[moron4hire]

Do you... Do you maybe not know how concurrency works?

It's not about hitting a minimum threshold of performance. It's about achieving the best possible performance for whatever system it's running on.

Maybe you think because I said VR it must mean I need to be running on massive gaming rigs. We run quite nicely on 5 year old smartphones, too. We run a pancake mode for people without VR. We run on every headset on the market, and we don't have to pay a lick of attention to what Facebook or Google or Apple thinks should and should not be in their app stores. And we can do this because of the broad range of browser APIs.

[seniorgarcia]

Maybe you do not know what words in the English language mean? I have a Quest and an Oculus VR and a Samsung Gear VR and a shitty cardboard daydream.

I get how concurrency works. I do not get how you get any sort of useful information from my desktop claiming 12 threads, to my phone claiming 8 threads, to my quest claiming 6 threads, to my ipad/samsung tablet claiming however many threads over webxr.

I do not see how you can do anything useful with the thread count which is what I have been disputing. CPU thread count seems especially useless since it has no relation to VR performance.

[moron4hire]

I told you what usefulness I get out of it. Any one of those cores can decode a texture in T time. Do you want me to take T*N time to decode them on the render thread, or would you rather I took T*N/C off render thread on a system with C logical cores? I don't care that T is different on different machines. I don't care that C is different. Even small values of C makes up for some very large values of T on old CPUs.

[seniorgarcia]

And that is totally fine. If you don't care you don't need to know.

That has been my issue all along. Client computation of course needs to know how many threads are available to distribute computation in an efficient way. Why would the host need to know this though?

[moron4hire]

Who said anything about the host?

[seniorgarcia]

>Why does a webpage get to know how many CPU cores I have?

The question we have been replying too? Nobody gives a shit what you can do within the client. Fingerprinting the client as the host is an issue though, you might at least appreciate that...

[moron4hire]

What is your proposal? Forget the browser for a minute. Just any way, short of airgapping, that a user could receive an app, want that app to perform maximally, but also not have information about the system being egressed?

I don't appreciate it because it's childish. You want to make this out to be a privacy issue when it's not. It adds nothing meaningful to how easily you can be fingerprinted, but removing it would detract significantly from how performant a browser-based application can be made. Without it, you're pushing developers towards having to build native apps instead, giving even MORE access to the hardware fingerprint, where they are now stuck having to pay fealty to the platform gods, while also gaining nothing in reducing fingerprinting in the browser.