I'm rather surprised that it doesn't take the z-buffer as an input. I would have thought that would have provided useful information, it's one of the more useful forms of contolnet.
But I thought Nvidia “loves open source” (they don’t) and they are now a supporter for open source and open weight models by acquiring Huggingface? (They don’t actually care)
But the line is drawn when it involves CUDA and any part of their closed source compilers (nvcc).
There are obvious reasons why they are closed source, but it’s becoming pointless since Deepseek have open sourced their AI compiler and compute libraries with DeepGEMM and eventually they will catch up.
They used to ship one model per game but now there is a single model, however they still do minor updates to it presumably to fine-tune it on new games
Am I the only one who feels a sense of disinterest in a project where the main README is LLM-generated? Does the author not have time to write what they did and how it's used?
I'm more upset about it being factually wrong, e.g. both mentions of "git-ignored" are absurd (why would you mention it if it's not in the repo?) and wrong (they are in the repo).
I notice this, that AI likes to write about things that are not in there. Like i review AI generated output, notice unnecessary things, and asks AI to remove that. So AI removes that and adds that "this and that that was used or described like this was removed because bla bla bla" to the document.
I think its somehow needs to talk (write) about the things that are in the context and removal is there so AI predicts that it should be there.
Yeah, I call it bugfix storytelling. Once upon a time this class far far away had this red hooded method...
Especially egregious if both adding and removing the thing happens in one commit. Git should be telling the story, and if it can't then there _is_ no story!
If the README is >90% AI generated and it is as long as a novel, I am not going to read it and will assume that the author did not read or write it either.
Unfortunately it is slop, beyond the comprehension of the author unless they are experienced with DLSS internals to explain it in depth.
What kind of sorcery is this ? Very impressive work !
Programmer: OpenDLSS...
Jensen : Wait. Not like that! (╯°□°）╯︵┻━┻
But the line is drawn when it involves CUDA and any part of their closed source compilers (nvcc).
There are obvious reasons why they are closed source, but it’s becoming pointless since Deepseek have open sourced their AI compiler and compute libraries with DeepGEMM and eventually they will catch up.
At least their support helps the open-weight ecosystem.
Isn't the mote that Nvidia has is they work with studios to generate the training data from the game, then they ship a model per game?
Or is my knowledge outdated here and they're just using a single generalised model?
They don't. Only DLSS 1 was trained specifically per each game.
there's no way that's true!?
I think its somehow needs to talk (write) about the things that are in the context and removal is there so AI predicts that it should be there.
Especially egregious if both adding and removing the thing happens in one commit. Git should be telling the story, and if it can't then there _is_ no story!
Unfortunately it is slop, beyond the comprehension of the author unless they are experienced with DLSS internals to explain it in depth.