If you haven’t been on the web often lately, this may be something that has slipped past your radar. On September 12, 2018, the European Parliament voted to pass a directive that could change the way we approach the internet for years to come. But, consider first that it’s only the initial review, with a final vote happening next year.

What is this directive, and why is the internet involved? Why are people suddenly seeing #Article13 trend on Twitter a few hours after the decision was passed? What’s with this #SaveTheInternet nonsense?

Understanding the copyright directive

The directive at the forefront of this entire debacle is known as the European Union Copyright Directive, or EUCD. The EUCD hopes to streamline effective regulations towards the protection of intellectual property in the EU. It was first adopted in 2001, following the ruling during the 1996 World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty. Earlier this year, another version of the directive was drafted with added articles and stipulations.

Basically, the EUCD seeks to create measures to protect one’s copyright on created content. The range of intellectual property that should be protected include music, videos, images, algorithms/codes, and even software. The directive calls for member countries to enact and implement laws that protect copyright owners. Eventually, such stipulations also reach big companies that operate within the EU.

You might be thinking why there is an outcry over it in the first place, especially when the directive’s purpose is clear. Well, there’s one particular part of the EUCD that a lot of people disagree on: Article 13.

The unlucky Article 13

Article 13 of the EUCD isn’t a lengthy piece of reading. The whole article contains three provisions for the implementation of copyright protection on websites that host user-generated content. The directive makes a note that these websites store large amounts of user-generated content, with the main purpose, if not one of its main purposes, of earning profit. Basically, any website that allows you to upload your own content and allows you to earn money from it is affected by the directive.

The article also cites that such websites should create measures such as “effective content recognition technologies,” complaint management systems, and tracking solutions. These measures should be readily available the moment users upload content on the website itself. With such measures taken into account, it allows content creators and service providers to properly engage in discussions should there be a dispute. It’s basically what YouTube Creators is all about.

Websites like YouTube, Twitch, Facebook, and Twitter, as well as streaming apps such as Spotify, Apple Music, and IGTV (when monetization is available) are most likely the article’s main targets. The directive also explicitly states that non-profit service providers and online marketplaces will not be affected. So, Wikipedia and Shopee aren’t affected, don’t worry.

The ongoing debate towards copyright protection

For some people, the EUCD is inherently good for intellectual property protection. They argue that the primary goal of the directive is to protect users from piracy and copyright infringement. Through the EUCD, there will be systems in place that protect music labels, content creators, and publishers from any illegal use of their content online. For these people, users should be held liable for infringement of any kind (memes, remixes, and parodies are a few examples).

Furthermore, the directive not only affects users but also the companies that run these websites. It basically mandates companies to create better content recognition systems, or change their already existing system for stricter copyright protection. If they don’t make adjustments, they will be held liable for any infringement-related issues. What Article 13 does, for those who are for the EUCD, is simply a suggested improvement.

However, there are others who believe that the directive is a little too extreme and could potentially do more harm than good. Leading institutions and companies in the tech industry think that the provisions are too vague, leaving it open for interpretation. This has the potential for companies to abuse copyright claims without effective ways of intervention. Furthermore, any significant changes to already-existing systems would require heavy costs to implement.

The bigger picture here is how the directive affects the internet as a whole. Big names in the tech industry argue that it’s an attack on the creative freedom of users. Instead of allowing the internet to be an open space for the right way of creativity, it simply adds more filters and restrictions in the process. Basically, you can’t put up an Avengers meme without having the approval of Disney and Marvel Studios first.

So, what happens now?

The EUCD was put in place to protect copyright — a simple and basic goal. There is recognition that there are measures that must be in place to uphold copyright. There is no denying that big companies have to abide by intellectual property rules, or suffer severe consequences for infringement. However, a lot of people are clamoring that these measures are both vague and sound extreme. Not only does the directive infringe one’s creative freedom in providing quality content, but it also makes the whole process costly and rigid.

At the end of the day, everybody wants to protect copyright. The argument for or against the EUCD is already past the debate on whether protecting copyright is right or wrong. The debate now is whether or not a open source like the internet should be kept that way or be strictly protected at all costs.

All of these will come into play in January 2019, when the European Parliament casts its vote for or against the directive. If you have the time to read the EUCD, you can access the full document here.

Aside from using your phone to call, text, and take pictures, you now have the power to access the internet and play games with others. Instead of limiting yourself to Snake and Bounce, you now have online games such as PUBG Mobile and Mobile Legends.

There’s just one problem: Not all games are playable across all smartphones. With the gaming world now expanding to the mobile scene, you would need a smartphone with the latest hardware and software inside it. Even if that’s not the case, you would need a smartphone that can handle long hours of gaming, as well. It’s an intense fight over what matters to you the most: performance versus efficiency.

Fortunately, the choice shouldn’t be very difficult thanks to Huawei’s latest mobile advancement: GPU Turbo.

What’s GPU Turbo all about?

GPU Turbo processing technology aims to enhance the gaming experience across Huawei’s smartphones. Executives promise that the tech will boost gaming performance while maintaining the phone’s efficiency. This means you can play games on your smartphone without sacrificing much — like battery life, for example.

The technology looks at the graphical capabilities of your phone and adjusts it accordingly, especially for gaming. With GPU Turbo, technologies such as 4D gaming and both augmented and virtual reality (AR and VR) are taken care of. Huawei believes that GPU Turbo will boost graphical performance by 60 percent, and can make even budget phones play graphically intensive games.

Apart from boosting visual performance, GPU Turbo also enables smartphones to maximize efficiency. One common problem across all smartphones is that the battery depletes relatively fast while you’re gaming. Partner that with a non-effective cooling solution within the phone, and it’s basically device overkill when playing games. What GPU Turbo does is extend your phone’s battery life by 30 percent and keep your device relatively cool while playing.

Implications on Huawei Smartphones

One of the key insights Huawei executives received was about consumer demand for a smoother mobile gaming experience. Because people want to play the latest mobile games seamlessly, they would want to buy smartphones that are capable of doing so. Graphical performance should not suffer in the slightest, especially for multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) and battle royale games.

The fun doesn’t stop there: With Huawei smartphones supporting GPU Turbo, other technologies such as AR and VR get a chance to truly shine. Huawei executives claim that GPU Turbo opens up opportunities for innovations like online shopping through AR or telemedicine through VR. At this rate, in theory, you could have a truly complete smartphone experience on your hands.

As of writing, GPU Turbo will take effect Huawei’s latest smartphones like the new Huawei Nova 3 series. However, older smartphones supported by the latest EMUI will experience the upgrade, as well. (View the list here.)

If you’ve been dying to have the full mobile gaming experience, GPU Turbo is definitely something to watch out for.

Illustrations by MJ Jucutan

NVIDIA seemed to have struck gold with the announcement of their brand new graphics cards for gamers. These cards are set to bring the gaming world into unparalleled heights thanks to the technologies behind them. The company calls them the RTX series, and the biggest feature within these graphics cards is real-time, ray tracing technology.

But, what is ray tracing technology? What is it about this technology that had NVIDIA wanting to produce a new line of cards to house it? Will it really change the gaming experience as a whole?

Ray tracing in a nutshell

Ray tracing is a rendering technique that uses rays of light to project images or objects onto your screen. These rays of light determine the colors, reflections, refractions, and shadows that the objects possess. These also show more accurate, more realistic images as the rays trace back to any source of light in the surrounding. To put it simply, ray tracing is what happens when you could take a picture of anything around you with your eyes.

The technology isn’t that new; in fact, it has been used since the 1960s for movies and television. Ray tracing is the main proponent behind CGI, where most special effects are often rendered to recreate realistic backgrounds with accurate coloring. In 2008, Intel showed a demonstration of the game Enemy Territory: Quake Wars that used ray tracing powered by a Xeon Tigerton processor. Currently, there are applications that allow you to edit videos using ray tracing such as Adobe’s After Effects.

Shifting from rasterization to ray tracing

For the longest time, NVIDIA has worked with multiple companies to produce game-grade graphics cards for consumers. The main technology behind these graphics cards is rasterization. In a nutshell, rasterization creates shapes to outline certain elements during gameplay. These shapes are given various colors to mimic reflections and shadows produced by such objects. The technology does not use up too much processing power to produce high-quality images for games. Rasterization enables gamers to play at smoother frame rates while getting the best and most realistic image quality.

However, NVIDIA wanted to take things up a notch when producing the next generation of graphics cards for the modern-day gamer. The company wanted to improve the gaming experience by any means, thus bringing in ray tracing in their graphics cards. With ray tracing, colors are more accurate allowing for a more immersive gaming experience — at least that’s how the company explains it. This is clearly seen with their exclusive gameplay of Shadow of the Tomb Raider:

This technology became the backbone for their new RTX graphics cards, putting much emphasis on real-time interactions within games. The RTX graphics cards possess greater memory capacity and processing speeds to keep up with the demands of the technology inside it. With NVIDIA’s Turing architecture, these new cards make the ray tracing processes much faster while using less computations.

Risks of going for ray tracing

Of course, with new technologies comes risks to consider before buying into them. First, ray tracing heavily relies on multiple calculations to generate accurate images on your screen. Back then, computers and graphics cards were not powerful enough to produce quality images immediately using ray tracing. Production of such images can take days to possibly weeks or months, as seen with most movies that heavily rely on CGI.

When applying ray tracing technology to modern games, graphics cards tend to suffer more. The computational requirement for ray tracing is much more than the graphics card’s virtual memory (VRAM) could handle. Of course, it depends on how much RAM is included in your graphics card — even then, it would consume more energy than it’s optimized for. These are the risks that NVIDIA is constantly trying to address with their new RTX cards.

There is still a lot of work needed to prove that ray tracing is the future for gaming. While the technology wants to bring to you the most immersive gaming experience ever, it also comes with a heavy cost — not just on your wallet. Let’s hope that the RTX series is worth the wait.