Bimfred

Most of us lose the playfulness as the responsibilities of adult life pile up. Between work, family and everything else, there's just no time. But that playfulness, doing something just for the fun of it, is armor. It helps ward off depression, relieves stress, it keeps our mental health up. We need hobbies, we need things in our life that are just fun and enjoyable, and we don't need to feel guilty about taking some time to relax and unwind.

I live out in the countryside. The nearest store is about 2.8km away. Put on some good music, get an ice cream for the second half of the trip, it's a lovely walk. I could catch a bus back, there's a stop right by the shop, but my timing is generally shite. If I'd be halfway home by the time the bus comes, I'd rather just walk.

They're not producing fuel to continue the same reactions, which would be a violation of conservation of energy. They're producing fuel to run a different reaction. Less "perpetual motion machine," more "spinning a turbine to charge a battery to run an EV."

Edit: A better analogy is cracking water to capture the hydrogen, to later burn it in a fuel cell.

A Deuterium-Deuterium reaction produces Helium-3 and a neutron, or Tritium and a proton. Roughly even odds on which products you'll get. And a ton of energy. A Deuterium-Tritium reaction produces Helium-4, a neutron and a shitton more energy.

Basically, the DD reaction is used to create fuel for a more predictable and energetic reaction. From the article, seems they're also bombarding Lithium with neutrons from the DD reaction to create more Tritium. Problem with Tritium is that while it does occur naturally, it's extremely rare and volatile. Tritium has a half-life of about 12 years, so if we want to use it in a fusion reactor, we need a feasible way to produce more of it at scale.

It's all stepping stones to a greater goal though. DD and DT reactions produce neutrons, which will make your entire reactor highly radioactive thanks to neutron activation. D-³He and ³He-³He reactions produce ⁴He and protons, which are actually able to be controlled by magnetic fields and won't irradiate your whole shit. But then sourcing ³He becomes your new biggest problem.

Reminds me of Seth Rollins and Roman Reigns cutting a compliment promo on each other.

Hats off to my man MrEdders. Yes, I'll absolutely watch your three hour video on some obscure 90's FMV noir game!

Since you were so insistent that it's simple, I told you to go and implement non-rigid capes to two old games that never had more than a rudimentary physics engine, and report back just how easy it was. And seeing how your reply, three minutes later, started with the words "Already done," I can only assume that you did it. So do tell, how easy was it?

Cause that was the task. Add soft body physics to Jedi Outcast, which is running on a modified Quake 3 Arena engine. Or create a new animation rig and redo all of the character animations. And you did it in three minutes. So show your work.

Took you three minutes to implement soft body physics in the Quake 3 engine, huh? Show your work.

Right. Go add capes that aren't just rigged to the existing skeleton to Jedi Outcast or Morrowind, then come back and tell me how easy it was.

I didn't think I'd have to point out that adding a cape is a similar pain in the ass. Dynamic objects like scarves and capes are not the same as a shirt. If your character framework isn't set up for them from the start, implementing them is not as simple as "just plop it in there bruh".

A character model is made up of "slots". The head slot, the chest slot, the legs slot and so on. When you equip a piece of gear, it replaced the body mesh in that slot. So a helmet model replaces the head, a cuirass replaces the chest, I think you follow. If you want a piece of gear to only partially cover the character, you need to create a new slot. But gear is easy to implement, since it conforms to the character's "body" and uses the same animations.

Now add a scarf. First, you need to create a new slot, so that equipping the scarf doesn't replace the head or chest. And then comes the question of animations. Are you going to have the scarf just lay flat against the character? That's the easiest approach, but it'll be completely static, look like ass and probably clip through at least some of your armors. You could use a cloth sim. If your scarf mesh has enough polygons, it'll look the best. But it's also computationally expensive, especially if you go with mesh-based collisions for maximum eye candy. And what types of objects can the scarf collide with? Just the character, or world objects as well? Every object the scarf collides with will create a whole new slew of physics calculations, all the time, dropping your performance in the gutter like a mob snitch. Or you could create a bespoke rig for the scarf. It'll look better than a static object and won't have a notable performance hit, but won't look as good as the cloth sim, especially since it won't collide properly with whatever else your character is wearing. And you'd need to create matching animations for literally every animation the character can possibly do. Every. Single. One. Your animators would want to murder you. And they will, when you come back to them a little later and say "Okay, real impressed with the scarf, now let's make 5 different ones. And I want capes."

TL;DR: It's not just another piece of gear.