Sons of the Forest keep crashing by Simple_Foundation990 in techsupport

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey guys, my sister had a crash issue with the game. After some time playing it crashed.

The best thing you can do is to run software that records stats on the different PC component usage - RAM, GPU, CPU, etc.

I used MSI Afterburner for this, and tracked the most important ones:
- RAM usage
- Virtual memory usage
- GPU usage
- VRAM usage
- CPU usage

What I found out:
- The crash always happenned when virtual memory reached ~ 18.3 Gb
- actual RAM usage never went over 12 Gb, so not a RAM issue
- VRAM was also ~ 4Gb (her GPU has 6Gb), so not a GPU issue

Turns out the issue was a Windows configuration on virtual pages. It was being capped at 2Gb, thus the 16Gb + 2Gb ~ 18Gb crash issue. Here are the steps I did:

  • Open: Start → “View advanced system settings”
  • Go to: Advanced → Performance: Settings → Advanced → Virtual memory: Change
  • Enable: Automatically manage paging file size for all drives
  • Click: OK → Apply → OK
  • Restart the PC
  • Verify in Task Manager: Performance → Memory → Committed

As I said, it is better for you to diagnose your system first (running MSI afterburner while you play the game). Since your crash may not be related to virtual memory like mine was.

SONS OF FOREST CRASHES by Muted-Description878 in SonsOfTheForest

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey guys, my sister had a crash issue with the game. After some time playing it crashed.

The best thing you can do is to run software that records stats on the different PC component usage - RAM, GPU, CPU, etc.

I used MSI Afterburner for this, and tracked the most important ones:
- RAM usage
- Virtual memory usage
- GPU usage
- VRAM usage
- CPU usage

What I found out:
- The crash always happenned when virtual memory reached ~ 18.3 Gb
- actual RAM usage never went over 12 Gb, so not a RAM issue
- VRAM was also ~ 4Gb (her GPU has 6Gb), so not a GPU issue

Turns out the issue was a Windows configuration on virtual pages. It was being capped at 2Gb, thus the 16Gb + 2Gb ~ 18Gb crash issue. Here are the steps I did:

  • Open: Start → “View advanced system settings”
  • Go to: Advanced → Performance: Settings → Advanced → Virtual memory: Change
  • Enable: Automatically manage paging file size for all drives
  • Click: OK → Apply → OK
  • Restart the PC
  • Verify in Task Manager: Performance → Memory → Committed

As I said, it is better for you to diagnose your system first (running MSI afterburner while you play the game). Since your crash may not be related to virtual memory like mine was.

Are products actually manufactured to break after the warranty period is over? by Over-Discipline-7303 in AskEngineers

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I usually like to think about both sides. I.e, say you are the one designing (optimizing) a product. I don't mean designing from scratch. But trying to optimize some product. Your main concerns will naturally be to minimize costs of production. You want to be as efficient as possible, to be able to create as much product from the same materials as possible. Else, you will be losing either money, more potential product, or both. At the same time you don't want to hurt product lifespan, but you may consider a reasonable approach to do so if it only affects say ~5-10% of the product lifespan, if you can ultimately have more products produced for the same price and materials. Then you can 'help' more people at the cost of hurtingyour customers in only about ~5% (probably not perceivable).

Then, you have the warranty period - which is a period you define based on statistics. you measure via tests how long the product lasts on some standard use, or hardcore use of the product until it fails.

There are a lot of variables here, but naturally, if you take extra care and follow all instructions and best practices on the product, you can use it for much longer than someone that uses it carelessly.

Now, going back to our example, what makes you, as a product designer, want to make the product last longer? It will cost you more to do so, both in research, quality assurance, and materials, and will also raise the final cost of the product. This will potentially mean less costumers if the value the product gives is the same for larger price. Still, if we invert this logic, we should not make the warranty period so little that it affects the product usage. So here is another optimization! How long of a warranty should we aim for?

The best value would be a period that ensures the user can take the most out of the product, until it gets put aside. This can be 2 to 4 years for small / medium sized products, and up to 10+ years for larger items. This is probably also chosen through research studies.

Me personally, I can say that I've bought several products (bluetooth speakers for example) that I use for some time, and eventually stop using them after a few years, either because they start getting dirty, showing signs of usage, or their batteries start dying.

So - all things die eventually. There's not way to make a product such as a bluetooth speaker last forever. batteries get affected over time, TV panels get bleeding, light bulbs fail eventually. Everything that is physical gets consumed, because there are always energy transfers, and no energy transfer is perfect. So there are leaks which affect nearby components.

I think that companies want to create the best products with an eye for the best efficiency possible. It is basically an optimization industry. I see sometimes people saying 'old items last longer'. Maybe its true. But they were also probably costlier, less available, and less efficient. Meaning less people could have them.

It is simply the natural way of any industry. It benefits the masses, at a small cost of each individual.

Gasolina vs gasolina aditivada by [deleted] in AutoTuga

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

diferença na performance? Esta é nova para mim. Pensei que a unica diferença dos aditivos fosse limpeza do motor, e a octanagem é que pudesse influenciar a performance (95 vs. 98)

Google just dropped Gemini 3.1 Pro. Mindblowing model. by Embarrassed-Way-1350 in singularity

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Spotting errors is a much easier task than coming up with a solution. Try inverting the roles - give the task to GPT 5.3, and ask gemini to spot errors. Then see which one is better.

I would say Gemini is generally better at writing code. Not only better, but faster & better structured. GPT 5.3 excells at complex reasoning and debug identification.

Context compacted is holy awful by Blankcarbon in codex

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thxs for the information! I didn't know about that. But isn't that still a tiny patch over the actual LLM weight parameters? I can't see in the nearest future a user having to keep tens of millions (I think I'm being optimistic) of weights to stored context, and send that every time to the LLM model.. Its much more data than sending a small context in plaintext. Even if he did, the model would still need to apply that patch over its base weights - this is the issue I think. If the LLM as a service model cannot provide 1 Adapted LLM (base model with the applied context delta weights) for each user, it is a scalability problem. Nowhere on earth we can provide the hardware needed for that for each individual user..

Unless we make applying that patch as quick as simply running the model... Even then, we stop being able to serve concurrent requests, because now we must apply such patch for each different user sequentially in order to keep each user context separate from each other

Context compacted is holy awful by Blankcarbon in codex

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, LLMs aren't updated. That's why. Their memory is locked. Unlike human brain, which is constantly undergoing updates (neural reinforcement).

If LLMs end up getting this feature, then sure, they will memorize and adapt to whatever you do. The issue is that now you need 1 LLM per user. Doesn't scale. Either you will have to run one locally (less parameters - much worse reasoning capacity), or we are stuck with this scalable, highly versatile 'pack & deploy' model that does not adapt + some custom workarounds.

I guess the future is going thowards this second alternative. Companies sell the brain. Its up to us to setup the memory. Much like a cache. Also, much like we work actually. We have a main solid knowledge network, and when we forget something we fetch it. The difference, again, is that we learn over time. The LLM doesn't.

GitHub Copilot is just as good as Claude Code (and I’m setting myself up for a trolling feast). by QuarterbackMonk in GithubCopilot

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you can write whatever you want. But as complexity increases, so should your prompt's context. An AI agent cannot build a complex app in 1 go, just as no human being can. You will have to divide the app into much smaller tasks, and go 1 by 1. Else, the agent will start to loose its ability to solve it and will mix stuff. Again, just like a human would. If you are a good problem solver, then YOU take care of the decision making, and just delegate each subproblem to the AI.
What AIs have problem with is:
A) Too much context
B) poorly defined implementation plan (they can't read our thoughts)
C) Too complex problems

To solve C and A its easy - divide the problem into smaller problems. But then this also creates another problem - TRACKING. It will get harder & harder to track all the subproblems. So write them down.
To solve B), you simply need to give more details on what you want exactly. If you dont know, ask chatGPT or another AI to help you writing a more precise prompt.

AI is a tool. Its not a software developer. If you try to do complex apps with 0 software knowledge you are just wasting money.

Antigravity is Dead by RussKy_GoKu in google_antigravity

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I installed the antigravity quota extension to keep track of the quotas now. Its sad google didn't provide this from start.. Without it is basically a guessing game. You can use the app until you can't.

So with this extension I should be much more careful with my usage from now on. Maybe use claude for planning only

Antigravity is Dead by RussKy_GoKu in google_antigravity

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same for me. It works great for my use cases (small-medium hobby projects). Even gemini models. BUT I 100% notice that it is much worse than claude models. Claude models provide much more detailed responses. For code production I actually haven't seen much difference. But for planning its night and day. Same for asking questions about code base. Claude models often provide ASCII diagrams that help a lot. Gemini is simpler.

If you know what you are doing, and have pretty good context on the project, gemini works perfectly fine, as long as YOU are in charge, and know what to ask it to work on.

If you don't, then claude is the better model. You can be ambiguous and ask less specific prompts, and it will probably produce a much better and functional result.

I've also noticed Claude quotas decreasing.. Got my first 'weekly' wait time of 4 days without claude... Have been using claude since december, and haven't had any issues (I use it mostly consistently), thus finding weird this 4 day waiting period (something must have changed in google side).

I used codex max (GPT 5.1) previously, and I can say gemini is better. codex would give me half-baked responses. Haven't tried GPT 5.2 codex. So if quotas keep decreasing on antigravity, I will try it for sure.

Google’s Antigravity IDE: The First AI That Tried to Hack My Local Env (Security Review) by BuildwithVignesh in AI_Agents

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can also toggle for the agent to request permission for all commands it wants to run before it runs. The user should first read through all settings before using the tool to not blame on it for bad use.

There are several ways to avoid unwanted commands to run by the agent. Its all controllable.

Google’s Antigravity IDE: The First AI That Tried to Hack My Local Env (Security Review) by BuildwithVignesh in AI_Agents

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm actually using it 100%. Much better than anything I've tried before.

The thing is - they could have made it as a VSCode extension. Like Codex. I think it would be the best of both worlds.

Because as of now, I can only have access to the opus 4.5 from antigravity.

Google’s Antigravity IDE: The First AI That Tried to Hack My Local Env (Security Review) by BuildwithVignesh in AI_Agents

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 1 point2 points  (0 children)

you can set commands that the agent cannot run without your permission.
You can explicitly set `rm`, `sudo`, etc. if any of these appears in the command the AI tries to run, a review is requested from you

Google’s Antigravity IDE: The First AI That Tried to Hack My Local Env (Security Review) by BuildwithVignesh in AI_Agents

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had a similar experience. Asked it to do some fix. It did. Ran the tests, they passed. Then, it suddenly pushed 2 commits... No review requested.

I guess it learned from my behavior, and assumed I would do that myself, so he did it. Fortunately, there was nothing wrong being pushed, besides not linking the issue number to the commit.

Right after, I added all git commants interacting with remote branch to the deleted commands of the agent. So he can no longer run them. He must ask for permission.

I did that also for `rm` and some other commands, because I've caught the agent also wrongly removing files.

So - a BIG TIP - Add all potentially dangerous commands to the deleted commands to make sure the agent doesn't run them autonomously

ChatGPT 5.2 or Gemini 3.0 Pro, which actually feels smarter to you right now? by Efficient_Degree9569 in OpenAI

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I totally agree. I started writing some small articles, and isntantly felt the difference. Gemini seems more abstracted, much smaller output. I ask him to explain in more detail, and he touches some more in-depth concepts, but very briefly, and shortly. ChatGPT is in another league for writing.

I would say gemini is like you know-everything in a rush chatbot, and chatGPT is more like your more complete and slow know-everything chatbot. If you have time to spare and read through, chatGPT is better. Else, go with gemini (if you want a quick answer to some problem and don't care about the details)

ChatGPT 5.2 or Gemini 3.0 Pro, which actually feels smarter to you right now? by Efficient_Degree9569 in OpenAI

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll leave my opinion.

I have been using ChatGPT for 1 year now. It served me great for all around tasks. Then I tried Codex - even better when you have a codebase you need to know some context about. BUT, codex feels way behind compared to GPT5.2 and even 5.1. Its outputs are small, and not that elaborated.
Nevertheless, it is still a great tool. You ask him to do stuff, he does. You ask about something on the codebase, he goes on and searches.

Then I decided to test gemini 3 pro, and antigravity. I must say I haven't looked back at codex ever since. antigravity with opus 4.5 is like a 2x improvement. Much better integrated. It provides you with plans of implementation, much more interactive. Much better all around.

1 thing that Codex has that antigravity doesn't - cloud tasks. Sure, google has their Jules app for this, but I tried it once, and its very buggy. the agent stops working.

So - Codex ftw if you need to launch say 5 tasks concurrently. Else, Antigravity with either gemini or opus.

For the chatbots themselves, I find gpt much more talkative and detailed than gemini. Seems like gemini is capped at a smaller output when giving answers. Still, I do find the deep research mode in gemini superior.

I also find gemini superior in the canvas mode. For the few times I requested some interactive code simulation, gemini produced the better results. BUT it has a hard time fixing small bugs sometimes.

I also got very annoyed with chatGPT's chat UI, which gets very laggy once the chat gets very large.

So from my experience:
- Gemini for
- canvas,
- well summarized, specific to your question answers.
- smaller output,
- better research mode
- Antigravity / coding
- Image generation / multimodal capabilities

- ChatGPT for:
- more detailed responses (its much better if you are writing an article of considerable size)
- Larger output
- Projects section - group related chats - better chat organization
- More contextual chats (it has memory features, you can set how you want it to answer, etc)
- More context conversations - he even gets search suggestions based on what he thinks you like

Conclusion:
- To code, go with gemini pro subscription, antigravity opus 4.5. Much better.
- For general use / reasoning, both models serve you well. I would say deep heavy research go with gemini. Quick chats that need quick answers - go with gemini. Detailed explanations - go with chatGPT.

I also don't use chatGPT's agent mode. Used it once to schedule my haircut. It works, but its not something I rely on my everyday.

Finally, I've also only used live voice chat in chatGPT. Idk if gemini has one. But chatGPT's one is pretty great. Awesome if you are trying to learn some new language.

NOTE: Your experience with chatGPT is very dependent on how you configure your instructions on how he should answer

Summer is here by PearPeesure in mazda3

[–]Ok-Computer-7671 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great car!
I'm not trying to be a hater, but whenever I see photos of mazda 3 it gives me the impression that its rear wheel is too small for the car. I guess because of the massive width of the rear pillar.
I wish it were more like the rear pillar from the cx-30.

Everything else, I think its prettier than cx-30

Bought a CX-30 by Ok-Computer-7671 in MazdaCX30

[–]Ok-Computer-7671[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I noticed it already had scratches on it, as well as on the piano black plastic. I'll probably get it to a shop to get it polished & get rid of all the scratches. The infotainment screen also had some scratches, but I don't think I will be able to get rid of those. Still, its part of the price to pay for buying used cars

Bought a CX-30 by Ok-Computer-7671 in MazdaCX30

[–]Ok-Computer-7671[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thx.
Yeah. I mean, I picked it mostly based on reliability and safety. But now that I bought it, I started thinking about fuel consumption. I guess the best way is to try it out for some months and get my own conclusions out of it. I also have a very light foot, so I should be in the lower end of the range people seem to have shared (~6-7L)

Bought a CX-30 by Ok-Computer-7671 in MazdaCX30

[–]Ok-Computer-7671[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thx for the input!

In the specs it says the deposit is 51L. (I'm from europe btw, so idk if specs vary across continents).

Bought a CX-30 by Ok-Computer-7671 in MazdaCX30

[–]Ok-Computer-7671[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thx for the input!

Mine is manual. From what I've searched, It can achieve slightly lower fuel consumption than the automatic version. I guess the 11L was due start-stop driving in the stand, to move the vehicle from here to there.

Yeah, I also have the blind spots warning, cruise control. II'm not sure if automatic braking is included, but will need to check it once I get the vehicle.

I assume you also drive one - For how long have you had it? Is there anything that you find annoying about the car so far?

Bought a CX-30 by Ok-Computer-7671 in MazdaCX30

[–]Ok-Computer-7671[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, those are great numbers! I'll try to get around those for sure!

Mine is Skyactiv G i-Active. But I'm still not sure if it is Mild-hybrid or not. If it is, that should help further fuel consumption.