So what you're saying is ZTE is Too Big to Fail? Except last I remember that term was used to describe some American companies which nearly caused the entire economy of the greatest nation on earth to implode.
Is it really so hard to CONTINUE to carry that thing
The thing fundamentally changes properties. Would you put a banana in your backpack? Probably. Why not. Would you put a half eaten banana with bruised leftovers in your backpack along with the open peel? Probably not, not unless you planned ahead with additional ways to manage the waste that fundamentally changed during the course of time.
Seriously.... you came in with it.... you can leave with it....
Indeed you can. Or you can put it in the provided bins... or at least you could before the orange-utan in the whitehouse fucked that up too.
No firewall was broken here. NAT is NOT a firewall and should NOT be considered as a security measure.
The fundamental purpose of UPnP is to open ports through routing gear. Your claim that no firewall is broken here is a distinction without a difference for the consumer whose sole device incorporates the firewall and NAT in the same piece of equipment managed by a common UPnP interface.
As for NAT being NOT a firewall, I caution against the use of capitals. NAT may not be a firewall in a fundamental sense but without statefull packet inspection and with a lack of knowledge of what to do with incoming packets that don't match any current states or any current routing rules it behaves identically to a firewall for all intents and purposes, albeit a very simple one.
Firewall like behaviour is not a side-effect of NAT. NAT is side-effect of certain firewall features.
A modern cheapass class D amp outperforms probably 99% of systems if not more from that era.
If by 99% you mean 99% of produce units then I agree. Even in the old days garbage systems existed. If you mean 99% of models designed you would be very VERY wrong. Cheaparse class D has nothing on even midrange amplifiers from the 80s.
It's hard to build high power analog with high linearity, low crssover low distortion etc. Like really hard.
No it's really easy. Compared to a class D amplifier it is incredibly trivial by comparison. The problem was Class-A amplifiers were inefficient and thus good ones at any considerable power doubled as space heaters and served to anchor the house to the ground during a hurricane.
Now making a classic amplifier like you described that fits in the palm of your hand, THAT is hard. However the reality is people didn't need high power. Not in the past, not now. The fascination with marketing power was a curious quirk and some of the best amplifiers every released fall in the sub 100W category which was more than enough to make the neighbours call the police on you.
People started to value convenience over quality. MP3s on shitty earbuds became the standard
Sorry but by the time this started happening music was compress, manufactured and generally devoid of any quality or dynamic range. People moved to convenience because they found it didn't make shit sound any worse than it already did.
No. People buy shitty inferior sound formats because record industries have decided to fuck up the releases on technically superior formats rendering the shitty inferior ones as the better product.
I was actually quite happy when the industry ignored vinyl, however recently there's more interest in that, expect the industry to fuck up this format now too. And then there's the recently industry trend of vinyl only special editions with never before released tracks.
Renaissance fairs are big in Europe? I think you'll find that they're mostly a US phenomenon.
You'd be wrong. And the wonderful part about renaissance fairs in Europe is that we have actual medieval towns in which to hold them. It's quite a different experience having a renaissance fair in a football field in a US city vs in the Abbey of Echternach in Luxembourg.
You can also buy "raw water" for $20 a gallon, but that doesn't mean it's better.
Better than what? "better" is a comparative term. You need to compare it to something else. RAW water isn't good for you to drink, but as someone who has just recovered from a gut infection from a trip to a 3rd world country I would have greatly appreciated having RAW water instead of whatever was used to wash or clean the things I ate that got me sick.
Records suck compared to CD. Technically they do in every way. However we have a lot of evidence that vinyl goes through a different mastering process than a traditional CD, and in this process it can result in a superior sound and thus in specific circumstances be "better". Not better technically, but better in the only way that matters.
analog is for hipsters OR for those who have exceptional analog systems
And those who find that some of the only decent masters were exclusive to vinyl and tape while the mass produced CD got trashed in the name of loudness.
Yeah, I wonder that too. Anyone who buys a set like this has likely invested real money in a sound system that's separate from the TV itself.
Unlikely. It's amazing: a) the number of people who don't give a shit about sound. b) the number of people who would prioritize a minimalistic living room over sound (see the whole reason sound bars exist). c) the number of people who buy TVs to glue them on a wall and complain enough about the space taken up by their cable box underneath.
Okay -- I'm trying to picture someone who has the kinda of deep pockets to be able to afford an 88", 8k TV set, but who needs to use the internal speakers because they can't afford a proper surround sound receiver and speakers.
Yeah sure plenty of cases. You see proper surround sound receivers and speakers are thick. Quite thick. The better the sound, the thicker it is. There is a huge market out there for the "wife friendly" home system which is how these damn soundbars became so popular in the first place.
LG's 88" screen is about a thick as an iPad would look frigging awesome hung up on a wall somewhere. The same can not be said for a decent surround sound system.
(Though personally any woman who considers a soundsystem based on it's looks rather than it's sound need not apply with me)
What the hell are you talking about? There's plenty of 4K content. Not only is nearly every release getting a 4K version, but they are rapidly backfilling the catalogue with remasters too.
Then there's Netflix and other streaming content available in 4K too.
makes me sad that a great piece of nature can't stay clean for a few days unless there are paid people who clean up after the visitors - the real trash are the humans leaving their trash behind.
If you see the examples in TFA about the National Mall, it's not that people are trash for leaving trash behind, it's that the dedicated bins to leave said trash are actually being used as expected by normal decent people, but are not being emptied and thus are overflowing with garbage.
Yeah there's some grubs out there, but in this case the people attempting to do the right thing are unable to do it.
I could give two shits and a fuck about walking around and enjoying "nature"
If you could give a shit then why aren't you in support of the ban? I on the other hand could not give a shit about your noisy irritating photography hobby.
It's all guess work. CEOs don't have some magic power to separate out sales with 100% precision.
No, it's all legal distinction. You're right CEOs don't have magic power and therefore they should not make the claims they did. Shit happens, they'll learn to be more careful in their quarterly earnings reports next time.
The fact Nvidia was wrong doesn't make them frauds.
That depends entirely on precisely how they said that "wrong" thing. When you say you're guessing at something it pays off not to specifically mention exactly what and why something will happen. Specifically don't say your Gaming sales are strong and growing at a rate that will ensure the channel remains optimal when the crypto crash happens. Don't then go on to double down on the claim by saying you're masters at managing a channel.
But whatever man, it's not up to you or me to decide who made a fraudulent claim. Unless you're the presiding judge on this case, but I seriously doubt that.
Please link to the fraudulent statement so I can point out where your reading comprehension failed.
Jeesh some people need to be spoon fed. Why not follow the links in TFA through to the actual legal filing?
"Specifically, defendants: (1) assured investors that NVIDIA followed the market closely and could adjust to rapid changes in the cryptocurrency markets; (2) touted that NVIDIA and its executives are “masters at managing our channel, and we understand the channel very well.”; and (3) assured investors that surging demand for graphics processing units (“GPUs”) among cryptocurrency miners would not have a negative impact on NVIDIA because of strong demand for GPUs by NVIDIA’s core customer base of computer gamers. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages."
He's posted the same claim 5 times. If that doesn't make something a fact...
If you counted you'd notice I didn't post 5 times. If you paid attention in several of my posts I cited the source. If you're at all willing to advance yourself rather than just post shit you'd google it and self educate on the topic too you'll very quickly come up with lots of articles all pointing to a study of waste from rivers which made the original claim that 90% of the waste *from rivers* comes from just 10 rivers and footnotes saying that makes up 1/5 to 1/4 of the total waste depending on which other study you choose. Now go forth and learn.
Err all over the place. The world has a large and damn dirty coastline, we dump a fuckton of waste from ships. Storms carry garbage from land to sea. Like it or not, we as a species are fucking grubs.
Gladly. Shithole nations are followers in every way. We brought them technology, products, processes, and money by the bucketload. The Vietnamese who are pouring mountains of plastic into the ocean didn't invent these, they were introduced to them by western nations.
As such pointing the finger to their waste without demonstrating a suitable alternative is disingenuous. They learnt to drink from plastic bottles from us, it's up to us to demonstrate that they can live without it too.
Despite my flippant comment the USA still is the most powerful nation in the world. Do not underestimate the amount of influence it has on waste from these countries. And despite my comment I don't call out USA alone here. All western nations have a role to play, not the least those such as Australia who actively exported their plastic waste to they very countries which are accused of polluting the oceans with it.
We should once again become the leaders we have always claimed to be.
In English, many past and present participles of verbs can be used as adjectives.
So we've gone full circle to your original post. I deduct a further 2 points from your original post as you disproved your own complaint about the adjective use of "depreciated".
Slashdot Mirror
So what you're saying is ZTE is Too Big to Fail? Except last I remember that term was used to describe some American companies which nearly caused the entire economy of the greatest nation on earth to implode.
I guess a few drives would be enough to backup all the devices in my home
Huh? You mean you're not on the 6K porn bandwagon yet?
Is it really so hard to CONTINUE to carry that thing
The thing fundamentally changes properties. Would you put a banana in your backpack? Probably. Why not. Would you put a half eaten banana with bruised leftovers in your backpack along with the open peel? Probably not, not unless you planned ahead with additional ways to manage the waste that fundamentally changed during the course of time.
Seriously.... you came in with it.... you can leave with it....
Indeed you can. Or you can put it in the provided bins... or at least you could before the orange-utan in the whitehouse fucked that up too.
In a park, you're bringing trash with you
In some parks. In many you're just as able to buy stuff there.
No firewall was broken here. NAT is NOT a firewall and should NOT be considered as a security measure.
The fundamental purpose of UPnP is to open ports through routing gear. Your claim that no firewall is broken here is a distinction without a difference for the consumer whose sole device incorporates the firewall and NAT in the same piece of equipment managed by a common UPnP interface.
As for NAT being NOT a firewall, I caution against the use of capitals. NAT may not be a firewall in a fundamental sense but without statefull packet inspection and with a lack of knowledge of what to do with incoming packets that don't match any current states or any current routing rules it behaves identically to a firewall for all intents and purposes, albeit a very simple one.
Firewall like behaviour is not a side-effect of NAT. NAT is side-effect of certain firewall features.
A modern cheapass class D amp outperforms probably 99% of systems if not more from that era.
If by 99% you mean 99% of produce units then I agree. Even in the old days garbage systems existed. If you mean 99% of models designed you would be very VERY wrong. Cheaparse class D has nothing on even midrange amplifiers from the 80s.
It's hard to build high power analog with high linearity, low crssover low distortion etc. Like really hard.
No it's really easy. Compared to a class D amplifier it is incredibly trivial by comparison. The problem was Class-A amplifiers were inefficient and thus good ones at any considerable power doubled as space heaters and served to anchor the house to the ground during a hurricane.
Now making a classic amplifier like you described that fits in the palm of your hand, THAT is hard. However the reality is people didn't need high power. Not in the past, not now. The fascination with marketing power was a curious quirk and some of the best amplifiers every released fall in the sub 100W category which was more than enough to make the neighbours call the police on you.
People started to value convenience over quality. MP3s on shitty earbuds became the standard
Sorry but by the time this started happening music was compress, manufactured and generally devoid of any quality or dynamic range. People moved to convenience because they found it didn't make shit sound any worse than it already did.
But let's face it, we all know the only real way to get good sound it to play Guitar Hero: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
No. People buy shitty inferior sound formats because record industries have decided to fuck up the releases on technically superior formats rendering the shitty inferior ones as the better product.
I was actually quite happy when the industry ignored vinyl, however recently there's more interest in that, expect the industry to fuck up this format now too. And then there's the recently industry trend of vinyl only special editions with never before released tracks.
Renaissance fairs are big in Europe? I think you'll find that they're mostly a US phenomenon.
You'd be wrong. And the wonderful part about renaissance fairs in Europe is that we have actual medieval towns in which to hold them. It's quite a different experience having a renaissance fair in a football field in a US city vs in the Abbey of Echternach in Luxembourg.
You can also buy "raw water" for $20 a gallon, but that doesn't mean it's better.
Better than what? "better" is a comparative term. You need to compare it to something else. RAW water isn't good for you to drink, but as someone who has just recovered from a gut infection from a trip to a 3rd world country I would have greatly appreciated having RAW water instead of whatever was used to wash or clean the things I ate that got me sick.
Records suck compared to CD. Technically they do in every way. However we have a lot of evidence that vinyl goes through a different mastering process than a traditional CD, and in this process it can result in a superior sound and thus in specific circumstances be "better". Not better technically, but better in the only way that matters.
analog is for hipsters OR for those who have exceptional analog systems
And those who find that some of the only decent masters were exclusive to vinyl and tape while the mass produced CD got trashed in the name of loudness.
Yeah, I wonder that too. Anyone who buys a set like this has likely invested real money in a sound system that's separate from the TV itself.
Unlikely. It's amazing:
a) the number of people who don't give a shit about sound.
b) the number of people who would prioritize a minimalistic living room over sound (see the whole reason sound bars exist).
c) the number of people who buy TVs to glue them on a wall and complain enough about the space taken up by their cable box underneath.
Okay -- I'm trying to picture someone who has the kinda of deep pockets to be able to afford an 88", 8k TV set, but who needs to use the internal speakers because they can't afford a proper surround sound receiver and speakers.
Yeah sure plenty of cases. You see proper surround sound receivers and speakers are thick. Quite thick. The better the sound, the thicker it is. There is a huge market out there for the "wife friendly" home system which is how these damn soundbars became so popular in the first place.
LG's 88" screen is about a thick as an iPad would look frigging awesome hung up on a wall somewhere. The same can not be said for a decent surround sound system.
(Though personally any woman who considers a soundsystem based on it's looks rather than it's sound need not apply with me)
when barely anyone makes media for 4k.
What the hell are you talking about? There's plenty of 4K content. Not only is nearly every release getting a 4K version, but they are rapidly backfilling the catalogue with remasters too.
Then there's Netflix and other streaming content available in 4K too.
Apple doesn't build TVs.
No, they build very expensive gadgets that plug into TVs and offer this functionality. They will lose customers to Samsung with this.
If Apple is loosening the reins on its AirPlay streaming, it makes me wonder if they’re planning to kill off the Apple TV soon.
Personally I hope they kill iTunes.
makes me sad that a great piece of nature can't stay clean for a few days unless there are paid people who clean up after the visitors - the real trash are the humans leaving their trash behind.
If you see the examples in TFA about the National Mall, it's not that people are trash for leaving trash behind, it's that the dedicated bins to leave said trash are actually being used as expected by normal decent people, but are not being emptied and thus are overflowing with garbage.
Yeah there's some grubs out there, but in this case the people attempting to do the right thing are unable to do it.
I could give two shits and a fuck about walking around and enjoying "nature"
If you could give a shit then why aren't you in support of the ban? I on the other hand could not give a shit about your noisy irritating photography hobby.
It's all guess work. CEOs don't have some magic power to separate out sales with 100% precision.
No, it's all legal distinction. You're right CEOs don't have magic power and therefore they should not make the claims they did. Shit happens, they'll learn to be more careful in their quarterly earnings reports next time.
The fact Nvidia was wrong doesn't make them frauds.
That depends entirely on precisely how they said that "wrong" thing. When you say you're guessing at something it pays off not to specifically mention exactly what and why something will happen. Specifically don't say your Gaming sales are strong and growing at a rate that will ensure the channel remains optimal when the crypto crash happens. Don't then go on to double down on the claim by saying you're masters at managing a channel.
But whatever man, it's not up to you or me to decide who made a fraudulent claim. Unless you're the presiding judge on this case, but I seriously doubt that.
Please link to the fraudulent statement so I can point out where your reading comprehension failed.
Jeesh some people need to be spoon fed. Why not follow the links in TFA through to the actual legal filing?
"Specifically, defendants: (1) assured investors that NVIDIA followed the market closely and could adjust to rapid changes in the cryptocurrency markets; (2) touted that NVIDIA and its executives are “masters at managing our channel, and we understand the channel very well.”; and (3) assured investors that surging demand for graphics processing units (“GPUs”) among cryptocurrency miners would not have a negative impact on NVIDIA because of strong demand for GPUs by NVIDIA’s core customer base of computer gamers. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages."
Want to do your own legal analysis http://investor.nvidia.com/ Go your hardest.
It's just that everyone got used to the way Adobe does it.
No. It's that everyone *adopted* it.
He's posted the same claim 5 times. If that doesn't make something a fact...
If you counted you'd notice I didn't post 5 times. If you paid attention in several of my posts I cited the source. If you're at all willing to advance yourself rather than just post shit you'd google it and self educate on the topic too you'll very quickly come up with lots of articles all pointing to a study of waste from rivers which made the original claim that 90% of the waste *from rivers* comes from just 10 rivers and footnotes saying that makes up 1/5 to 1/4 of the total waste depending on which other study you choose. Now go forth and learn.
Where is the rest of the plastic coming from?
Err all over the place. The world has a large and damn dirty coastline, we dump a fuckton of waste from ships. Storms carry garbage from land to sea. Like it or not, we as a species are fucking grubs.
You're gonna have to explain that.
Gladly. Shithole nations are followers in every way. We brought them technology, products, processes, and money by the bucketload. The Vietnamese who are pouring mountains of plastic into the ocean didn't invent these, they were introduced to them by western nations.
As such pointing the finger to their waste without demonstrating a suitable alternative is disingenuous. They learnt to drink from plastic bottles from us, it's up to us to demonstrate that they can live without it too.
Despite my flippant comment the USA still is the most powerful nation in the world. Do not underestimate the amount of influence it has on waste from these countries. And despite my comment I don't call out USA alone here. All western nations have a role to play, not the least those such as Australia who actively exported their plastic waste to they very countries which are accused of polluting the oceans with it.
We should once again become the leaders we have always claimed to be.
In English, many past and present participles of verbs can be used as adjectives.
So we've gone full circle to your original post. I deduct a further 2 points from your original post as you disproved your own complaint about the adjective use of "depreciated".