Thorsten.
You seem like a very logical person, and seem to have some pride in your logic.
But logic is one of the least meaningful personality traits...ever.
Consider a sudoku puzzle and a 'cookie clicker' like idle/grind game.
One is a logic puzzle, the other is, well, a grind game where you raise a number by clicking on a cookie, and the only purpose of the game is to make the number raise.
But:
Effectively they're the same.
Just like how, if you had enough time and resources, you would eventually reach a billion cookies, even if you only clicked the cookie every year.
The sudoku puzzle would also be inevitably solved, since it's logical.
The application of logic is useful, but one of the greatest traps for intellectuals is the worship of it.
When logic is one of the least essential things, ever. I know it's being 'meme'd like a bulwark or wellspring of some energy that keeps 'evil away' (bigots for example are usually depicted as crude troglodyte like fools)
But in reality. While useful, it's superfluous, and, for the most part, inevitable.
You can keep humanity running with food, water, copulation and birth and shelter.
Housecats also run physics integration in their insane feline minds without even knowing what a 'number' is, but they still lead the trajectory, and swat a bird out of the air.
What I'm getting at is:
If you pretend, and I do think you are pretending...that you do not 'understand' the notion of making a mathematical computer pixel construct, more 'lifelike' by emulating the equipment and its quirks of physical devices, the traditional counterparts.
Then, well.
Why should I bother with someone like you?
Yes, you're logical. But logic is virtually inevitable. If someone applies logic to a problem that is solved with logic, then it will be solved. There is no creativity in logic, only logic.
This means that there's a chance that someone out there, who is also logical, perhaps not as much as you, but without this kind of insufferability attached to it.
Making you completely surplus to requirement, and remaining in a lowered state of "logic" (by shunning a logical ace like you, cause, again, logic is useful...) is still something less damaging to my being, and a whole more tolerable than this.
As for the computer built in the 40s. I was talking about concepts, not hardware, that was the entire point. I wish I had the examples on hand...but, all i can say is that there were computational concepts invented way way before any hardware that was capable of building it.
But that's beside the point.
I'm too turned off by "My eyes are not cameras so they don't have lens flare" as a response to "to some people it feels more realistic if their virtual rendering looks like a movie would look if it were recorded by a physical camera on physical film, something you can build IRL and recreate and verify physically"
Sure, in the simulation, you're simulating 'reallife' won't contest that.
But again.
"A cartoon that looks more real ho ho ho how absurd"
The point behind that, too, was emulating physical hardware. And I'm sure you know that.
Otherwise...you'd be pretty damn dense to not understand that.
And that actually, with your otherwise penchant for logics, would lower my opinion of you even further right now.