But when they say "soap opera effect" that tells me that they aren't against motion interpolation, they are against high frame rates in general. This is analogous analogous to saying that 640x480 is the *best* resolution, and going higher makes things worse. I notice the article doesn't even mention the term frame rate. So this isn't a technical discussion, this is an aesthetic one.
Decades of watching movies has trained us to accept 24fps as "cinematic" motion, but in reality it just looks bad.
Yeah, I don't get it either.
The "problem" with soap operas (as I recall, haven't seen one in ages) was that they actually looked smooth and vivid, like you really had a window into a real scene instead of just grainy film "magic".
I agree that Chicken Littlism is a bad strategy if you want to convince stupid people who are unable to distinguish between shrill alarmism and serious research. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that YOU should be stupid.
Yeah, calling people stupid doesn't seem to be working all that well either. Lost you a presidential election recently, I noticed.
But it gives you a little thrill, so I guess that's some sort of payoff.
And here I would have thought that communist dictatorships would somehow be less dictatorial...
Cuba has never been communist any more than China or Russia.
Sorry, but at some point you just have to own it.
Cuba, China, and Soviet Russia are/were communist. They are exactly what you get when true believers in communism implement communism. You've had over a century to come up with some sort of counterexample.
Your assertion is actually worse than No True Scotsman... we're going to have to invent a new one for this... it's more like No True Scotland or something.
Once upon I time, I thought it was a legitimate concern. But they've Chicken Littled it way beyond anything I have patience for at this point.
You should improve your critical thinking skills. Whether it is a "legitimate concern" or not, is completely unrelated to whether "they" are Chicken Littling it.
Doesn't matter.
If you want to convince people of things (which some of us call "democracy", and think it's the least worst form of government), then chicken littling for 30 or 40 years (oh, and calling them "stupid", "deniers", etc.) is not the way to do it.
I would have given money, changed my lifestyle, my purchasing habits, whatever was required - and I did, for a time.
That's not how it works. What's needed is for you to vote for people who will do something about it, and convince others to do so as well. Nothing you can do on a personal level means jack diddly shit.
And there it is in a nutshell. "Climate change" is only cared about as a tool for obtaining more political power.
That's really not enough data to do anything of consequence, except deliver a small amount of propaganda to users' handsets. Congratulations on keeping it dictatorial, Cuba.
Shocking, isn't it?
And here I would have thought that communist dictatorships would somehow be less dictatorial...
That's nothing. One day I was just thinking about something that I not normally think about. Later that day I looked up the YouTube main page and there was a movie about what I thought about in the Recommended section.
Oh yeah? That's nothing... YouTube shows me things even before I think about them!
We should give generous subsidies to nuclear energy. Minor subsidies should be given to current reactors to keep them above water. Major subsides (100's of billions to start) should be spent on next generation nuclear. NuScale has passed phase 1 of the NRC review, and their first 12 SMR's are going to be built in Idaho. We should heavily subsidize this project and all future ones. We should also subsidize other 4th generation nuclear when their reactors pass nrc review. If and only if we do that, we will have a chance at mitigating climate change.
Well, yeah... but... where would the sneering superiority rights be in that??
This is only reasonable if we tax fossil fuels. Renewables are generally cleaner than fossil fuels, though not entirely clean. Energy should be taxed based on the costs to repair the environmental damage that has to be cleaned up and the costs of mitigating their impacts. In this respect, fossil fuels are far more expensive and should be taxed at a higher rate that reflects their true costs of use.
Er, we do tax fossil fuels, massively. You know that, right?
Slashdot Mirror
But when they say "soap opera effect" that tells me that they aren't against motion interpolation, they are against high frame rates in general. This is analogous analogous to saying that 640x480 is the *best* resolution, and going higher makes things worse. I notice the article doesn't even mention the term frame rate. So this isn't a technical discussion, this is an aesthetic one.
Decades of watching movies has trained us to accept 24fps as "cinematic" motion, but in reality it just looks bad.
Yeah, I don't get it either.
The "problem" with soap operas (as I recall, haven't seen one in ages) was that they actually looked smooth and vivid, like you really had a window into a real scene instead of just grainy film "magic".
Exactly what you'd expect a shill for Big Oil to say.
Shouldn't I be getting a check if I'm a shill?
Where's my check?? Dang, we evil minions need a union or something.
I agree that Chicken Littlism is a bad strategy if you want to convince stupid people who are unable to distinguish between shrill alarmism and serious research. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that YOU should be stupid.
Yeah, calling people stupid doesn't seem to be working all that well either. Lost you a presidential election recently, I noticed.
But it gives you a little thrill, so I guess that's some sort of payoff.
So how would you recommend that new knowledge is shared with the public so that you would actually believe it ?
I'm not him but hard to say.
Pretty sure that getting Oprah to say that we'd all be toast by 2000 wasn't it though.
And here I would have thought that communist dictatorships would somehow be less dictatorial ...
Cuba has never been communist any more than China or Russia.
Sorry, but at some point you just have to own it.
Cuba, China, and Soviet Russia are/were communist. They are exactly what you get when true believers in communism implement communism. You've had over a century to come up with some sort of counterexample.
Your assertion is actually worse than No True Scotsman ... we're going to have to invent a new one for this ... it's more like No True Scotland or something.
Once upon I time, I thought it was a legitimate concern. But they've Chicken Littled it way beyond anything I have patience for at this point.
You should improve your critical thinking skills. Whether it is a "legitimate concern" or not, is completely unrelated to whether "they" are Chicken Littling it.
Doesn't matter.
If you want to convince people of things (which some of us call "democracy", and think it's the least worst form of government), then chicken littling for 30 or 40 years (oh, and calling them "stupid", "deniers", etc.) is not the way to do it.
You will numb people to what you are saying.
I would have given money, changed my lifestyle, my purchasing habits, whatever was required - and I did, for a time.
That's not how it works. What's needed is for you to vote for people who will do something about it, and convince others to do so as well. Nothing you can do on a personal level means jack diddly shit.
And there it is in a nutshell. "Climate change" is only cared about as a tool for obtaining more political power.
That's really not enough data to do anything of consequence, except deliver a small amount of propaganda to users' handsets. Congratulations on keeping it dictatorial, Cuba.
Shocking, isn't it?
And here I would have thought that communist dictatorships would somehow be less dictatorial ...
My donkey and my 56 Chevy can only use 2G though :(
But viva la revolucion!
My donkey and my 56 Chevy can only use 2G though :(
And it would have worked too, if it weren't for you meddling Russians!
... without more information not sure what to think.
I doubt that there's a complete absence of human caused warehouse accidents.
, only 10.1% of adults moved homes from August 2017 to August 2018
Only 10% of adults moved within one year???
Is it only me to whom that sounds too high, not low?
"How many questions?"
"Twenty, thirty, cross referenced."
"It took over a hundred questions for Al Gore, didn't it?"
If their iThing display is speaking curses, they have more to worry about than they realize.
"Siri, stop cussing at me ... "
In turn, this causes issues such as display imprecations, slowing performance, and more, the lawsuit alleges.
The screen curses you? Awesome!
Ah, the politician timescale ... sorta near but safely 9at the time) far away.
I notice that true AI, the dying off of us old Republicans, and my big premium savings from Obamacare are a little overdue as well.
Volkswagen AG expects the era of the combustion car to fade away after it rolls out its next-generation gasoline and diesel cars beginning in 2026.
Ah, the politician timescale ... it feels so near, yet is safely far away ....
That's nothing. One day I was just thinking about something that I not normally think about. Later that day I looked up the YouTube main page and there was a movie about what I thought about in the Recommended section.
Oh yeah? That's nothing ... YouTube shows me things even before I think about them!
Capitalism in a nutshell. If you want competition you have to accept egregious amounts of redundancy.
Redundancy which, frustrating though this may be to some, makes things better, not worse.
See Soviet era stores vs. American stores of the same era.
We should give generous subsidies to nuclear energy. Minor subsidies should be given to current reactors to keep them above water. Major subsides (100's of billions to start) should be spent on next generation nuclear. NuScale has passed phase 1 of the NRC review, and their first 12 SMR's are going to be built in Idaho. We should heavily subsidize this project and all future ones. We should also subsidize other 4th generation nuclear when their reactors pass nrc review. If and only if we do that, we will have a chance at mitigating climate change.
Well, yeah ... but ... where would the sneering superiority rights be in that??
This is only reasonable if we tax fossil fuels. Renewables are generally cleaner than fossil fuels, though not entirely clean. Energy should be taxed based on the costs to repair the environmental damage that has to be cleaned up and the costs of mitigating their impacts. In this respect, fossil fuels are far more expensive and should be taxed at a higher rate that reflects their true costs of use.
Er, we do tax fossil fuels, massively. You know that, right?
Why is this a problem? Renewables are cheaper, right, so they'll just win in the market? That's what I keep hearing here?
>> but to regular users, the address format is the biggest hurdle to adoption. That's OK. Regular users don't need to do anything with an IP address.
Except tell them to websites and services that have inadvertently blocked them.
And sometimes, if they are super helpful, provide them to developers who are troubleshooting issues ...
...
Hands don't get pregnant.
So quit trying four or five times a day.
If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.