Slashdot Mirror

Oh yeah, even exists in original 3D !!!

4K is worth it if your HD stream doesn't have 4:4:4 chroma subsampling.

Most HD and 4K streams use 4:2:2 chroma subsampling to save bandwidth. However, a 4K streams trivially down-samples to 4:4:4 chroma subsampling at HD resolution, and that means you'll see a shaper picture on a plain 1080p TV with a 4K stream.

Example: 4:2:2 vs 4:4:4 comparison

p.s. You'll see an even bigger difference if your TV supports 10-bit color.

It does.

Clinton had one _projected_ balanced budget (if you included SS accounting tricks), but it never happened. Dotcom imploded and the Clinton recession ended the hope, no balanced actual year.

The rest of your post is just idiotic.

What's up with this this graph and this graph, both from The United States federal budget wikipedia article then? Cooked books? Accounting shenanigans? Flat out lying? They fairly clearly show surpluses.

The country who's totally got experience with war and occupation. Sorry, when the next Hitler rolls around I damn well hope the military shoots back and kills as many as possible of the bastards. And if that means going on the offensive all the way to Berlin, so be it. WW2 ended because of D-day and the nukes at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you can't defend yourself to victory. And in a real war it's not about duty and honor, it's about freedom and survival as a people and a nation. Try making a dictator that'd send 6 million men, women and children to the gas chambers feel ashamed about using AI.

My dad is old enough to remember WW2, of course as a child so he was probably shielded from the worst of it and for me it's nothing but stories. But I understand enough to know I don't really understand it at all, you look at endless rows of graves, some corpses so ravaged you didn't even know who you buried and it's like a plane crash is nothing. 9/11 was nothing. Vietnam was nothing. Millions upon millions upon millions died and lives were pretty much as cheap as back in the Roman Empire. I really hope I'll never see war, but if we're in it I want us to win it by all means necessary.

I actually suggested something along these line a few months ago... Let me see if I can dig up the link... Ah yes, here it is:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik...

Essentially my position is that you should know your sources at the human level. If not the actual author, then the reputation of the person who is pointing you at that author. If a liar wants me to look at something, then I should look carefully.

In keeping with the story, I think it got stuck in a "forever [where's the] beef" loop.

The explanation is simple.

2/3rds of all terrorist attacks in the US are carried out by home grown far right extremists. They're a far bigger threat than radical Islam. It's obvious to anyone with at least half a brain who the real slime are.

On the internet, no one knows you're a dog

Source? The steepest slope on this graph is about 0.48 degrees C per degree latitude. Using 111km / degree latitude, this gives a minimum of 230 km towards the pole per degree C. Global average will be higher than the minimum. Your figure isn't.

Geothermal is not clean, but at least nobody can blame us.

Who needs network capacity when you can literally just dump all of wikipedia into your own (AWS) databases all at once for faster access? https://dumps.wikimedia.org/

In short.... they seem like a sprawling non-profit that has a disproportionately large and disproportionately expensive operation leeching off the public good done by unpaid volunteers to provide personal salaries for an entity that serves itself and uses donations to grow itself and pay administrative overheads to people that own itself, whereas an organization of 10% of its size would be more than adequate to support the technical infrastructure and systems that the unpaid volunteers doing 99% of the real work require for all languages of the global free encyclopedia to exist.

I have noticed that an awful lot of people underestimate the complexity of large operations especially when the end goal seems simple. Running something with the size and reach of wikipedia is not simple.

You probably think "it's just a website" and you could host it. You couldn't.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik...

Hosting and the technical operation is such a SMALL percentage of the Wikimedia foundation's $76 Million in annual operating expenses: it's kind of ridiculous.

They would still complain that Amazon's contribution is paltry.

Consider this though: The people contributing FREE LABOR to build the encyclopedia are not getting paid by the foundation, BUT the foundation has many hired staff and buildings.... so the donations are going to pay people, But the people who develop the software and write the articles on the encyclopedia are largely unpaid volunteers ---- Meanwhile the WM foundation spends more than $6 million on administrative employees, close to a $1 million each on a bunch of different categories like "branding and brand identity, community health, etc"

In short.... they seem like a sprawling non-profit that has a disproportionately large and disproportionately expensive operation leeching off the public good done by unpaid volunteers to provide personal salaries for an entity that serves itself and uses donations to grow itself and pay administrative overheads to people that own itself, whereas an organization of 10% of its size would be more than adequate to support the technical infrastructure and systems that the unpaid volunteers doing 99% of the real work require for all languages of the global free encyclopedia to exist.

How times have changed.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

Sure, you are totally right... and venus is a paradise, with its 400C air temperature (higher than mercury) because CO2 do not generate greenhouse effect and heat a planet

Planets radiate heat they absorb from the sun and the atmosphere absorb some of that heat and with conduction heats the atmosphere and the planet... not only that, but it will also release it back... some will still go to space, but another part will be sent back to the planet... repeat this and you get the greenhouse effect...

this happen for all components in the atmosphere. The problem with CO2 is that it is bigger and can absorb more heat than nitrogen and oxigen. Half of it still goes to space, but the other half will be resent to the earth surface again. And not not forget that conduction will also transfer some of that heat back to earth. That small differences adds up with time.

please read the image to try to understand: https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

Limiting the science is a wrong way to do science. You are right in small scale, but in huge planet size scale, small details do make difference, specially over time

This is the graph you are looking for:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/...
https://www.census.gov/library...

Servers represent only 6% of Wikimedia foundation operating expenses. Staff is about 50%. For the details, see for yourself.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik...

This isn't exactly a huge deal for the Wikimedia foundation anyways. If you look at their financial reports, they've got plenty of money.

Are you really comparing this monstrosity to a tesla ? C'mon.

You're right and wrong. The market is not the problem but the political system which allows politicians to bias the economy.

There are mechanisms to inflate the labor supply with suppresses price.

What you keep not appreciating is that it is SUPPLY and DEMAND.

Contrary to your suggested knowledge of the matter, it is by manipulating SUPPLY that employers lower price.

IF you want to be paid more, then you have to DECREASE SUPPLY. Just as that will increase the selling price of nickel or rubber... it will also increase the price of labor.

Control immigration, regulate the H1B visa system better... and labor prices will come up. It is fundamental and unstoppable. You can get around that as easily as you can get around the laws of thermodynamics. Many say they can dictate the market... hyper-inflating currencies and famines tend to be the reward of such people.

How then were labor prices suppressed? Well, look at a graph of WHEN US labor prices started to go down:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

We can see it started to crash in the 1970s. What happened in the 1970s? Globalism was an element. There were changes in trade, changes in labor, and that put pressure on US wages.

If you want to improve US wages, you don't do it by passing a law that says companies have to pay people more. You do it by increasing the value of US labor... which means shifting the supply/demand curve.

Microsoft launches yet another all-grey cannot-discern-anything UI abomination.

FTFY.

Compare Office 2019 to the last sane version of ribbonized Office, which was 2010.

Microsoft launches yet another all-grey cannot-discern-anything UI abomination.

FTFY.

Compare Office 2019 to the last sane version of ribbonized Office, which was 2010.

Since the Diesel trains are mostly smaller DMUs on branch lines (EMUs typically on big long-distance and urban commuter trains), I'd assume that far above 90% of passenger-kilometers on rail would be by electric trains.

Since you asked about "rain electrification": Germany has far more thunderstorms than Britain or Ireland, but on a global scale it would rank below average. (map). But I currently feel too lazy to calculate the number of lightning strikes per rail passenger kilometer.

Those flashy Android gauges are going to look incredibly dated in a few years. This is a good example https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

The republicans with the "rinos" who are more like democrats, or pawns of special interests.

It's really funny that these pawns of special interests are called RINOs, when being spawns of special interests is pretty much what the Republican Party has been about since the beginning.

If anything, the GOP STARTED the trend of US political parties catering to special interests. The GOP began being backed by the special interests of all stripes

There's even a political cartoon from the Democrats back then mocking them as having no real principles and will kowtow to any special interest group to get their vote - notice how even feminists and free love people are in there... alongside religious moral nanny types.

During/after the Civil War the Republicans discovered the best special interests were (northern) business interests - railroad tycoons and their trains really helped transport the Union troops, Pinkterons provided security, etc. The Gilded Age was the age that started the cooperation between big government and these big businesses.

Then came the Progressive movement, where mostly Republicans argued over which special interests the Party should be pawns to (not an end to being pawns). The Progressives wanted to add groups like unions and working people as special interests, while other Republican wanted to just continue being pawns to big business and factory owners.

The pawns to big business took control of the Republican Party, while the progressives moved to the Democratic Party.

A little later, the Civil Rights movement shuffled the two Parties into which special interest groups they would be pawns to again (Dems favoring blacks, immigrants, etc; Republicans to white southerners)

And that's basically how both parties came to be today: both are pawns to special interests, the difference being only which special interest groups they cater to.

The idea of some magical Good Old Days when the Republicans didn't cater to special interests is just a naive fantasy.

The latest models have red, yellow and green lights to let you know if your conversations align with acceptable domestic security guidelines.

You forgot the blue and orange lights...
Homeland Security Advisory System

To be fair, the request was to upload images to Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia itself (who don't host media files AFAIK). The rules and processes for deletions are differerent, and most users can't delete images on Wikimedia Commons, they can only request they get deleted (with a specific reason). Details.

When someone else owns it, there is no reason for you to respect their property. If you own it, you take care of it.

This is a quite recent attitude in America. In the late 19th Century and early 20th Century public works were a point of major civic pride. When P.G. Wodehouse satirized small town Americans, they were friendly and enthusiastic and inclined to bend your ear about the local water-works. Because in the early 20th century, when communities built, say, a pumping station, they'd build it like this. And lest you think that was an aberration, here is one across town. When they built a simple gatehouse, it ended up looking like this.

Many people wish to return to what they conceive of as a late 19th Century version of America, in which the government didn't spend so much, but the cost off these structures must have been mind-boggling, especially in light of the much smaller population and economy of the time. It was an era of public works on a heroic scale. In Chicago in the mid 19th Century they retrofittted sewers to what was already a big city, a project that required reversing the course of the Chicago river and jacking up buildings as much as 14 feet as they were being used. Sometimes entire blocks of unreinforced masonry buildings were jacked up at once.

There's nothing that has shaped America we are familiar with than our historical mania for public works projects: dams, highways, subways, bridges. We've always loved big shiny new things. We're crap at maintaining old stuff, though. The only reason those old pump stations are around was they were built to longevity standards appropriate for an Egyptian pyramid.

When someone else owns it, there is no reason for you to respect their property. If you own it, you take care of it.

This is a quite recent attitude in America. In the late 19th Century and early 20th Century public works were a point of major civic pride. When P.G. Wodehouse satirized small town Americans, they were friendly and enthusiastic and inclined to bend your ear about the local water-works. Because in the early 20th century, when communities built, say, a pumping station, they'd build it like this. And lest you think that was an aberration, here is one across town. When they built a simple gatehouse, it ended up looking like this.

Many people wish to return to what they conceive of as a late 19th Century version of America, in which the government didn't spend so much, but the cost off these structures must have been mind-boggling, especially in light of the much smaller population and economy of the time. It was an era of public works on a heroic scale. In Chicago in the mid 19th Century they retrofittted sewers to what was already a big city, a project that required reversing the course of the Chicago river and jacking up buildings as much as 14 feet as they were being used. Sometimes entire blocks of unreinforced masonry buildings were jacked up at once.

There's nothing that has shaped America we are familiar with than our historical mania for public works projects: dams, highways, subways, bridges. We've always loved big shiny new things. We're crap at maintaining old stuff, though. The only reason those old pump stations are around was they were built to longevity standards appropriate for an Egyptian pyramid.

Sure I haven't, buddy. Never mind that this book was where I taught myself C, back in the early 90's.
You got room in your mouth for the other foot? Help yourself.

As was Hung Far Lo

No no no. Vint Cerf invented the shortboard.

Wikipedia says 16.36% of page requests are Linux. What do you make of that?

I think the OP was referring to George Washinton. OTOH he never needed any bridges.

I wish I could share some of your optimism, but maybe I'm just jealous because what the Zuck has decided to implement is so much weaker than the EPR (Earned Public Reputation) that I've been advocating for a while now. In my fantasy, you should be able to see the data and even contest negative accusations. Also, I think any system involving REAL human beings has to be multidimensional.

I actually went over to Facebook to see if I could detect any trace of this system, but I couldn't. So let my go wild and speculate how I think it should work: You should see two adjacent icons for each identity. The first avatar would be self-selected and link to the usual profile generated by the self. The second avatar would be a standardized representation of the EPR of that identity. I usually imagine a little radar graph featuring the dimensions that are most important to you, the person who is looking at this mysterious new identity and trying to assess whether or not to read what it wrote or linked to. If you click on the EPR icon, the link would take you to the details, both of how each dimension was calculated and the actual data.

Also, I think the entire system should be biased in favor of positive reputation and the data should age over time. Easiest to illustrate with an example using the relatively simple dimension of "truthful", where the clear negative is "untruthful". If someone wanted to accuse someone of being untruthful, then they would have to document the lie, not merely point at it--and the reputation of the accuser should also be taken into account. If someone makes a false accusation, then that should bounce back against the accuser's own reputation. I think that most of this could actually be done automatically using algorithms, though I also think you still need ways to bring humans into the loop to resolve disputes--and I'm pert' shure Facebook would hate that part of the idea.

Anyway, I started a related proposal over on Wikipedia: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik... ADSAuPR, atAJG.

Glad to see that you got a mod point, though you could have done much more than reveal a tiny bit of insight. In Facebook's case, of course they can't stand the thought of letting us rate THEIR reputation--but they don't actually care because they are only concerned with one metric: Market Cap. On that foundation, there are several secondary metrics, of which time is the most important one. The more human time wasted on Facebook, the bigger the market cap. I think wasted time is bad, but Facebook INSISTS that bigger market cap is good.

There are solution approaches to the problems of bad actors (human and otherwise). I'm even an advocate of EPR (Earned Public Reputation), largely because I think it can be implemented in a symmetry way. However human reputation cannot and should not be reduced to a single number. Human beings are complex and trying to reduce that complexity to a single number is basically insane. A single number can only represent a single dimension, and the question becomes "What are they actually measuring?"

Amusingly enough, I recently submitted a proposal for a multidimensional metric for use on Wikipedia. As the idea mutated, it became two symmetric multidimensional metrics, one for contributors, and one for the articles that they contributed to. MEPR-C is proposed as the Multidimensional Earned Public Reputation of Contributors with the corresponding MEPR-A for articles. ADSAuPR, atAJG.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik...

Climate sensitivity is about 3C for a doubling of CO2 with an likely range of about 30% on either side (not 100%). So probably between 2 and 4C. However, it is a "right-skewed distribution" suggesting that if carbon dioxide concentrations double, the probability of very large increases in temperature is greater than the probability of very small increases. So to the extent that there is uncertainty, it is not our friend.

Ultimately though, how much warming will depend on how much we emit. We can decide to limit emissions and minimize warming. Or not. It's up to us.

In this graph https://static.skepticalscienc... you can clearly see the correlation between temperature and CO2. It's clear that as CO2 goes up, temperature goes with it. Oh, wait...
While in this graph https://upload.wikimedia.org/w... you can clearly see that solar activity has nothing to do with global temperatures. Oh, wait...
Anyway, data proves that the hypothesis that CO2 leads to higher temperatures, because the IPCC says so. (Oh, wait...)

You're right, the EU wouldn't allow it for member states, but there are a lot of countries in that area, that aren't EU members. Unfortunately, if you look at the pricing of streaming services, you'll see an overlap with the map, that content creators agreed on, when installing the 6 DVD region codes

Or a Philco phone.

You could design it around miniature vacuum tubes and market it to audiophiles.

Or maybe they're just too young to have experienced the nightmare of the Atari 400: https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

only the Commander-in-Chief has the power to create a new branch of the military.

In this case, my .sig is not applicable.

I would love to see federal income tax reduced by 90% and if there are some things that still need to be done, let the local governments do it.

Look at this graph of federal government spending, and say what exactly are you going to cut? Even if you cut military spending to bare bones, you wouldn't succeed in closing the annual deficit. If you cut social security, you will be voted out of office. If you cut Medicare, you will be voted out of office. So what exactly are you planning on doing?

Neither medicare nor social security are paid with income tax. They are both paid with their own separate payroll tax. Medicaid is already mostly administered by the state and the federal government shouldn't be collecting any money and giving it back to the states. Other than military spending, which could be significantly cut, most of the other stuff that the federal government does could easily be done by the individual states. We currently spend 4 times as much on our military as the next closest country (China). That would be a good place to start. If we cut our military budget in half we would still be spending more money than any other country.

I would love to see federal income tax reduced by 90% and if there are some things that still need to be done, let the local governments do it.

Look at this graph of federal government spending, and say what exactly are you going to cut? Even if you cut military spending to bare bones, you wouldn't succeed in closing the annual deficit. If you cut social security, you will be voted out of office. If you cut Medicare, you will be voted out of office. So what exactly are you planning on doing?

He’s going to cut “undesirables”. “Small goverment” and “local control” are just euphemisms for genocide.

I would love to see federal income tax reduced by 90% and if there are some things that still need to be done, let the local governments do it.

Look at this graph of federal government spending, and say what exactly are you going to cut? Even if you cut military spending to bare bones, you wouldn't succeed in closing the annual deficit. If you cut social security, you will be voted out of office. If you cut Medicare, you will be voted out of office. So what exactly are you planning on doing?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

The data says very much otherwise, and there's only legacy software forcing people into Windows nowadays. The only thing garbage here is your attempt.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

The data says very much otherwise, and there's only legacy software forcing people into Windows nowadays. The only thing garbage here is your attempt.

Here's a map showing vote breakdown by county: https://commons.wikimedia.org/...

It's overwhelming.