...it still doesn't fix one of the number one flaws with GMail which is this: if GMail is going to group everything into conversations, why does it still have separate Inbox and Send Items folders? Basically, Inbox now just means "Everything where someone has sent you something", and "Sent Items" means "Mostly the same as the Inbox, plus a few times you sent an email but never got a reply."
The look and feel? It's OK. It doesn't show off MD to its best potential, but it's good enough. I had no problems finding anything, and some of the features, such as associating actions with the emails themselves, were well done.
Trends tend to suggest this is possible. We've gone from MPEG 1/2 to H.265 in about 25 years, with the latter being capable of compressing content at a higher quality to that of the former despite being 1/4 of the size.
Something to think about in general: While 300Mbps is inline with 4K Blu-ray, which has a ceiling of about 80Mbps (4x80 = 320Mbps, 4x4K=8K), videos rarely need to be compressed at that maximum rate to look effectively perfect. Most of the time the bit rate can be much lower, typically 1/3 of the maximum, it just needs the higher rates to be available when the need arises.
So even if there are no improvements on H.265 in the near future (AV1 is supposed to already be an improvement), it's possible that, with suitable buffering, a 100Mbps media channel would be more than capable of providing a high quality 8K video signal.
There's your problem. The judges disagreed and felt that $25 was likely.
TBH, while I intensely dislike Windows and would discourage its use if I ever owned my own business, the reality is that the software definitely has a market value of more than $0. Whether it's $25 is up in the air, but the aim was to make old hardware functional, presumably with "functional" being defined as "being capable of running Windows applications"; at the very least, the value of the operating system would be tied to what it would cost to replace the old hardware with equivalent functionality.
More likely, your Firefox install is messed up, and his was too until he went to about:config and changed media.autoplay.enabled to false.
Unfortunately, some websites are so sure the browser is going to autoplay their videos that they don't bother coding for browsers that aren't, because some programmers are assholes.
What I think is more interesting there is if Pangaea was less of a host to civilized life than the modern day continents, simply by virtue of the fact that presumably non-specialized life would only have found it easy to flourish in a band around the edge.
Probably will never happen. While I disagree with the thesis that there's anything wrong with 16:9 laptops, the market does tend to go in directions that have nothing to do with utility or usefulness. Or is someone out there selling $100-200 Android phones with three day battery lives and slide out keyboards, with a headset jack and two USB ports and an HDMI out, that's thick enough both support this functionality and not suffer cracked screens due to flexing?
When the "thin laptop" craze started in the late 1990s and early 2000s, I was disappointed. Up until then the trend had been to create small laptops that were worthy desktop replacements. The Thinkpads came with three bays right under the keyboard allowing users to quickly swap drives and batteries. They were thicker than today's laptops (around 2") but were otherwise almost as small as a Netbook, and fit comfortably in a backpack or briefcase. But someone decided that flexibility and battery life was far less important than being able to use the laptop to cut tomatoes, and that was the end of that.
The complaint here is not about DLC per-se (which I know some people have objections to, but honestly I don't see the problem), it's about loot boxes specifically, which are a form of gambling. Given the amounts of money people are encouraged to spend, it's a problem.
I understood it full well. Getting rid of the SIM slot makes it harder to change carriers. The entire point of the SIM slot is to make changing carriers easier. The second half of your comment bears no relationship to Verizon et al's opposition to eSIM.
Verizon and co colluded to prevent people from switching from easily changed SIM cards to some electronic system that'd make it harder to switch carriers? Verizon?
And now they're being sued for being anti-competitive?
Is this bizarro world?
*checks who the President is*
Oh wait, yes, yes it is. We're in the worst timeline, which means somehow Verizon has temporarily become one of the good guys. Weird.
Is your position that Waze is able to predict that routing people via the "shortcut" will result in everyone being 30 minutes late, or is it that Waze will detect when the traffic it's diverted to the "shortcut" is now taking 30 minutes longer, and will stop routing traffic that way until it clears up?
I doubt the former is true. That'd take some advanced knowledge of traffic behavior to a level I'm not sure is practical. So I suspect the second is actually the case, in which case yes, the Waze app will cause traffic jams as the GP proposed. In fact, I suspect the situation is worse if you're correct and it'll do real time routing, as it'll probably end up creating a feedback effect and create multiple back ups on multiple routes.
I think most people who do tax evasion are just trying to be richer, they're not doing so to make a statement against the government. Rape, on the other hand, does appear to be about power - it might involve a supposedly sexual act, but it's not "sex" given sex is pretty much a two person thing. Reportedly many (most?) rapists don't even show signs of arousal during the attack, and the attack is frequently done primarily with objects, not the attacker's genitalia.
True. This is basically a repeat of the Assault Weapons Ban but with the parties reversed. The Republicans will get stick for it (as the Democrats did the AWB, despite it having near unanimous Republican support), but in practice everyone voted for it because nobody wants to be seen to be "for" sex trafficking, even if it's a stupid bill that hurts more innocent people than guilty.
Thank God you posted that and debunked the GP's comment, otherwise millions of people, perhaps even billions,might have thought the summary really was referring to a flasher. Thank you so much for your commitment to getting the truth out there.
The squishy stuff in the middle that you like to read doesn't fix the glaring non sequitur.
1. There is no non-sequitur. The complaint of the GP was that the two lines contradicted one another. Just as you just repeated.
2. Yes, it fixes the supposed contradiction between the two assertions. Completely. 100%. How are you not seeing that? Stallman isn't arguing that a law can be passed in the current environment, he's arguing that social reform is needed to ensure politicians are elected who don't pass laws that are corrupt, and then that once this is done we can finally pass laws to solve real problems.
It's not hard. You and the GP are just idiots who want to bash Stallman for the sake of bashing him.
If that were true it's just as stupid, he's aiming to have a car designed for him that will only accept the most accurately built parts without failing. But it reads as a boast to me.
second: trying to hit the specs as exactly as possible doesn't mean the design can't tolerate less precision, it just means it looks better if everything fits exactly as designed
That's not what he's saying. He's saying the design will REQUIRE those poor tolerances. He's talking about the design of the vehicle, not their goal when it comes to making the parts.
The quote was: "Our car needs to be designed and built with such accuracy and precision that, if an owner measures dimensions, panel gaps and flushness, and their measurements don't match the Model 3 specs, it just means that their measuring tape is wrong."
I really, really, hope it's a forgery. But like I say, the man's pronouncements on transit makes me think he really would say something like this. Hope I'm wrong.
I see the problem, it's that you've selectively quoted the interview and missed out gobs of context, including the fact that he believes we need wholesale social reform.
I should probably add that this would make me think the memo is bogus, if it wasn't for the fact that, well, Musk's public nonsense about transit makes me think he's the kind of person who would mansplain to a bunch of engineers something completely and totally ridiculous. Hopefully my fears are misplaced, and the memo is fake.
He has no tolerance for sane engineering. This quote:
Our car needs to be designed and built with such accuracy and precision that, if an owner measures dimensions, panel gaps and flushness, and their measurements don't match the Model 3 specs, it just means that their measuring tape is wrong.
is not a boast despite how its worded (and what Musk obviously thinks.) It's an admission they fucked up. Designing something so it has poor tolerances is a bug, not a feature. It means the design is shitty. It means you've multiplied the possibilities of failure.
He might as well boast about a computer that requires "only the most advanced cooling system known to man", or a book "with binding so advanced that merely turning the pages too quickly will cause the papers to fall out."
Not exactly the same thing, my concept is (1) massively distributed, and (2) aimed at eradicating autoplaying video, not ads (which I have no inherent objection to.)
I have been planning to work on a "Nuclear option" Firefox plug-in for a while, which would do this:
1. It'd detect whether a video is trying to autoplay.
2. If one is, it'd do some checks against a whitelist or something similar to see if the video is legit (ie "Well, he's on YouTube, of course he'd want to watch the video", "Well, in fairness the link that brought him to this page had the word "video" or "watch" in it", etc.)
3. If there's no good reason to think the autoplay is legitimate, then, after verifying with the user (one final check), the plugin would:
- Share the link with every other user of the same plugin
- Every single node attached to this network would then download the page in the background, detect the ads, and simulate clicks on them. Multiple times.
I'm pretty sure sites finding they're unable to accept advertising any more due to advertisers being given clearly bogus click stats would kill pretty much all of the worst offenders, and scare the shit out of anyone planning to do this in future.
I have no written this thing yet. But if this carries on, I will.
It's not just advertisers. Who else is fed up with clicking on a news link only for it to start playing a 720P autoplaying video version of the same article that's already written below it? The web isn't a fucking television you stupid fuckers. Offer people a video if they want one, but don't shove this bandwidth sucking loud piece of shit I never asked for, that takes longer to consume than the writing below it, on me. Assholes.
Slashdot Mirror
The look and feel? It's OK. It doesn't show off MD to its best potential, but it's good enough. I had no problems finding anything, and some of the features, such as associating actions with the emails themselves, were well done.
Trends tend to suggest this is possible. We've gone from MPEG 1/2 to H.265 in about 25 years, with the latter being capable of compressing content at a higher quality to that of the former despite being 1/4 of the size.
Something to think about in general: While 300Mbps is inline with 4K Blu-ray, which has a ceiling of about 80Mbps (4x80 = 320Mbps, 4x4K=8K), videos rarely need to be compressed at that maximum rate to look effectively perfect. Most of the time the bit rate can be much lower, typically 1/3 of the maximum, it just needs the higher rates to be available when the need arises.
So even if there are no improvements on H.265 in the near future (AV1 is supposed to already be an improvement), it's possible that, with suitable buffering, a 100Mbps media channel would be more than capable of providing a high quality 8K video signal.
There's your problem. The judges disagreed and felt that $25 was likely.
TBH, while I intensely dislike Windows and would discourage its use if I ever owned my own business, the reality is that the software definitely has a market value of more than $0. Whether it's $25 is up in the air, but the aim was to make old hardware functional, presumably with "functional" being defined as "being capable of running Windows applications"; at the very least, the value of the operating system would be tied to what it would cost to replace the old hardware with equivalent functionality.
More likely, your Firefox install is messed up, and his was too until he went to about:config and changed media.autoplay.enabled to false.
Unfortunately, some websites are so sure the browser is going to autoplay their videos that they don't bother coding for browsers that aren't, because some programmers are assholes.
HBO and Amazon Prime do much the same thing.
Near water isn't really a static thing. Pangaea started to break up only about 175M years ago.
What I think is more interesting there is if Pangaea was less of a host to civilized life than the modern day continents, simply by virtue of the fact that presumably non-specialized life would only have found it easy to flourish in a band around the edge.
Probably will never happen. While I disagree with the thesis that there's anything wrong with 16:9 laptops, the market does tend to go in directions that have nothing to do with utility or usefulness. Or is someone out there selling $100-200 Android phones with three day battery lives and slide out keyboards, with a headset jack and two USB ports and an HDMI out, that's thick enough both support this functionality and not suffer cracked screens due to flexing?
When the "thin laptop" craze started in the late 1990s and early 2000s, I was disappointed. Up until then the trend had been to create small laptops that were worthy desktop replacements. The Thinkpads came with three bays right under the keyboard allowing users to quickly swap drives and batteries. They were thicker than today's laptops (around 2") but were otherwise almost as small as a Netbook, and fit comfortably in a backpack or briefcase. But someone decided that flexibility and battery life was far less important than being able to use the laptop to cut tomatoes, and that was the end of that.
The complaint here is not about DLC per-se (which I know some people have objections to, but honestly I don't see the problem), it's about loot boxes specifically, which are a form of gambling. Given the amounts of money people are encouraged to spend, it's a problem.
I understood it full well. Getting rid of the SIM slot makes it harder to change carriers. The entire point of the SIM slot is to make changing carriers easier. The second half of your comment bears no relationship to Verizon et al's opposition to eSIM.
Verizon and co colluded to prevent people from switching from easily changed SIM cards to some electronic system that'd make it harder to switch carriers? Verizon?
And now they're being sued for being anti-competitive?
Is this bizarro world?
*checks who the President is*
Oh wait, yes, yes it is. We're in the worst timeline, which means somehow Verizon has temporarily become one of the good guys. Weird.
Is your position that Waze is able to predict that routing people via the "shortcut" will result in everyone being 30 minutes late, or is it that Waze will detect when the traffic it's diverted to the "shortcut" is now taking 30 minutes longer, and will stop routing traffic that way until it clears up?
I doubt the former is true. That'd take some advanced knowledge of traffic behavior to a level I'm not sure is practical. So I suspect the second is actually the case, in which case yes, the Waze app will cause traffic jams as the GP proposed. In fact, I suspect the situation is worse if you're correct and it'll do real time routing, as it'll probably end up creating a feedback effect and create multiple back ups on multiple routes.
I think most people who do tax evasion are just trying to be richer, they're not doing so to make a statement against the government. Rape, on the other hand, does appear to be about power - it might involve a supposedly sexual act, but it's not "sex" given sex is pretty much a two person thing. Reportedly many (most?) rapists don't even show signs of arousal during the attack, and the attack is frequently done primarily with objects, not the attacker's genitalia.
True. This is basically a repeat of the Assault Weapons Ban but with the parties reversed. The Republicans will get stick for it (as the Democrats did the AWB, despite it having near unanimous Republican support), but in practice everyone voted for it because nobody wants to be seen to be "for" sex trafficking, even if it's a stupid bill that hurts more innocent people than guilty.
Does it issue damages proportional to the number of times the plaintiff got angry, or, I guess, to put it another way, per-fume?
I'm guessing this is the perfect court to raise a stink about ad blockers.
Thank God you posted that and debunked the GP's comment, otherwise millions of people, perhaps even billions,might have thought the summary really was referring to a flasher. Thank you so much for your commitment to getting the truth out there.
While I agree with you, Amazon's competitors treat their employees like shit too. So, given that, I buy from Amazon anyway.
1. There is no non-sequitur. The complaint of the GP was that the two lines contradicted one another. Just as you just repeated.
2. Yes, it fixes the supposed contradiction between the two assertions. Completely. 100%. How are you not seeing that? Stallman isn't arguing that a law can be passed in the current environment, he's arguing that social reform is needed to ensure politicians are elected who don't pass laws that are corrupt, and then that once this is done we can finally pass laws to solve real problems.
It's not hard. You and the GP are just idiots who want to bash Stallman for the sake of bashing him.
If that were true it's just as stupid, he's aiming to have a car designed for him that will only accept the most accurately built parts without failing. But it reads as a boast to me.
That's not what he's saying. He's saying the design will REQUIRE those poor tolerances. He's talking about the design of the vehicle, not their goal when it comes to making the parts.
The quote was: "Our car needs to be designed and built with such accuracy and precision that, if an owner measures dimensions, panel gaps and flushness, and their measurements don't match the Model 3 specs, it just means that their measuring tape is wrong."
I really, really, hope it's a forgery. But like I say, the man's pronouncements on transit makes me think he really would say something like this. Hope I'm wrong.
I see the problem, it's that you've selectively quoted the interview and missed out gobs of context, including the fact that he believes we need wholesale social reform.
I should probably add that this would make me think the memo is bogus, if it wasn't for the fact that, well, Musk's public nonsense about transit makes me think he's the kind of person who would mansplain to a bunch of engineers something completely and totally ridiculous. Hopefully my fears are misplaced, and the memo is fake.
is not a boast despite how its worded (and what Musk obviously thinks.) It's an admission they fucked up. Designing something so it has poor tolerances is a bug, not a feature. It means the design is shitty. It means you've multiplied the possibilities of failure.
He might as well boast about a computer that requires "only the most advanced cooling system known to man", or a book "with binding so advanced that merely turning the pages too quickly will cause the papers to fall out."
Not exactly the same thing, my concept is (1) massively distributed, and (2) aimed at eradicating autoplaying video, not ads (which I have no inherent objection to.)
I have been planning to work on a "Nuclear option" Firefox plug-in for a while, which would do this:
1. It'd detect whether a video is trying to autoplay.
2. If one is, it'd do some checks against a whitelist or something similar to see if the video is legit (ie "Well, he's on YouTube, of course he'd want to watch the video", "Well, in fairness the link that brought him to this page had the word "video" or "watch" in it", etc.)
3. If there's no good reason to think the autoplay is legitimate, then, after verifying with the user (one final check), the plugin would:
- Share the link with every other user of the same plugin
- Every single node attached to this network would then download the page in the background, detect the ads, and simulate clicks on them. Multiple times.
I'm pretty sure sites finding they're unable to accept advertising any more due to advertisers being given clearly bogus click stats would kill pretty much all of the worst offenders, and scare the shit out of anyone planning to do this in future.
I have no written this thing yet. But if this carries on, I will.
It's not just advertisers. Who else is fed up with clicking on a news link only for it to start playing a 720P autoplaying video version of the same article that's already written below it? The web isn't a fucking television you stupid fuckers. Offer people a video if they want one, but don't shove this bandwidth sucking loud piece of shit I never asked for, that takes longer to consume than the writing below it, on me. Assholes.