Epic Games has given the green light for the Internet Archive to host installation files for Unreal and its immediate follow-up, Unreal Tournament.According to a post within the OldUnreal Discord server (and spotted by ResetEra), the archiving website now hosts images of the two games' original discs. Players can download those disc image files (which are here and here) individually, or use OldUnreal's previously released Windows-only installers for the games (Unreal here, Tournament here) to automatically download and install the Archive's files, in turn making the two arena shooters fully playable again.Both games were pulled from sale years ago, but with Epic's approval, get to live on as a part of video game history. The arena shooter franchise helped establish Epic as a developer, and its various sequels and spinoffs were used to showcase the game engine of the same name.Epic and Unreal's long, complex historyHowever, Epic's overall relationship with Unreal is...complicated. Officially, the series came to an end with Unreal Tournament 3 in 2007, as Epic put its then-full attention on the Gears of War series and its MOBA Paragon. An attempt was made to revive the franchise with a new installment made in Unreal Engine 4 (and simply titled Unreal Tournament), but that was later canceled as Epic elected to focus on Fortnite, and the series was officially shelved.In 2022, Epic officially killed the Steam servers for several older games, including the Unreal project's alpha and Unreal Tournament 3. The latter was meant to be revived on Steam as the free-to-play Unreal Tournament 3X, but that appears to have been quietly canceled last summer.Still, this new development provide a win for the series, along with game preservation and historians of the medium, which is always a plus.In 2000, then-Epic programmer Brandon Reinhart wrote a post-mortem on Unreal Tournament's development, which you can read here.

Sam Lake, the creative force behind Remedy Entertainment, is the winner of the New York Game Awards' Andrew Yoon award for its ceremony on January 21, 2025.The distinction has previously gone out to "game changers" in the industry, including Naughty Dog's Neil Druckmann, Xbox head Phil Spencer, and Hideo Kojima. Lake has been recognized for being a "true visionary whose work continues to pave the way for narrative-focused game design and visually striking universes.""You know a Remedy game when you see it, largely due to Sam Lakes impact on the worlds he creates," wrote NYVGCC president Harold Goldberg. "Its really cool to see how his 20-year career at Remedy has touched so many of our members and interns at the Circle, and we are thrilled to have him join the roster of esteemed game changers previously recognized with the Andrew Yoon Legend Award.Lake joined Remedy as a writer for its debut title, 1995's Death Rally. Over the years, he's written or been the creative director (or both) on nearly every game developed by the studio, from the original Max Payne games to Alan Wake, Quantum Break, and the Remedy-made story campaigns for Smilegate's Crossfire X. He most recently wrote, directed, and acted in 2023's Alan Wake II, which became Remedy's fastest-selling title and saw critical acclaim.Of the sequel, NYVGCC executive director Ryan Callahan remarked how it "[isn't] often you see a video game studio deliver a superb sequel to a title a decade later, but its even rarer to see how it resonates with fans and spawns a whole connected universe comprised of its past franchises. I dont think anyone expects anything less from someone like Sam Lake."In addition to games, Lake also co-wrote two Alan Wake books and a Max Payne comic book. This past summer, Remedy struck a deal with Annapurna to adapt Alan Wake and Control for TV and film, but his involvement in those projects is currently unknown.The New York Game Awards will air on Tuesday, January 21, 2025. Ahead of Alan Wake II's release last year, Game Developer with Lake about its co-lead Saga Anderson (and having two protagonists in general), and going all-in on live-action video.

Robin Zeng, the founder of the worlds largest EV battery company, says Tesla CEO Elon Musks big bet on 4680 cylindrical cell technology is going to fail and never be successful. Zeng, the chairman of Chinas Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL), tells Reuters that when Musk visited China in April, We had a very big debate, and I showed him. He was silent. He doesnt know how to make a battery.Teslas tabless 4680 cells, which are used in some of its cars, including the Cybertruck, are supposed to have five times more energy capacity, and the company announced in September it had produced 100 million of them. A recent report by The Information said Musk had given the team working on the batteries an end of the year deadline to deal with costs and other problems.CATL batteries, meanwhile, go inside everything from Tesla vehicles in China to Ford EVs in North America like the Mustang Mach-E and F-150 Lightning. The company specializes in lithium iron phosphate batteries (LFP), which generally dont get as much range as various cylindrical cell units used in many Tesla vehicles. While Zeng wasnt impressed with Musks battery knowledge, he thought he was good with chips, software, hardware, and mechanical things.Zeng also commented that Musks problem is overpromising timelines, which he often does habitually, especially regarding Full Self-Driving technology. Maybe something needs five years. But he says two years. I definitely asked him why. He told me he wanted to push people.

Even with the ability to take excellent photos with our phones and instantly share them across the world, theres something magical about the old-school instant camera. With just a click of a button, you can capture a moment in a photo that you can see and touch almost immediately. Images captured by an instant camera arent as pristine or perfect as those produced by modern digital cameras, but their soft images and imperfections are often a big part of the allure.Yet not all instant cameras are the same, and some of them are better suited for different needs and budgets. Thats why we tested some of the most popular instant cameras on the market from brands like Fujifilm, Polaroid, Leica, Canon, and Kodak.All of the models featured in our instant camera buying guide are enjoyable to use, but each offers a different set of features at a different price point. As a result, some are more appropriate for a child or budding photographer, while others are more advanced and provide added creative control (for a price). When it comes down to it, though, we consider print quality, ease of use, and affordability to be the hallmarks of a quality shooter. Thats why we picked Fujifilms Instax Mini 12 as the best instant camera for most people, as it ticks all three boxes wonderfully.What Im looking forPhoto qualityInstant cameras arent known for producing high-quality, sharp photos, and most of them struggle with low-light conditions. However, the photos should at least be clear and bright enough that the subject is discernible and the picture looks relatively true to life.Ease of use How easy is it to set the instant camera up and take photos with it? Ease of use is a big part of what makes instant cameras fun and accessible to people of all ages. You shouldnt need a professional photography background just to enjoy an instant camera.Value Instant cameras come with different features at various price points. Generally, the more feature-rich cameras tend to be pricier, but do the extra capabilities justify the added cost?Some cameras, for example, pair with a companion app or feature a built-in selfie mirror, while others include the ability to print images from your phone. None of these are essential, though the added niceties may be worth it for some people.SuitabilitySome instant cameras arent as well suited for some situations and / or people as others. For example, there are instant cameras that print old-fashioned Polaroid photos that arent very clear. They frustrate me, but retro lovers might find them charming. Other cameras come with advanced creative modes that let you edit photos and even print smartphone pictures, but a young child might find them hard to use.FilmEach instant camera requires a different kind of film, which means that the sticker price of the camera isnt the true price. This is something you should take into account before making a purchase, as the cost of film can quickly add up. Depending on the brand, you may have to pay anywhere between 50 cents and $2 a shot. Its also important to take into account that some film is easier to find. The Instax Mini 12, for example, uses credit card-size Instax Mini film thats sold at most major retailers. Other types of film, including the film needed for Kodaks Mini Shot 3 Square Retro, are available on Amazon but arent sold by as many retailers.Finally, most instant camera brands sell films of varying quality in a range of styles. Some are decorated with colorful frames and patterns, while others are black and white. They also vary in shape and size, from small rectangular prints you can stick in your wallet to square-shaped ones. You can also buy wider prints, and some brands even sell film with an adhesive backing that allows you to use the resulting images as stickers. If youre looking for more creative control or features like filters, however, the Instax Mini Evo is our choice, one that boasts great image quality and allows you to choose which photos youd like to print. Other instant cameras, like the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus and Kodaks Mini Retro 3, also offer a variety of advanced creative modes for those who desire more.Take a look at this list of our instant camera recommendations to find the best fit for you. The best instant camera for most peopleFujifilm Instax Mini 12$79Fujifilms Instax Mini 12 is the best instant camera for most people. While it lacks more advanced features, the simple instant camera takes good-quality shots quickly and easily and offers a built-in selfie mode. Its sold in a variety of fun colors thatll especially appeal to kids and tweens. Film type: Fujifilm Instax Mini film (sold separately) / Film size: 2 x 3-inches / Weight: 306 gramsCharging method: AA batteries Companion app: NoneOther features: Built-in selfie mirror, film counterIf all youre looking to do is just click a button and get a decent print for a reasonable price, we recommend Fujifilms Instax Mini 12. Its a basic instant camera thats similar to our former pick, the Instax Mini 11, but with some minor updates. It still takes less than five minutes to start shooting, but the setup process is easier since all you need to do is twist the lens to either on or off. Such ease of use, combined with the cameras thinner build, makes it particularly well suited for those new to photography and kids.For an instant camera, Fujifilms Instax Mini 12 produces vivid, relatively true-to-life photos. Image: Sheena Vasani / The VergeFor an instant camera, image quality is also better than most of the other cameras I tested, producing relatively true-to-life photos. Most of the cameras I tested struggled to capture low-light conditions well, and this one is no exception, but the built-in flash does help. Fujifilm claims the Mini 12 optimizes image quality in both dark and bright environments better than its predecessor, but I didnt notice much of a difference. The flash which you cant disable is also still overpowering in some instances, resulting in a few overexposed images. If anything, the photos actually seemed a little darker and less vivid than before. However, at least the Instax Mini 12 captured my features and skin color more accurately when I used the included selfie feature which is really just a small mirror mounted on the front of the camera. Fujifilms Instax Mini 12 features a new lens structure thats fun and more intuitive to play with. Image: Sheena Vasani / The VergeYou can also now zoom in a little easier thanks to a new lens structure, which you can twist to enter the Close-Up Mode in lieu of pressing a button. When in this mode, you can take advantage of the cameras newParallax Correction feature, which is supposed to result in a more aligned photo. The lens was fun to play with and reminded me of a traditional point-and-shoot, but actually using it to take quality photos takes some time to figure out. As with the Mini 11, its still somewhat tricky to center your subject in the frame using this mode, even with the updated lens. Thankfully, it became easier to properly align photos after a couple of attempts (as well as some composition guidance from the manual).The Mini 12 also offers a number of other niceties. I appreciated the larger-than-average viewfinder and the fact that the camera comes with a small counter that displays the remaining number of shots, which is a feature many of the other instant cameras I tested lacked. Its easy to lose track of how many photos youve taken, especially when out for drinks or while sightseeing on vacation. Yet given each print costs about $1, its important to be mindful of how many shots youve got left.All in all, the Instax Mini 12 is a basic camera that caters to all ages and experience levels and gets the job done and done relatively well. It doesnt feature Bluetooth or pair with a companion app that allows you to edit photos (only scan them), and it also doesnt offer advanced features like filters, lens options, or portrait modes. But if youre looking for an instant camera that offers a great traditional analog experience, this is it.Fujifilms Instax Mini 12 is a cute instant camera thats great for all ages. Image: Sheena Vasani / The VergeBest premium instant cameraFujifilm Instax Mini Evo$199Fujifilms stylish Instax Mini Evo is the best premium instant camera. With it, you can choose which photos to print, while also boasting good image quality.Film type: Fujifilm Instax Mini film (sold separately) / Film size: 2 x 3-inches / Weight: 285 gramsCharging method: USB-C (on newer models) / Companion app: YesOther features: LCD screen, smartphone printingOne of Fujifilms newest instant cameras, the Instax Mini Evo, is my colleague Becca Farcases favorite and its mine as well. A hybrid camera that bears a resemblance to Fujifilms more expensive Fujifilm X100 line of cameras, it looks good and boasts vintage dials and buttons so stylish that they even caught the attention of passersby as I walked around Los Angeles taking photos. I tested the black camera, but Fujifilm also sells a brown version and is also offering limited edition models in silver and gold.RelatedIts easy to balk at its $199 price tag, but this camera offers a level of flexibility that could save you money in the long run if you use it a lot. Thats because the Instax Mini Evo includes a full-color three-inch LCD screen that lets you preview and select which images you want to print, which can help you avoid wasting film on unwanted shots. The added flexibility gave me more room for creative experimentation, too, as I wasnt worried about running out of film. I also loved using the Instax Mini Evo app to print photos from my smartphone. Plus, unlike the Instax Mini 12, the Evo now uses a USB-C port (though older black models still use the Micro USB port) for charging so you dont need to keep buying new batteries.The Instax Mini Evo comes with a large LCD screen that doubles as a viewfinder and allows you to choose which photos to print. Image: Becca Farsace / The VergeUnlike Fujifilms Instax Mini 12, the Mini Evo comes with a few extra features that can help you capture better photos. For example, you can actually turn off the flash on the Mini Evo and use the three-inch LCD screen as a viewfinder. You can also use the menu to adjust how bright you want the film to look when its printed out, which was helpful given neither the Evo nor the Mini 12 are particularly great at capturing dark environments.Additionally, there are dials you can use to apply various lens options and filters, ranging from retro to monochrome shades, as well as a mirror lens, vignette, soft focus, and more. You can take app-based remote shots, too, which adds an extra element of photographic control that can help you take better selfie shots than the selfie mirror in the front.Being able to adjust the brightness of the prints helped me capture night photos and a low-light immersive exhibit a little more clearly and realistically, which is a feature the Instax Mini 12 doesnt offer. Image: Sheena Vasani / The VergeOf course, its not a perfect device, and there are some downsides to consider outside the price. For instance, although you can add some filters and make a few edits using Fujifilms companion app, it just isnt as feature-rich as some of the apps available for the other digital and hybrid instant cameras I tested. The Evos extensive menu system also wasnt particularly easy to navigate, and it took me some time to figure out how to turn the flash on and off. Plus, if you rely on internal storage solely, you can only take 45 images before the device is full. Still, all of these are minor issues, and I was very happy overall with how portable the stylish camera is, as well as how easy it is to take good photos quickly.The Instax Mini Evo, like the Instax Mini 12, shines the best when capturing photos taken in well-lit environments. Image: Becca Farsace / The VergeThe best instant camera for social occasionsKodak Mini Shot 3 Retro $100$17041% off$100$100$17041% offKodaks hybrid Mini Shot 3 Retro instant camera comes with a fun companion app you can use to add frames, stickers, filters, conceal blemishes, and more. As long as you dont mind the so-so image quality, this is a good digital instant camera for parties.Film type: Kodak Instant Print 3 x 3-inch cartridge (included) / Film size: 3 x 3-inch square prints / Weight: 467 grams / Charging method: Micro USB / Companion app: Yes Other features: LCD screen, smartphone printingWhereas the Instax Mini Evos companion app is more functional, Kodaks hybrid Mini Shot 3 Retro is all about fun. The cameras accompanying mobile app allows you to apply frames, stickers, filters, and a plethora of customization options to photos, making the camera great for scrapbooking. Theres even a beauty feature within the app to conceal blemishes, as well as a set of Snapchat-like filters you can use to add, say, dog ears, making this a fun instant camera to use as a mini photo booth of sorts at parties.With its feature-rich app, Kodaks Mini Shot 3 Retro is more modern than retro. Its also a ton of fun. Image: Sheena Vasani / The VergeLike the Instax Mini Evo, Kodaks Mini Shot 3 Retro comes with an LCD screen (albeit a much smaller one) you can use to decide whether or not you want to print a shot. It also supports Bluetooth, and you can use the Kodak Photo Printer app to upload photos to social media or print decent, relatively crisp photos from your smartphone. Unlike the Mini Evo, however, Kodaks Mini Shot 3 Retro retails for around $150 and includes a pack of a film (its also often on sale for a lot less). It also uses cheaper film; you can currently pick up a 60-sheet cartridge for about $17.99, which equates to roughly $0.33 a shot. The fact that the film is cheaper arguably encourages play and creative experimentation, even if the large 3 x 3-inch square prints feel lower in quality and more flimsy than both Fujifilms and Polaroids.Photos taken with the Kodak Mini Shot 3 arent particularly sharp and can have an excessive pink tint. Image: Sheena Vasani / The VergeHowever, there are notable drawbacks to the Kodak Mini Shot 3. My biggest issue is that the resulting prints of photos taken with the camera arent nearly as crisp or clear as those taken with a smartphone. Photo quality wasnt consistently as good as the Mini Evos or Mini 12s nor, for the most part, as clear and sharp. The photos also sometimes had an excessive pink tint that can interfere with quality. It doesnt store images the way the Mini Evo does, either, which means you cant decide whether youd like to print them later. Its also noticeably heavier than the Mini Evo and, frankly, nowhere near as stylish.Nonetheless, if you dont mind compromising on photo quality and want a relatively affordable hybrid camera with fun app features, the Kodak Mini Shot 3 Retro is a good choice. The best instant camera for retro fans Polaroid Now Plus (second-gen)$131$15013% off$131$131$15013% offThe second-gen Polaroid Now Plus is a great instant camera for retro fans that prints vintage-style photos and offers modern conveniences like USB-C. It also features a variety of creative modes, making it a solid choice for artistic photography as well. Film type: Polaroid i-Type Color Film (sold separately) / Film size: 4.2 x 3.5-inch prints / Weight: 451.5 grams / Charging method: USB-C / Companion app: Yes / Other features: Lens filter kit, film counterIf youre looking for an instant camera that offers the most old-fashioned, instant-film experience, the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus is the camera for you. Compared to the other instant cameras on this list, it most closely resembles vintage instant cameras like the Polaroid 600 with its classic, retro-inspired design. Meanwhile, its square I-Type film prints and iconic Polaroid-style frame give photos a more authentically vintage look. The Polaroid Now Plus comes with a set of color lenses you can snap onto the camera. Image: Sheena Vasani / The VergeYet, at the same time, the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus also comes with the convenience and usefulness of more modern features, including support for USB-C charging. It also offers Bluetooth support and a companion app boasting several creative modes that allow for greater photographic control. These include a remote shutter, a self-timer, and a Polaroid Lab where you can adjust the exposure and various color settings. The app also features a handful of shooting modes including a manual option and one for capturing multiple exposures while the camera includes a set of five colored lenses you can snap onto the front. These were enjoyable to play with and allowed for more artistic expression. The latest Polaroid Now Plus is too big and awkwardly sized to easily fit into a bag, but I did like that it has a small counter on the back underneath the power button. Photo by Sheena Vasani / The VergeIf theres one thing the Polaroid Now Plus isnt known for, its portability. Given how heavy, large, and awkwardly sized it is, its not the kind of instant camera you can easily slip into your purse or carry around. Plus, it takes up to 15 minutes for prints to develop, and you have to make sure its not exposed to light while developing. Thats quite an inconvenience if youre out with friends, say, at the beach on a sunny day. The photos I took with the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus werent that true to life, but they did give off an old-school vibe that I found charming. Photo by Sheena Vasani / The VergeIf youre looking for an instant camera that can easily print a good, clear photo without much effort on your part, this is not the camera for you. Of all the cameras on this list, the latest Polaroid Now Plus struggles with low-light environments the most. I could barely see images I took indoors, and I was only able to get the clearest shots when the light was directly behind me during the day more specifically, in the morning. Even these images werent as clear in comparison to Instax film, and both contrast and color saturation levels tend to be quite low.RelatedAdmittedly, this gave my pictures more of a dreamy vintage look that felt artistic, and you can use the Polaroid Lab to slightly adjust saturation and exposure settings. However, doing so is time-consuming. Given all these issues, I found it was easy to quickly waste film, which proved expensive. After all, you only get eight I-Type sheets for $16.99, and thats in addition to forking out $149.99 for the camera.Truth be told, however, you could argue that many of these shortcomings are typical of a retro Polaroid-inspired instant camera and, thus, part of the experience. If thats what youre looking for, and you dont mind the price, the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus is the perfect camera for you. The second-gen Polaroid Now Plus is a good combination of old-school and modern but was way too big for me to comfortably hold with just one hand. Photo by Sheena Vasani / The VergeThe best instant camera for portabilityPolaroid Go (second-gen)$68$10032% off$68$68$10032% offThe Polaroid Go is the smallest, most affordable option in Polaroids instant camera lineup. It doesnt offer as much creative control as the Now Plus, but its more portable and produces charming retro-style photos at half the price.Film type: Polaroid i-Type Color Film (sold separately) / Film size: 2.6 x 2.1-inch prints / Weight: 239 grams / Charging method: USB-C / Companion app: No / Other features: Self-timer, selfie mirror, film counterWhereas the Polaroid Now Plus is huge, the second-gen Polaroid Go is tiny. It easily fits into the palm of my hand which is saying a lot, given Im petite and a little over five feet tall making it easily the most portable instant camera on our list. It also produces the smallest prints of all the instant cameras I tested, which could be nice if youre trying to save some space and want something even more compact than Instax Mini prints.Weighing just over a pound, the latest Polaroid Go is also the lightest instant camera Ive ever held, and you can easily use it with one hand. Thats actually pretty convenient, given I sometimes struggled to take pictures with the heavier Polaroid Now Plus and, to a lesser extent, some of the other instant cameras I tested. In fact, if the images produced looked more true-to-life and didnt require you to hide them from light for about 15 minutes while developing, Id be tempted to call this the best instant camera for travel or small children. The latest Polaroid Go comes with USB-C support, as opposed to Micro USB. Photo by Sheena Vasani / The VergeAt $79.99, the latest Polaroid Go is the most affordable Polaroid camera on the market, with film that costs just a little more than Fujifilms Instax Mini shots (or about $19.99 for a 16-sheet pack). It also sports a small number of upgrades over the last-gen model despite retailing for $20 less. The most significant is USB-C support, which allows for faster charging and prevents you from having to spend money on AA batteries.Polaroid also claims the camera produces clearer stills than its predecessor, but truthfully, I didnt see a significant difference from one generation to the next. The photos are a little brighter, but if anything, the original Polaroid Go like the Now Plus produced warmer pictures that I preferred and thought were truer to life. Still, the photos are charming in the way only a Polaroid photo can be. Contrast and color saturation levels are still low but in a way that exudes the vintage, almost dreamy look of the photos taken with the Now Plus.The second-gen Polaroid Go produces charming photos but with a cooler tone. Photo by Sheena Vasani / The VergeUnlike the Now Plus, however, the Go lacks creative modes and more advanced features, although it does offer a helpful self-timer and a larger selfie mirror. Theres also no Bluetooth support and, thus, no fancy app that will allow you to add extra effects. Instead, its just a simple point-and-shoot camera, just like the Instax Mini 12, which makes it a little easier to use. In addition, as mentioned, the prints are even smaller than the Instax Mini, which could be a drawback for those who prefer larger, more traditional Polaroid photos. While it produces similar vintage-style shots, design-wise, it doesnt look anything like old-school Polaroid cameras, which could also take away from the retro experience some desire.The Polaroid Go is easy to hold with one hand. Photo by Sheena Vasani / The VergeThat said, none of the older Polaroid cameras came with an app, either. All in all, the Gos simplicity makes it a suitable candidate for those seeking an easy-to-use camera that provides a more traditional instant film experience one they can take advantage of just about anywhere for half the price of the Polaroid Now Plus.Other instant cameras were consideringInstax Wide 400Fujifilm recently released the $149.95 Instax Wide 400, the upgraded version of the Wide 300. Its the companys first wide-format instant camera in nearly a decade, and like its predecessor, it prints photos that are twice as wide as the Instax Mini 12s. It features a new self-timer and a rounded body for better grip, though its currently only available in a sage green hue. Ive just got my hands on the camera and have started testing it to see how it stacks up to Fujifilms other models, along with other wide-format instant cameras.Kodak Smile PlusEarlier this year, Kodak released the Kodak Smile Plus, another hybrid instant camera you can use to print smartphone photos. Its cheaper than Kodaks Mini Retro 3 at $99.99, but it lacks an LCD screen, so you cant pick and choose images before you print them, which could result in more wasted shots. That said, it does offer a microSD card slot, so you can store and view photos elsewhere. It also prints on Zinc paper, allowing your photos to double as stickers, and comes with a physical filter-changing lens. Ill be testing the instant camera once I get my hands on it to see how it stacks up, so stay tuned.A few more good instant cameras (and one to avoid)Leica Sofort 2From photo quality to the lever you pull to print photos, Leicas Sofort 2 is a terrific camera thats remarkably similar to the Instax Mini Evo. In all of my tests, the photos I took with both looked identical. The two hybrid cameras also print smartphone photos via Instax Mini film and offer 10 film and lens effects, along with a macro mode for those who want more creative control. The Sofort 2s minimalistic look is stylish, too, even if its not as charming as the retro-inspired Evo.The drawback to the Sofort 2 is that its twice the price of the Evo. Its hard to recommend at $389 since most people would likely consider the differences between the two cameras relatively minor. The user interface is easier to navigate on the Leica, though, and I appreciate the included lens cap and extended two-year warranty. I also like that it lets you print photos taken with other Leica cameras via the companion app a nice perk for Leica fans. Nonetheless, I dont think those perks are enough to justify spending nearly $200 more. Instax Mini 99If youre looking for an analog instant camera thats more advanced, Fujifilms Instax Mini 99 is one to consider. At around $200, Fujifilms latest instant camera is not as affordable as the Instax Mini 12, but its certainly a step up from the one-button point-and-click camera given it has multiple brightness settings, focus zones, color effects, and even two shutter buttons for greater creative control. The camera even comes with a tripod socket and an aluminum extension column, as well as a Sports Mode designed to further reduce blur while capturing fast-moving subjects.Thanks to the added level of customization, I was able to capture higher-quality photos that looked truer to life than those from the Instax Mini 12 and Mini Evo. Granted, the Mini 99 is an analog camera and not a hybrid like the $199.99 Mini Evo, meaning you shouldnt buy it if you also want to print smartphone photos. The new model also isnt as simple to use as the Mini 12, so I wouldnt recommend it for young children. Still, for an advanced analog instant camera, its relatively easy to set up and use, rendering it as much of a fun option for budding photographers as it is for the experienced alike.Instax Square SQ1While it didnt make the cut, the Instaxf Square SQ1 is also worth a brief mention. Like the Mini 12, the Instax Square SQ1 produces good-quality shots, is easy to set up and use, and comes with a built-in selfie mirror. The reason we didnt include it above, however, is that it costs nearly twice as much as the Mini 12 at $119.95, though we do sometimes see it on sale for $100. That said, it might be worth a look if you prefer large 2.4 x 2.4-inch square prints and relatively true-to-life photos over vintage-looking stills. After all, the SQ1 is still cheaper than the Polaroid Now Plus and produces higher-quality images than the Kodak Mini Shot 3 Square Retro, which also prints similarly sized square shots.Fujifilm also sells the newer Instax Square SQ40. Its similar to the Instax Square SQ1 but with a vintage look thats more visually striking, yet its also more expensive at $149. Given it produces similarly good-quality photos and is not likely to go on sale anytime soon, Id recommend the Instax Square SQ1 or the more capable Instax Mini Evo for $50 more. Avoid the Kodak PrintomaticWe also tested a few instant cameras that we would advise people to steer clear of. The Kodak Printomatic is chief among those, and we specifically mention it because its often one of the bestselling instant cameras on Amazon. We suspect thats because its routinely on sale for $49.99 ($30 off) with a pack of film specifically, a 10-pack of Zink photo prints with adhesive backings so you can use the images as stickers. However, if youre simply looking for a budget-friendly instant camera, its not worth purchasing over Fujifilms Instax Mini 12.As is common with Zink photos, the Printomatics resulting photo quality isnt clear and tends to be oversaturated. In fact, many photos were so bad that I barely recognized the subject in the frame. The camera is also slow to print and wasnt always responsive when I pressed the shutter button, which meant I occasionally had to press it a few times to take a shot. All in all, it was a frustrating camera to use thats not worth the $30 you may save by picking it over Fujifilms Instax Mini 12. Besides, youll probably be using the money saved to buy extra film given how many prints youll waste.Update, November 14th: Updated links and adjusted pricing.

There is a new Humble Bundle of interest to game developers, specifically Unity developers, the Award Winning Assets Bundle The Crown Collection. This bundle is a collection of up to 27 Unity Assets from Infinity PBR and Nature Manufacture that are redeemed on the Unity Asset Store. It is organized into the following tiers:1$ TierBatsCobra SnakeIce WorldWinter Ground PackLandscape Ground PackLandscape Ground Pack 2Mid TierWorld Streamer 2Park Photo Scanned AssetsR.A.M 2019 River Auto Material 2019L.V.E 2019 Lava & Volcano Environment 2019Advanced Foliage Pack 2.0Advanced Rock PackFire & Smoke Dynamic NatureGround Terrain MaterialsDesert Terrain MaterialsGolems Cave Monster30$ TierL.V.E 2023 Lava & Volcano Environment 2023Mountain Environment Dynamic NatureMountain Trees Dynamic NaturePBR Graveyard and Nature Set 2.0River Valley LevelWeapons & Armor Pack #2Armor Pack 2Metal Ghost KnightMedusaDemonsNorthstar Navigation & Tracking SystemUsing links on this page pays GFS a commission (and thanks so much if you do!). If you have trouble opening the bundle link please paste it into a new browser tab and it should work just fine. You can learn more about the Award Winning Asset Bundle for Unity and see some of the assets in action in the video below.

GIMP 3 Release Candidate is Here / News / November 14, 2024 / Applications, GraphicsGIMP, the GNU Image Manipulation Program first released Gimp v2 back in 2004. Now, 20 years later GIMP 3 is almost here with the official release candidate of GIMP 3 going live last week. GIMP is a free and open-source raster graphics application similar to Photoshop, released under the GPL v3 license. So what are the highlight new features in GIMP 3?Port to GTK3Port away from intltoolPort to meson buildRedesign API for scripts/plug-ins (API Frozen Now)Wayland support [In Progress]Space invasion non-sRGB Colors [In Progress]Multi-layer selectionLess floating selectionAutomatic layer boundary managementSupport SwatchBooker file format for palettes and gradientsLayer effects (Non-destructive)Layer effects on layer groupsUI improvementsKey LinksGIMP HomepageGIMP 3 Release CandidateGIMP Development RoadmapYou can learn more about the GIMP 3 release candidate and see it in action in the video below.

In todays world, CLIP is one of the most important multimodal foundational models. It combines visual and textual signals into a shared feature space using a simple contrastive learning loss on large-scale image-text pairs. As a retriever, CLIP supports many tasks, including zero-shot classification, detection, segmentation, and image-text retrieval. Also, as a feature extractor, it has become dominant in virtually all cross-modal representation tasks, such as image understanding, video understanding, and text-to-image/video generation. Its strength mainly comes from its ability to connect images with natural language and capture human knowledge as it is trained on large web data with detailed text descriptions, unlike vision encoders. As the large language models (LLMs) are developing rapidly, the boundaries of language comprehension and generation are continually being pushed. LLMs strong text skills can help CLIP better handle long, complex captions, a weakness of the original CLIP. LLMs also have broad knowledge of large text datasets, making training more effective. LLMs have strong understanding skills, but their way of generating text hides abilities that make their outputs unclear.Current developments have extended CLIP to handle other modalities, and its influence in the field is growing. New models like Llama3 have been used to extend CLIPs caption length and improve its performance by leveraging the open-world knowledge of LLMs. However, incorporating LLMs with CLIP takes work due to the limitations of its text encoder. In multiple experiments, it was found that directly integrating LLMs into CLIP leads to reduced performance. Thus, certain challenges exist to overcome to explore the potential benefits of incorporating LLMs into CLIP.Tongji University and Microsoft Corporation researchers conducted detailed research and proposed the LLM2CLIP approach for enhancing visual representation learning by integrating large language models (LLMs). This method takes a straightforward step by replacing the original CLIP text encoder and enhances the CLIP visual encoder with extensive knowledge of LLMs. It identifies key obstacles associated with this innovative idea and suggests a cost-effective fine-tuning strategy to overcome them. This method boldly replaces the original CLIP text encoder. It recognizes the challenges of this approach and suggests an affordable way to fine-tune the model to address them. The LLM2CLIP method effectively improved the CLIP model by integrating large language models (LLMs) like Llama. Initially, LLMs struggled as text encoders for CLIP due to their inability to clearly distinguish image captions. Researchers introduced the caption contrastive fine-tuning technique to address this, greatly improving the LLMs ability to separate captions. This fine-tuning led to a substantial performance boost, surpassing existing state-of-the-art models. The LLM2CLIP framework combined the improved LLM with the pretrained CLIP visual encoder, creating a powerful cross-modal model. The method used large LLMs but remained computationally efficient with minimal added costs.The experiments mainly focused on fine-tuning models for better image-text matching using datasets like CC-3M. For LLM2CLIP fine-tuning, three dataset sizes were tested: small (CC-3M), medium (CC-3M and CC-12M), and large (CC-3M, CC-12M, YFCC-15M, and Recaption-1B). Training with augmented captions improved performance, while using an untrained language model for CLIP worsened it. Models trained with LLM2CLIP outperformed standard CLIP and EVA in tasks like image-to-text and text-to-image retrieval, highlighting the advantage of integrating large language models with image-text models.The method directly boosted the performance of the previous SOTA EVA02 model by 16.5% on both long-text and short-text retrieval tasks, transforming a CLIP model trained solely on English data into a state-of-the-art cross-lingual model. After integrating multimodal training with models like Llava 1.5, it performed better than CLIP on almost all benchmarks, showing significant overall improvements in performance.In conclusion, the proposed method allows LLMs to assist in CLIP training. By adjusting parameters such as data distribution, length, or categories, the LLM can be modified to fix CLIPs limitations. It allows LLM to act as a more comprehensive teacher for various tasks. In the proposed work, the LLM gradients were frozen during fine-tuning to maintain a large batch size for CLIP training. In future works, the LLM2CLIP can be trained from scratch on datasets like Laion-2Band and Recaption-1B for better results and performance. This work can be used as a baseline for future research in CLIP training and its wide range of applications!Check out the Paper, Code, and Model on Hugging Face. All credit for this research goes to the researchers of this project. Also,dont forget to follow us onTwitter and join ourTelegram Channel andLinkedIn Group. If you like our work, you will love ournewsletter.. Dont Forget to join our55k+ ML SubReddit. Divyesh Vitthal Jawkhede+ postsDivyesh is a consulting intern at Marktechpost. He is pursuing a BTech in Agricultural and Food Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur. He is a Data Science and Machine learning enthusiast who wants to integrate these leading technologies into the agricultural domain and solve challenges. Upcoming Live LinkedIn event, 'One Platform, Multimodal Possibilities,' where Encord CEO Eric Landau and Head of Product Engineering, Justin Sharps will talk how they are reinventing data development process to help teams build game-changing multimodal AI models, fast

A Modern Approach To The Fundamental Problem of Causal Inference 0 like November 14, 2024Share this postAuthor(s): Andrea Berdondini Originally published on Towards AI. Photo by the authorABSTRACT: The fundamental problem of causal inference defines the impossibility of associating a causal link to a correlation, in other words: correlation does not prove causality. This problem can be understood from two points of view: experimental and statistical. The experimental approach tells us that this problem arises from the impossibility of simultaneously observing an event both in the presence and absence of a hypothesis. The statistical approach, on the other hand, suggests that this problem stems from the error of treating tested hypotheses as independent of each other. Modern statistics tends to place greater emphasis on the statistical approach because, compared to the experimental point of view, it also shows us a way to solve the problem. Indeed, when testing many hypotheses, a composite hypothesis is constructed that tends to cover the entire solution space. Consequently, the composite hypothesis can be fitted to any data set by generating a random correlation. Furthermore, the probability that the correlation is random is equal to the probability of obtaining the same result by generating an equivalent number of random hypotheses.IntroductionThe fundamental problem of causal inference defines the impossibility of associating causality with a correlation; in other words, correlation does not prove causality. This problem can be understood from two perspectives: experimental and statistical. The experimental approach suggests that this problem arises from the impossibility of observing an event both in the presence and absence of a hypothesis simultaneously. The statistical approach, on the other hand, suggests that this problem stems from the error of treating tested hypotheses as independent of each other.Modern statistics tends to place greater emphasis on the statistical approach, as it, unlike the experimental approach, also provides a path to solving the problem. Indeed, when testing many hypotheses, a composite hypothesis is constructed that tends to cover the entire solution space. Consequently, the composite hypothesis can fit any data series, thereby generating a correlation that does not imply causality.Furthermore, the probability that the correlation is random is equal to the probability of obtaining the same result by generating an equivalent number of random hypotheses. Regarding this topic, we will see that the key point, in calculating this probability value, is to consider hypotheses as dependent on all other previously tested hypotheses.Considering the hypothesis as non-independent has fundamental implications in statistical analysis.Indeed, every random action we take is not only useless but will increase the probability of a random correlation.For this reason, in the following article [1], we highlight the importance of acting consciously in statistics.Moreover, calculating the probability that the correlation is random is only possible if all prior attempts are known. In practice, calculating this probability is very difficult because not only do we need to consider all our attempts, but we also need to consider the attempts made by everyone else performing the same task. Indeed, a group of people belonging to a research network all having the same reputation and all working on the same problem can be considered with a single person who performs all the attempts made.From a practical point of view, we are almost always in the situation where this parameter is underestimated because it is very difficult to know all the hypotheses tested.Consequently, the calculation of the probability that a correlation is casual becomes something relative that depends on the information we have.The Fundamental Problem of Causal InferenceThe fundamental problem of causal inference [2] defines the impossibility of associating causality with a correlation, in other words: correlation does not prove causality. From a statistical point of view, this indeterminacy arises from the error of considering the tested hypotheses as independent of each other. When a series of hypotheses is generated, a composite hypothesis is formed that tends to fit any data series, leading to purely random correlations.For example, you can find amusing correlations between very different events on the internet; these correlations are obviously random. These examples are often used to demonstrate the fundamental problem of causal inference. In presenting this data, the following information is always omitted: how many hypotheses did I consider before finding a related hypothesis.This is essential information because if I have a database comprising a very high number of events, for any data series, there will always be a hypothesis that correlates well with my data. Thus, if I generate a large number of random hypotheses, I will almost certainly find a hypothesis that correlates with the data I am studying. Therefore, having a probability of about 100% of being able to obtain the same result randomly, I have a probability of about 100% that the correlation does not also imply causation.On the other hand, if we generate a single hypothesis that correlates well with the data, in this situation, almost certainly, the correlation also implies causation. This is because the probability of obtaining a good correlation by generating a single random hypothesis is almost zero.This result is also intuitive, because it is possible to achieve a good correlation with a single attempt only if one has knowledge of the process that generated the data to be analyzed. And it is precisely this knowledge that also determines a causal constraint.The following figure summarizes the basic concepts showing how the correct way to proceed is to consider the hypotheses as non-independent.Calculating the probability that the correlation is randomCorrectly calculating the probability of getting an equal or better result randomly involves changing our approach to statistics. The approach commonly used in statistics is to consider the data produced by one method independent of the data produced by different methods. This way of proceeding seems the only possible one but, as we will show in the following paradox, it leads to an illogical result, which is instead solved by considering the data as non-independent.We think to have a computer with enormous computational capacity that is used to develop hypotheses about a phenomenon that we want to study. The computer works as follows: it creates a random hypothesis and then performs a statistical test. At this point, we ask ourselves the following question: can there be a useful statistical test to evaluate the results of the hypothesis generated?If we answer yes, we get an illogical result because our computer would always be able, by generating a large number of random hypotheses, to find a hypothesis that passes the statistical test. In this way, we arrive at the absurd conclusion that it is possible to create knowledge randomly, because it is enough to have a very powerful computer and a statistical test to understand every phenomenon.If we answer no, we get another illogical result because we are saying that no hypothesis can be evaluated. In practice, the results of different hypotheses are all equivalent and indistinguishable.How can we solve this logical paradox? The only way to answer the question, without obtaining an illogical situation, is to consider the results obtained from different methods depending on each other. A function that meets this condition is the probability of getting an equal or better result at random. Indeed, the calculation of this probability implies the random simulation of all the actions performed. Hence, random attempts increase the number of actions performed and consequently increase the probability of obtaining an equal or better result randomly.For this reason, generating random hypotheses is useless, and therefore if you use this parameter, it is possible to evaluate the data and at the same time it is impossible to create knowledge by generating random hypotheses.Considering the hypothesis as non-independent is a fundamental condition for correctly calculating of the probability that the correlation is random.The probability of getting an equal or better result at random meets this condition.The dependence of hypothesis on each other has profound implications in statistics, which will be discussed in the next section.Consequences of the non-independence of the hypothesisConsider the tested hypotheses to be dependent on each other when calculating the probability that the correlation is causal leads to three fundamental consequences in statistics.First fundamental consequence of the non-independence of the hypothesis: our every random action always involves an increase in the probability of a random correlation.Example: We need to analyze a statistical datum represented by 10 predictions about an event that can only have two results. The 10 predictions are divided into 8 successes and 2 failures. To calculate the probability of obtaining an equal or better result randomly we use the binomial distribution and we get the following value 5.5%. If before making these 10 predictions, we tested a different hypothesis with which we made 10 other predictions divided into 5 successes and 5 failures, the uncertainty of our result changes. Indeed, in this case, we must calculate the probability of obtaining a result with a number of successes greater than or equal to 8 by performing two random attempts consisting of 10 predictions each. In this case, the probability becomes 10.6%, so the fact of having first tested a random hypothesis almost doubled the probability of a random correlation of our second hypothesis. Consequently, increasing the random hypotheses increases the number of predictions that we will have to make, with the true hypothesis, to have a low probability that the correlation is coincidental.Second fundamental consequence of the non-independence of the hypothesis: every random action of ours and of every other person equivalent to us, always involves an increase of the probability that the correlation is random.By the equivalent term, we mean a person with the same reputation as us, therefore the data produced by equivalent people are judged with the same weight.Example: 10 people participate in a project whose goal is the development of an algorithm capable of predicting the outcome of an event that can have only two results. An external person who does not participate in the project but is aware of every attempt made by the participants evaluates the statistical data obtained. All participants make 100 predictions, 9 get a 50% chance of success, one gets a 65% chance of success. The probability that a 65% success is due to a random correlation is obtained by calculating the probability of obtaining a result with a number of successes greater than or equal to 65 by performing ten random attempts consisting of 100 predictions each. The probability obtained, in this way, is 16% instead if he was the only participant in the project the probability would have been 0.18%, therefore about 100 times lower.Third fundamental consequence of the non-independence of the hypothesis: the calculation the probability that the correlation is random varies according to the information possessed.Example: 10 people participate in a project whose goal is the development of an algorithm capable of predicting the outcome of an event that can have only two results. In this case, people do not know the other participants and think they are the only ones participating in the project. All participants make 100 predictions, 9 get a 50% chance of success and one gets a 65% chance of success. The participant who obtains a probability of success of 65% independently calculate the probability that the correlation is coincidental. Not knowing that other people are participating in the project, calculate the probability of obtaining a result with a number of successes greater than or equal to 65 by performing a single random attempt consisting of 100 predictions; the probability obtained is 0.18%. An external person who is aware of every attempt made by the participants calculate the probability that the 65% success rate of one of the participants was due to a random correlation. knowing the number of participants in the project calculates the probability of obtaining a result with a number of successes greater than or equal to 65 by making ten random attempts consisting of 100 predictions each. The probability obtained, in this way, is 16%, a much higher value than the probability calculated by the participant. The probability calculated by the external person using more information is most accurate than the probability calculated by the individual participant. Consequently, the probability obtained by exploiting the greatest number of information must always be considered, in the case of the example, the probability that the 65% success is due to a random correlation is 16%. Therefore, the participant having less information underestimates this probability.The first and second fundamental highlighting consequence of the non-independence of the hypothesis can be redefined by highlighting the non-randomness of the action.First fundamental consequence of the non-independence of the hypothesis: our every non-random action always involves a reduction in the probability that the correlation is random.Second fundamental consequence of the non-independence of the hypothesis: every non-random action of ours and of every other person equivalent to us, always involves a reduction in the probability that the correlation is random.How to perform correctly the statistical hypothesis testAbout to perform correctly the statistical hypothesis test, It is interesting to note how the nonindependence of the hypothesis can be seen as something extremely obvious or as something extremely innovative. Indeed, it may seem absolutely banal to consider all the hypotheses that have been tested, for the obvious reason that by running a large number of random hypotheses sooner or later there will be some hypothesis that will fit the data quite well. On the other hand, also considering the previous hypotheses represents a revolution in the evaluation of a hypothesis. In fact, from this point of view, the mere knowledge of the hypothesis that makes the prediction does not allow us to define its real complexity. Therefore, if in the statistical hypothesis test the p-value [3], [4], used as a threshold to reject the null hypothesis, is calculated considering only the hypothesis that actively participates in the prediction, it means, that we are underestimating the complexity of the hypothesis. Consequently, the p-value, thus calculated, is wrong and therefore determines a false evaluation of the hypothesis. It is therefore believed that this systematic error, in the execution of the hypothesis test, is responsible for the high number of non-reproducible results [5], [6].Taking advantage of these considerations it is understood that evaluating a statistical result can be very difficult because some information can be hidden. For example, we are obliged to report the mathematical formula that makes the prediction but, instead, we may not report all previous failed attempts. Unfortunately, this information is essential for evaluating the hypothesis, because they are an integral part of the hypothesis. Indeed, if we test 10 hypotheses, we simply interpolate the data with those ten hypotheses and choose the hypothesis that passes the chosen evaluation test.This problem also depends on the increasing use of statistical software capable of quickly executing a huge number of mathematical models.Consequently, there is the risk of playing with this software by performing a multitude of analyzes and this sooner or later leads to a random correlation. For these reasons, the evaluation of statistical results represents one of the most important challenges for scientific research.Unfortunately, it is a difficult problem to solve because, as mentioned, some information can always be hidden when writing an article. The simplest solution adopted is to use more selective evaluation parameters, which in practice means making it unlikely to pass the evaluation test by developing random hypotheses. However, this solution has a big problem: by acting in this way there is the risk of discarding a correct hypotheses and cannot be applied to all fields of research. For example, in finance where the possible inefficiencies of the markets [7], which can be observed, are minimal, adopting very restrictive valuation methods means having to discard almost any hypothesis.ConclusionIn this article, we analyzed the fundamental problem of causal inference from a statistical perspective. From this point of view, the problem arises from treating all tested hypotheses as independent of each other. This way of acting is wrong because when we generate a series of hypotheses we are building a composite hypothesis that will tend to adapt and therefore give a random correlation to each of our series of data.It is believed that this incorrect approach is the cause of the problem of non reproducibility of scientific results.Moreover, the increase in computational capacity speeds up hypothesis development, inadvertently creating composite hypotheses that can lead to random correlations.The probability that a correlation is random is obtained by calculating the probability of obtaining an equal or better result randomly. This calculation can be done, correctly, only by knowing all the hypotheses tested, unfortunately this information is very difficult to have.For this reason, in modern statistics, it is considered fundamental to develop the awareness that each of our compulsive and irrational actions, which leads us to develop and test a large quantity of hypotheses, has as a consequence the generation of random correlations that are difficult to detect.Bibliography:[1] Berdondini, Andrea, Statistics the Science of Awareness (August 30, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3914134.[2] Holland, P. W. (1986) Statistics and Causal Inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81(396), 945960.[3] Hung, H.M.J., ONeill, R.T., Bauer, P., & Kohne, K. (1997). The behavior of the p-value when the alternative hypothesis is true. Biometrics, 53(1), 1122.[4] Harlow, L.L., Mulaik, S.A., & Steiger, J.H. (1997). What if there were no significance tests? Psychological Methods, 2(4), 315328.[5] Munaf, M., Nosek, B., Bishop, D. et al. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat Hum Behav 1, 0021 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021.[6] Ioannidis, J. P. A. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2, e124 (2005).[7] Black, F. (1971) Random Walk and Portfolio Management, Financial Analyst Journal, 27, 1622Join thousands of data leaders on the AI newsletter. Join over 80,000 subscribers and keep up to date with the latest developments in AI. From research to projects and ideas. If you are building an AI startup, an AI-related product, or a service, we invite you to consider becoming asponsor. Published via Towards AITowards AI - Medium Share this post

LatestMachine LearningEmpirical Techniques for Enhanced Predictive Modeling: Beyond Traditional ARMA 0 like November 14, 2024Share this postAuthor(s): Shenggang Li Originally published on Towards AI. This member-only story is on us. Upgrade to access all of Medium.A Non-Parametric Approach for Robust Forecasting and Data Analysis Across DomainsPhoto by XinYing Lin on UnsplashThe ARMA model is a popular choice for time series forecasting because it captures how data points are related over time like how todays data depends on yesterdays. But ARMA assumes that the residuals follow a specific (usually normal) distribution. In real-world data, this assumption often doesnt hold up. Outliers, sudden shifts, and unusual patterns can mess with the model, making forecasts less accurate or unstable.From my research, I believe that empirical techniques offer a solution. Theyre flexible, non-parametric, and adapt directly to the data without needing strict distribution assumptions. Instead of forcing data into a set framework, they use the actual observed values to build the model, making it effective at handling outliers and complex patterns that traditional models might miss.Combining empirical transformation and likelihood estimation with ARMA leads to a more reliable forecasting model. ARMA captures time-based relationships, while empirical likelihood helps manage irregularities. Instead of assuming a specific residual distribution, empirical likelihood lets the model adapt to real-world data, improving forecast accuracy.Lets dive into the world of empirical distribution and Read the full blog for free on Medium.Join thousands of data leaders on the AI newsletter. Join over 80,000 subscribers and keep up to date with the latest developments in AI. From research to projects and ideas. If you are building an AI startup, an AI-related product, or a service, we invite you to consider becoming asponsor. Published via Towards AITowards AI - Medium Share this post

If you're on a tight budget but still want a stylish gaming desk, we've got you covered. As part of the Walmart Black Friday Sale, you can get a GTRacing 55"x24" Gaming Desk for a mere $59.99 and that includes free shipping. Although the retail price of $199.99 is a bit exaggerated (it usually hovers closer to about $100), this is still far and away the lowest price we've seen for a 55" gaming desk. It has plenty of extra features you wouldn't expect at this price point, like carbon fiber styling and integrated LED accent lighting.GTRacing 55" Gaming Desk for $59.99GTRacing 55" RGB Gaming DeskGTRacing is a brand you may or may not heard of; it sells gaming chairs and desks at budget-friendly prices on Amazon and Walmart. This particular desk is a very popular model at Walmart. It features a steel frame that supports up to 300lbs and a 55"x24" MDF desktop surface that's wrapped in a water resistant carbon-fiber patterned skin. The desk features two cable grommets, one on either end, to route your cables. There's also an integrated LED accent lighting around the perimeter that can cycle through different colors and patterns. In terms of accessories, you get a large 24"x24" mousepad, as well as an under-desk headphone hook. A one-year warranty is also included. Seriously, for $60, you can't ask for more. You could get one of the best gaming desks of 2024 instead, but then you're paying up to 10x the cost.Looking for a matching gaming chair?GTRacing Gaming ChairWalmart has also discounted the GTRacing GT099 Series gaming chair to only $93.99. This is one of the most popular budget gaming chairs at Walmart with over 2,300 reviews giving it a 4.3/5 star rating. This sub-$100 gaming chair features PU leather upholstery, an adjustable headrest and lumbar pillow, up to 160 degrees of recline with a rocker toggle, and a weight limit of 300lbs. Sure, it's not as fancy as a Secretlab gaming chair, but it also costs 1/5 the price.Looking for more RGB bling for your gaming setup?Govee x Evangelion RGBIC Glide Wall Light (6PC + 2 Connectors)Clip the $50 off CouponGovee x Evangelion RGBIC Glide Y Lights (5-Pack)Govee x Evangelion RGBIC Gaming Light BarsClip the $30 off CouponEarlier this year, Govee launched a new line of Evangelion-themed RGB LED lights. They're based on existing Govee products that have been meticulously designed to faithfully recreate the futuristic space-mecha vibe of the Neon Genesis Evangelion anime, from the color palette, patterns, shapes, and text to custom lighting presets that you won't find on the standard models. They do cost a premium compared to Govee's non-Evangelion-themed offerings, but right now, ahead of Black Friday, they're significantly discounted. There are several designs to choose from and they all look amazing. They'd make a pretty incredible holiday gift for anime and gamer fans.When Is Black Friday 2024?The actual date of Black Friday in 2024 falls on November 29 this year, but the deals season will begin a lot sooner than that. Leading up to the big event, retailers will begin to open deals online. This usually starts in the last week of October, just before Halloween. Each week leading up to the event will slowly roll out more deals, which ultimately leads to massive discounts on Black Friday. Retailers will not reveal their biggest Black Friday deals until the big day, but most general deals will be available well in advance.Eric Song is the IGN commerce manager in charge of finding the best gaming and tech deals every day. When Eric isn't hunting for deals for other people at work, he's hunting for deals for himself during his free time.