There is no reason you can't go somewhere and pay with stock, if you can find someone to accept it as payment. And stock is used as 'currency' quite often in corporate buyouts. And you can be paid by your employer in stock. Not seeing much difference.
Learn to read. Two different events. First one (seen no matter how you were watching) was apparently a commercial break where no commercial was inserted. Game play was stopped, and since no commercial was inserted no commercial was missed. That is the problem the quote was about.
Second problem, affecting only Hulu, was at the end of the game, and people did miss some of the game.
A raster is an image created by starting in a corner, drawing a line from left to right (or the other way), advancing to the next next line, drawing that line, etc. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not there is a mask (and, by the way, all color TVs have always had a mask). ALL TVs, computer monitors, laser printers, inkjet printers, fax machines, and almost everything else that produces an image does it with a raster. The very few exceptions include xy plotters, oscilloscopes, and a few arcade games (Asteroid).
If you remove the signal from an oscilloscope, what do you see? A dot (unless, like a TV, you are using an internally generated horizontal sweep in which case you will see a line). If you remove the signal from an analog TV what do you see? A complete raster, containing nothing but noise (snow). If you want to replace the noise with an image, you must, must, must provide image data EXACTLY as the TV expects it.
Frames are NOT 'sent with a higher frequency' when a tape is fast forwarded. The frame rate (and line rate) is determined by how fast the heads are spinning, which is a constant 1798.2 RPM regardless of how fast the tape is moving (or not). You can STOP the tape (freeze), and the image will still be shown at 29.97FPS. If you move the tape faster the spinning heads will 'miss' some frames, and the image appears as fast forward, but the frame rate is EXACTLY the same.
No, this is entirely wrong. The 'raster' on the TV is generated INTERNALLY and has NO dependancy on the input signal (other than sync). An analog TV with NO signal will display a full raster just fine.
Fast forward is done by skipping frames, not by sending the frames faster.
Sorry I am late with this. Hope it will help clear things up for you.
In the TV receiver are two circuits which generate sawtooth signals, one for the horizontal and one for the vertical. These signals are what generate the raster, by pulling the electron beam across and down the screen. These are not dependant on the input signal (if you turn on an old TV with no input, you get a full screen of 'snow' - the raster is being generated properly but there is only noise to modulate the beam).
The 'sync' portion of the signal only makes sure that receiver starts drawing a line at the same time the transmitter is sending one. So the transmitter sends the sync, followed by luminance, followed by a 'black' (actually part of it is blacker than black) period (which contains the sync for the next line). At the same time, the receiver starts drawing the line, and at the end of the line the sawtooth returns to 0 (retrace), exactly when the 'black' portion of the signal arrives.
The receiver will be drawing lines at the rate of 15734/second, no matter how fast you are sending them.
So what happens if you are sending lines slower than that? Things start out OK. the line starts at the same time. But, when the receiver gets to the end of the line and does the retrace, you are still sending luminance info. The beam is therefore not off, and at least a portion of the retrace will be visible (not good). If the difference in speed is small, this will just show up as garbage on the right side of the screen. If the difference is large enough, you will not only see the entire retrace, but the end of the previous line (which you are still sending) will be drawn at the beginning of the next line (really not good).
On the other hand, if you are sending faster than the receiver, the receiver will not make it all the way across the screen before being forced to start a new line by the next sync. The picture will be 'compressed' horizontally (circles will not be round), and there will be black space on the right of the screen.
The same thing happens with the vertical.
Now, no TV is perfect, so the manufacturers 'overscan' by a little bit, so that the edges of the picture are hidden by the bezel. This hides small errors.
The color portion of the signal is even more finicky, but I won't go into that here.
So, while the TV may display 'something' for a wide range of frequencies, it will show 'just fine' for only a VERY narrow range of frequencies. Therefore, your original statement is entirely false.
What are you talking about? How can a bank 'loan more than it receives in deposits'? Where does it get the money to loan?
Fractional reserve is what allows the banks to make loans. If you deposit $1, the bank can loan out 90 cents, but must keep 10 cents in reserve. The reserve is so they have the cash to give people who make a withdrawal.
The purpose of the sync functions are to sync the oscillators in the receiver with the oscillators in the transmitter. There are still tight tolerances. For instance, if the horizontal oscillator is running too fast, the end of a line will 'wrap around' to the beginning of the next line, then when the sync happens the beginning of the next line will be drawn slightly below that wrapped part, giving a 'column' appearance to the left side of the screen. If the oscillator is running too slow the beam won't make it all the way across the screen before the sync, and the image will be 'compressed', with a black bar on the right side of the screen. If the vertical oscillator is off the picture will 'roll', either up or down. If the oscillators are too far off the receiver won't be able to sync at all, and the picture will 'tear' and possibly roll at the same time.
Later NTSC models that converted the signal to digital instead of using oscillators MAY have been able to cope with out-of-spec signals (for instance, detecting how long there was between syncs and adjusting how the line is filled accordingly), but there is no way a pure analog TV could deal with that, especially something as out of spec as 27fps.
Untrue. For instance, New York requires 'proof of insurance or evidence of a financial security bond or a financial security deposit'. Other states are the same.
You still aren't grasping the difference between the bookies and the insurance companies. The bookies use the same odds for everyone because everyone who made the same bet has the exact same chance of winning. This is of course the exact opposite of insurance, where everyone has a different chance of 'winning'. I don't know what is so hard to understand about that.
I can't figure out how you expect your 'plan' to work. It is obvious that if you only had one price that price would have to be between the current high and low prices. So why would anyone currently paying a low rate stay with your company? Now all the low-risk high-profit customers are gone, so you have to raise your rates to make up the loss. Now you have more customers who can get a better deal elsewhere, so they leave, and prices go up again. Rinse and repeat until you have no customers left. Good plan
I am not talking about fraud. I am talking about a normal human being buying insurance to protect themself from loss.
My house has a value of about $200K. If it burns down, my insurance will pay that. I pay about $400/year for fire insurance. You would have to be a complete moron to think the insurance company will ever make more than $200K off of me.
I didn't mean to intentionally cause an accident. I was pointing out the absurdity of your claim that insurance is gambling. IF you have an accident, exactly what have you 'won'?
You're still very wrong about the betting. While a well-informed bettor may have a better chance of making the right bet, once the decision has been made he has EXACTLY the same chances of winning that bet as someone who picked the same bet at random. And if enough well-informed bettors make that same bet the odds will be adjusted.
Where do you get the idea that the purpose of insurance is 'to level an unfair playing field'? That is ridiculous. The purpose of insurance is to protect yourself from potentially damaging losses. And it is only logical that the more likely you are to suffer that loss the more you should be paying for that protection.
Insurance is an old industry, run by statisticians and actuaries. And in all that time, none of those people were able to figure out that risk has no bearing on how much you should pay? Good one.
That is just stupid. If you think that insurance is 'gambling' and that 'you are betting you will have an accident', HAVE AN ACCIDENT. There, you 'won'.
Your comment about bookmakers is equally ill-informed. The only possible way person 'A' has a higher chance of winning than person 'B' is if 'A' can actually affect the outcome, or by making a DIFFERENT bet. In either case, 'A' and 'B' are certainly NOT going to get the same odds.
Your idea of a 'savings account' and 'loan' also makes no sense. Insurance is most certainly NOT 'every customer pays in more than they get paid out'. It is that on AVERAGE customers pay more (plus the money the insurance company makes on investing the premiums) than the company pays out. That says nothing about an INDIVIDUAL. As an individual you can cost them MUCH more than they will ever make off of you.
A friend of mine hit a deer with a new Honda truck. Body shop quoted $1300. An hour later they called him back. Didn't realize it had lane assist and adaptive cruise control. Estimate was now $3500.
It says market strategy, not marketing strategy. As in, do they have an actual, realistic plan for bringing the technology to market. And since it is info for investors, it makes sense to include it.
Bullshit. I have a brand-new car with 'lane keep assist'. Here is my experience with it:
In good weather, with a clean road, I don't notice it is there at all
Prior to a recent storm, it started continually telling me I was not staying in my lane. This was jarring to say the least. Turns out this ever-so-smart computer could not tell the difference between lane markings and the lines of brine that the highway dept put on the road. Have yet to see a human confused by that.
During the storm, a small amount of snow built up on the highway. Lane assist disabled itself (no lane markings to use). Human drivers had no problem.
After the storm (like, more than a week after) lane assist is still disabled. The roads are completely covered in salt, so lane markings are hard to see. Human drivers not having a problem.
Now, maybe the self-driving cars have MUCH better sensors and logic, but that seems hard to believe. If the self-driving cars are at all similar to these 'assist' features then I expect to see a lot of self-driving cars just sitting there waiting for better conditions.
The funny thing is, people like you think the purpose of that law is to keep people who you think are going too slow out of the left lane. A little searching shows the exact problem they are going after, with an explanation by an officer of what they are looking for.
What they are actually going after is aggressive SPEEDERS. The type of asshole who thinks he can dictate where and how people should be driving. The scenario he gave was car A driving in the left lane, at a speed asshole B determined is too slow. B then uses his usual charming methods of trying A to move over: tailgating, light flashing, etc. If that doesn't work he then illegally passes on the right, then cuts back in front of A. Then, he starts going slower and slower, trying to force A to pass him on the right. As soon as A moves over, the asshole speeds off. THAT is the idiot who will be ticketed under this new law. And the beauty of it is, the asshole has earned himself 4 citations - tailgating, passing on the right, obstructing, and speeding. If convicted of all 4, that will be enough points to lose his license.
And BTW the 'below the posted speed limit' is in the text of the law. It doesn't matter in the slightest what the defacto speed limit is, nobody is going to be convicted of that violation if they are at or above the posted speed limit.
Exactly. And to expand on that, a pass should start BEFORE you are less than a safe distance from the car in front, and end AFTER you are more than a safe distance past it. At highway speeds, that means you should be in the left lane BEFORE there is less than 200 feet, and remain there until there is MORE than 200 feet. And when you get to the point that you are 200 feet past the overtaken car, if there is less than 200 feet to the NEXT car you stay in the left lane until either you pass that car or enough space opens up. At no point other than that are you required to move over, regardless of what the idiot behind you wants.
He is misrepresenting the law. It has nothing to do with being a laggard. The law is keep right except to pass.
The problem is that most of the speeding chuckleheads don't know what a safe pass is. At 70MPH, the pass should start 200 feet behind the car being overtaken, and end when your rear bumper is 200 feet ahead of the other car. It is in these areas that the idiots decide you are breaking the law (you aren't) and decide to pass you on the right.
There is no law requiring you to move over for a speeder.
The NJ law is keep right except to pass. No mention is made of speed at all. As I said above, a 70MPH car is going to take about 30 seconds to properly pass a 65MPH car, and he is entitled to the whole 30 seconds regardless of whether or not someone else wants to go faster.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, who wants to read about people using technology to get better at what they do? We need more bitcoin articles!
Nobody will be buying for any price. That is the point.
There is no reason you can't go somewhere and pay with stock, if you can find someone to accept it as payment. And stock is used as 'currency' quite often in corporate buyouts. And you can be paid by your employer in stock. Not seeing much difference.
Learn to read. Two different events. First one (seen no matter how you were watching) was apparently a commercial break where no commercial was inserted. Game play was stopped, and since no commercial was inserted no commercial was missed. That is the problem the quote was about.
Second problem, affecting only Hulu, was at the end of the game, and people did miss some of the game.
So you're one of the dopes who think texting and driving doesn't cause fatal accidents, because fatal accidents have mostly gone down?
In other words, they weren't using it for archaeology, which is what TED said started about 6 years ago.
A raster is an image created by starting in a corner, drawing a line from left to right (or the other way), advancing to the next next line, drawing that line, etc. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not there is a mask (and, by the way, all color TVs have always had a mask). ALL TVs, computer monitors, laser printers, inkjet printers, fax machines, and almost everything else that produces an image does it with a raster. The very few exceptions include xy plotters, oscilloscopes, and a few arcade games (Asteroid).
If you remove the signal from an oscilloscope, what do you see? A dot (unless, like a TV, you are using an internally generated horizontal sweep in which case you will see a line). If you remove the signal from an analog TV what do you see? A complete raster, containing nothing but noise (snow). If you want to replace the noise with an image, you must, must, must provide image data EXACTLY as the TV expects it.
Frames are NOT 'sent with a higher frequency' when a tape is fast forwarded. The frame rate (and line rate) is determined by how fast the heads are spinning, which is a constant 1798.2 RPM regardless of how fast the tape is moving (or not). You can STOP the tape (freeze), and the image will still be shown at 29.97FPS. If you move the tape faster the spinning heads will 'miss' some frames, and the image appears as fast forward, but the frame rate is EXACTLY the same.
No, this is entirely wrong. The 'raster' on the TV is generated INTERNALLY and has NO dependancy on the input signal (other than sync). An analog TV with NO signal will display a full raster just fine.
Fast forward is done by skipping frames, not by sending the frames faster.
Sorry I am late with this. Hope it will help clear things up for you.
In the TV receiver are two circuits which generate sawtooth signals, one for the horizontal and one for the vertical. These signals are what generate the raster, by pulling the electron beam across and down the screen. These are not dependant on the input signal (if you turn on an old TV with no input, you get a full screen of 'snow' - the raster is being generated properly but there is only noise to modulate the beam).
The 'sync' portion of the signal only makes sure that receiver starts drawing a line at the same time the transmitter is sending one. So the transmitter sends the sync, followed by luminance, followed by a 'black' (actually part of it is blacker than black) period (which contains the sync for the next line). At the same time, the receiver starts drawing the line, and at the end of the line the sawtooth returns to 0 (retrace), exactly when the 'black' portion of the signal arrives.
The receiver will be drawing lines at the rate of 15734/second, no matter how fast you are sending them.
So what happens if you are sending lines slower than that? Things start out OK. the line starts at the same time. But, when the receiver gets to the end of the line and does the retrace, you are still sending luminance info. The beam is therefore not off, and at least a portion of the retrace will be visible (not good). If the difference in speed is small, this will just show up as garbage on the right side of the screen. If the difference is large enough, you will not only see the entire retrace, but the end of the previous line (which you are still sending) will be drawn at the beginning of the next line (really not good).
On the other hand, if you are sending faster than the receiver, the receiver will not make it all the way across the screen before being forced to start a new line by the next sync. The picture will be 'compressed' horizontally (circles will not be round), and there will be black space on the right of the screen.
The same thing happens with the vertical.
Now, no TV is perfect, so the manufacturers 'overscan' by a little bit, so that the edges of the picture are hidden by the bezel. This hides small errors.
The color portion of the signal is even more finicky, but I won't go into that here.
So, while the TV may display 'something' for a wide range of frequencies, it will show 'just fine' for only a VERY narrow range of frequencies. Therefore, your original statement is entirely false.
What are you talking about? How can a bank 'loan more than it receives in deposits'? Where does it get the money to loan?
Fractional reserve is what allows the banks to make loans. If you deposit $1, the bank can loan out 90 cents, but must keep 10 cents in reserve. The reserve is so they have the cash to give people who make a withdrawal.
The purpose of the sync functions are to sync the oscillators in the receiver with the oscillators in the transmitter. There are still tight tolerances. For instance, if the horizontal oscillator is running too fast, the end of a line will 'wrap around' to the beginning of the next line, then when the sync happens the beginning of the next line will be drawn slightly below that wrapped part, giving a 'column' appearance to the left side of the screen. If the oscillator is running too slow the beam won't make it all the way across the screen before the sync, and the image will be 'compressed', with a black bar on the right side of the screen. If the vertical oscillator is off the picture will 'roll', either up or down. If the oscillators are too far off the receiver won't be able to sync at all, and the picture will 'tear' and possibly roll at the same time.
Later NTSC models that converted the signal to digital instead of using oscillators MAY have been able to cope with out-of-spec signals (for instance, detecting how long there was between syncs and adjusting how the line is filled accordingly), but there is no way a pure analog TV could deal with that, especially something as out of spec as 27fps.
Untrue. For instance, New York requires 'proof of insurance or evidence of a financial security bond or a financial security deposit'. Other states are the same.
First, you have a weird definition of 'winning'.
You still aren't grasping the difference between the bookies and the insurance companies. The bookies use the same odds for everyone because everyone who made the same bet has the exact same chance of winning. This is of course the exact opposite of insurance, where everyone has a different chance of 'winning'. I don't know what is so hard to understand about that.
I can't figure out how you expect your 'plan' to work. It is obvious that if you only had one price that price would have to be between the current high and low prices. So why would anyone currently paying a low rate stay with your company? Now all the low-risk high-profit customers are gone, so you have to raise your rates to make up the loss. Now you have more customers who can get a better deal elsewhere, so they leave, and prices go up again. Rinse and repeat until you have no customers left. Good plan
I am not talking about fraud. I am talking about a normal human being buying insurance to protect themself from loss.
My house has a value of about $200K. If it burns down, my insurance will pay that. I pay about $400/year for fire insurance. You would have to be a complete moron to think the insurance company will ever make more than $200K off of me.
I didn't mean to intentionally cause an accident. I was pointing out the absurdity of your claim that insurance is gambling. IF you have an accident, exactly what have you 'won'?
You're still very wrong about the betting. While a well-informed bettor may have a better chance of making the right bet, once the decision has been made he has EXACTLY the same chances of winning that bet as someone who picked the same bet at random. And if enough well-informed bettors make that same bet the odds will be adjusted.
Where do you get the idea that the purpose of insurance is 'to level an unfair playing field'? That is ridiculous. The purpose of insurance is to protect yourself from potentially damaging losses. And it is only logical that the more likely you are to suffer that loss the more you should be paying for that protection.
Insurance is an old industry, run by statisticians and actuaries. And in all that time, none of those people were able to figure out that risk has no bearing on how much you should pay? Good one.
The goverment doesn't even mandate insurance (usually), It just requires that you have the financial wherewithal to pay for damage you cause.
That is just stupid. If you think that insurance is 'gambling' and that 'you are betting you will have an accident', HAVE AN ACCIDENT. There, you 'won'.
Your comment about bookmakers is equally ill-informed. The only possible way person 'A' has a higher chance of winning than person 'B' is if 'A' can actually affect the outcome, or by making a DIFFERENT bet. In either case, 'A' and 'B' are certainly NOT going to get the same odds.
Your idea of a 'savings account' and 'loan' also makes no sense. Insurance is most certainly NOT 'every customer pays in more than they get paid out'. It is that on AVERAGE customers pay more (plus the money the insurance company makes on investing the premiums) than the company pays out. That says nothing about an INDIVIDUAL. As an individual you can cost them MUCH more than they will ever make off of you.
A friend of mine hit a deer with a new Honda truck. Body shop quoted $1300. An hour later they called him back. Didn't realize it had lane assist and adaptive cruise control. Estimate was now $3500.
It says market strategy, not marketing strategy. As in, do they have an actual, realistic plan for bringing the technology to market. And since it is info for investors, it makes sense to include it.
Bullshit. I have a brand-new car with 'lane keep assist'. Here is my experience with it:
In good weather, with a clean road, I don't notice it is there at all
Prior to a recent storm, it started continually telling me I was not staying in my lane. This was jarring to say the least. Turns out this ever-so-smart computer could not tell the difference between lane markings and the lines of brine that the highway dept put on the road. Have yet to see a human confused by that.
During the storm, a small amount of snow built up on the highway. Lane assist disabled itself (no lane markings to use). Human drivers had no problem.
After the storm (like, more than a week after) lane assist is still disabled. The roads are completely covered in salt, so lane markings are hard to see. Human drivers not having a problem.
Now, maybe the self-driving cars have MUCH better sensors and logic, but that seems hard to believe. If the self-driving cars are at all similar to these 'assist' features then I expect to see a lot of self-driving cars just sitting there waiting for better conditions.
The funny thing is, people like you think the purpose of that law is to keep people who you think are going too slow out of the left lane. A little searching shows the exact problem they are going after, with an explanation by an officer of what they are looking for.
What they are actually going after is aggressive SPEEDERS. The type of asshole who thinks he can dictate where and how people should be driving. The scenario he gave was car A driving in the left lane, at a speed asshole B determined is too slow. B then uses his usual charming methods of trying A to move over: tailgating, light flashing, etc. If that doesn't work he then illegally passes on the right, then cuts back in front of A. Then, he starts going slower and slower, trying to force A to pass him on the right. As soon as A moves over, the asshole speeds off. THAT is the idiot who will be ticketed under this new law. And the beauty of it is, the asshole has earned himself 4 citations - tailgating, passing on the right, obstructing, and speeding. If convicted of all 4, that will be enough points to lose his license.
And BTW the 'below the posted speed limit' is in the text of the law. It doesn't matter in the slightest what the defacto speed limit is, nobody is going to be convicted of that violation if they are at or above the posted speed limit.
If traffic to my right is slower than I am, then I can be in the left lane whether you are 'impeded' or not. Period.
Exactly. And to expand on that, a pass should start BEFORE you are less than a safe distance from the car in front, and end AFTER you are more than a safe distance past it. At highway speeds, that means you should be in the left lane BEFORE there is less than 200 feet, and remain there until there is MORE than 200 feet. And when you get to the point that you are 200 feet past the overtaken car, if there is less than 200 feet to the NEXT car you stay in the left lane until either you pass that car or enough space opens up. At no point other than that are you required to move over, regardless of what the idiot behind you wants.
He is misrepresenting the law. It has nothing to do with being a laggard. The law is keep right except to pass.
The problem is that most of the speeding chuckleheads don't know what a safe pass is. At 70MPH, the pass should start 200 feet behind the car being overtaken, and end when your rear bumper is 200 feet ahead of the other car. It is in these areas that the idiots decide you are breaking the law (you aren't) and decide to pass you on the right.
There is no law requiring you to move over for a speeder.
The NJ law is keep right except to pass. No mention is made of speed at all. As I said above, a 70MPH car is going to take about 30 seconds to properly pass a 65MPH car, and he is entitled to the whole 30 seconds regardless of whether or not someone else wants to go faster.