in 2 sentences, lol
It didn't help that they make meaningless claims like
> Physically Accurate: Our deformable solver is driven by the Finite Element Method.
I don't know or care if they used an LLM to write that readme, but it's hot garbage. A pity because it seems like a decent sim otherwise.
I agree it doesn't have to be real-time to be valid, I think my mindset just goes to physics in video games which are usually real-time when I see contact solvers or most other things related to simulations.
claude 19 commits, +21,000 lines
Shirt shells? Tree stump solids? Knot rods?
I have no idea what any of those mean.