He doesn't yet know, but the day (if ever comes) that we can understand everything in OUR universe, will be the day you'd be an IDIOT not to believe in god.
There will be no more magic. Things behave "this" way. Reality is "this" construct that works this way. So fucking what??? That is NOT ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS. And our last source of answers, our last hope of "solving -not-for-god" will be depleted.
Time to be brothers. Untill then, let there be war and despair...
"which couldnt make anything extinct 250000 years ago"
Are we REALLY really _re-a-lly_ reeeeeeaaaaaly s-u-r-e about this? The fact that many species managed to survive is no indication of how much did not survive.
I particularly don't care if we humans survive, if it will mean the end of life as we know it (say for example, enough food). We can be very advanced, but if for any reasons growing crops gets harder we'd be in real trouble feeding 5B humans.
Scholasticus, the church I know plainly states religion is about faith. It can't be proved wrong or right. Some folks may think they have proved god exist or not, but it's 100% clear it's an act of will to believe.
But athists are very happy thinking that because it can't be proved, and since they won't believe anything not to have been proved right, then they are wrong.
God exists or does not. It doesn't what we believe so it's perfectly feasible for atheists to be blatantly wrong, and ignoring what God mandates.
So why do you blame people that don't believe the apollo mission was faked? They haven't PROVED it, and they refuse to believe in that.
SO I'd say you are in the same boat that creationists are. You just believe it, and nobody has proved you wrong (and even that is irrelevant if you don't agree with the "evidence").
And efficient low voltage CPU means nothing if you monitor and HD eat a high share of your batteries. The agregate "power saving" of using a crusoe instead of a low die underclocked pentium is negligible.
If any other company could deliver a really low power display, and a really low power bus/memory then things would be completely different.
If a miracle happens and very low power displays and storage is achived, transmeta could make a real difference. The bad thing is that in this case, probably a low power pentium could also deliver what the consumer wants (ie: if you can have your tablet on for 2 days with pantium and 4 with a crusoe, both good be prety usefull. Who needs the 2 extra days).
They are doomed, they should focus on teaming with whoever is trying to lower power consumption of the other devices, and focus on the flexibility of the crusoe in the meantime.
"Creationists... belong in exactly the same camp as the... Holocaust-deniers.".
You seem to be more Nazi than the Nazi, putting people into places without any explanation needed. Why should everyone that believes life on earth is not 100% coincidence in all aspects have to be aligned with Holocaust-deniers?
Holocaust-non-deniers are also having their little Holocaust at palestitians, which they also deny.
Now, I do not know if the first moon landing was true. I have 90% confidence it was true, though I cannot completely rule out that it was a fake. I will act as if it's true because there's not enough evidence to not believe it.
Whatever you or I believe or think we have proven will not change facts. What happened was and no amount of "your proving" is change that.
You actually start believing in cospiracy tales only after you have access to certain sources in the grand scheme of things. I know this myself, though I would admit 90% of the conspiracy theories are complete BS, there is significat amount of them that are not.
A lot of widows and orphans had their retirement accounts with investment houses that hold large amounts of Netscape, Lotus and Novel stocks.
Microsoft torn them appart by illegaly abusing a monopoly position, and their stocks droped like a rock.
How many widows and orphans own stock of good companies that have/are seing/will see their revenue streams destroyed because Microsoft leverages their monopoly position?
Your post strikes my as non insightfull... I am not modding it because if preffer to reply (after all, if someone mod it up, there are lots of chance others might agree with him).
Also, I don't know if they have bought or not the DoJ. So I can say they have't, as far as I know. You need to have a little trust. And if you the your representatives not agreeing with you, you'll just need to start educating people and start forming a political group.
The thing is Microsoft can just kill ANY software product that needs a profit to survive. Netscape this or that, could put could not put blah blah. Microsoft doesn't need to argue. They can decide they want Netscape to die and just invest X money on a bundled broswer. That's it, Netscape HAS to close.
So as long as you don't control the entire software bussiness, you are in risk of getting your revenue stream killed by Microsoft. If they REALLY want to, they could kill you. If you depend on a revenue stream, better not get in the way of Microsoft. It doesn't matter how innovative or well done your product is (ICQ, webmail, whatever), they will just put it free.
No wonder why AOL can't make revenues and Microsoft can. Because Micrsoft just needs 2 or 3 products to be sold to compensate ALL the loses in ALL the other fields (read: Office + Windows + some other products pay for everything).
And then they keep on "embracing and extending". That's why they must be stopped. They MUST be split, so they cannot leverage their positions. I lve Windows, I love Office, I love Explorer, I love . But I don't love them leveraging that so wipe competition. I can only lose in the long/mid term.
Simply not true. Money in the bank can be unused. If your economy is growing to fast, you'd see few "idle" bucks at the banks. If your economy is "cold", you'd see a _lot_ of idle money in the bank. Reinforcing these, when investors see that companies earnings at expected to go down, they sell but NOT to buy another hopefully underpriced stock, but to put it in the bank. (Just look at the interest rates falling. And that's also why the fed lowers rates, but they try to lower them beforehand, before people decide to cancel proyect as a countermesure of getting colder than needed. If they cannot prevent the ice formation, at least there is less incentive to sit the money on bacnks, and olso the projects VAN is measured against this rate).
Buy money owners couldn't care less earning less from having the money sitting in the bank, they are now "safe". Also, many projects are canceled in real life, because demand falls and thus you have extra capacity (you only need capital reposition, if anything). So new projects get postponed because of lack of oportunities.
So what would be desirable? To let companies AND people that will NOT sit their own revenues or even wealth. Of course, we all know that these are companies that either do reinvest all their extra earnings and people that consume all their income.
When this start getting cold, you need the "rich" individuals to start spending money (thepoor have already DONE that! They have no choice) and the rich (=very profitable) companies as well (the others are already speding all their income!)
So your argument COULD be not wrong. But it is in fact wrong. People cannot really find very good project to start right now. And the only ones that can decide to use that money ANYWAY are the ones that own that money. That is Microsoft et al (money bank sitters).
If they don't do it, then the goverment must do it. So you can expect a lot of deficit. And many taxes raised (so they can take away profiting power from the profiters that are not spending it, and then Spend It Right Away. Of course, this hurts companies that where not very profitable). Well, all this means inefficiency and can be a very dangerous game.
I don't really know how can people speak SO HIGH when there a lots of capable human beigns unemployed all over the countries, and a lot of factories underutilized. Is this an efficient use of resources?
And no, money is a limited resource only when it is beign used! Not when sitting in banks. (and if you want to force loans at near 0 interest rates and such, you'll see banks collapsing after a while, because loaned money will be used in stupid projects that can't pay the loans back, and the low margin of intermediation will not compensate the loses.).
So no... the right thing to do is not to profit from monopoly and make it sit on the bank for the "goodwill of the US citizen". The thing is to actually have them to use the money. And they don't want that (after all, shareholders can simple just SELL the stock if they want cash).
Freedom has no price. The right tool for humanity is freedom. You can ignore that fact and freeride from the hard work lots of "irrational idiots" that are sacrificing themselves to provide you freedom.
Hey, this is not theoretical. The "right tool for the job" today may have a huge impact in what you can do in the future. Look at the.doc,.xls problem. The right tool for the job costs everyone in the world $400 to just be able to use the standard documents, spreadsheets and presentations.
But your tip is aprecciated, because there will always be people working for your freedom for free.
That's like saying Vans (or make your pick) are unsecure cars because women are atracted to them. Giving uses something as simple as PHP is indeed a problem for them. Even suposedly experienced programmers make a lot of mistakes.
I've sen lots of codes where input was not being validated. And seen data that came through forms beign validated in intermediate steps and not the final one, or FORM info including what "table" to use (jikes).
Everything that can be sold can be though as a service. You think of software as long term investment (infinite stream of service actually). But in reality, it's just like any other good, some have an infinite lifetime (say "Calculator App"), while some others do not (games for example).
Simple example: You sell chess boards. Most people that like chess probably have one or two boards. So after catch up, you sales will only be (at most), newcommers to chess that need a board. That means your sells grow like your population does plus GPD growth (because some poors can now buy the wooden board, let's say). Once everyone is rich enough, you are only left with population growth (everyone else ALREADY has some nice boards).
Also, you have icecreams, you can sell as people feel like tasting. The "installed base" at t+1 is zero.
With software happens the same. You have very volitile "consumer" software and non-volatile "investment" software. So everything depends on what market you are in.
Examples: a computer game (obsoletes) Office: obsoletes slowly Calculator App: does no obsolete
Last thing, software has zero marginal cost, so it is very apealing for non-big-companies to enter this market. If you get it right, you can sell millions of them at no additional cost. Who cares if you can sell the product 10 years from now?
It doesn't have any statistical meaning because it's not hazardous. It probably only means that BSD users do NOT reboot they cumputers often and can get away with it.
It doesn't mean other can't stay online for as long as they want. I am pretty sure most unises can stay for as long as they want or until hacked.
Besides, you do argue a little circularly, before you come up with the decent explanation. If things were fastened down, you'd just assume that gravity could fail, but didn't this time.
Well, if they had things fastened down and gravity wouldn't fail in a critical power loss, then I'd be really _annoyed_.
So they did the wise thing and did NOT fasten stuff. Also, it's wise of them to not do very expensive "features" (like ingravity) that add no content and that could be "almost tolerable" if you can think of a magnet.
Size of screen. I WOULD like to read in the train with these things, download books, browse the newspapers, etc. There's always a way to add a small keyboard when you have the $.
Also, for watching movies in a train, bus, whatever, using it as a portable DVD player, as a portable Audio Center.
It's just a spreamlined PC slim and without big moving parts or lots of cables. Chances are this tables will be widely used when Wireless becomes widespread. Both concepts reinforce themselves.
Would be nice if it had a slot to Dock your (small) PDA and access it in a remote way (ie: as a window in your tablet, and drives mounted as/pda). Very very handy!!
Most people will use to take porn everywhere (bath, office, etc:), so may be usefull for them also:):)
I know, I was just making the distinction because everyone usually quotes average FPS and don't know it's instantaneous FPS what matters. That is, many people think they can feel 100 FPS when they cannot (but some still clearly can).
That's the easiest way, really. And the benefit of having nicely documented DTDs. OO is the true compatibility XML file format for office files.
That's why MS need to have their own. Because if they don't do it, many companies will use OO as a gateway (many not just yet, but soon).
So they have to do XML, plus MS is wanting to integrate Office + Windows Programing + WEB Frontends + EVERYTHING in an interoperable way. They can dictate the standard of what the WORLD will have to use in the future.
They will always be in the middle, and their revenue models will adapt to it just fine. The MS layer if you want to call it.
In practice, it may depend. The key variable is if the FPS are time constant. That is, a movie played back with a good decoder, and assuming it has 86 Fps, you can only see 85 FPS.
For a game, it depends. If for any reason you cannot deliver say, frame 40 of second 1, and you can afterward "process" 46 more frames, you'll only see 84 real frames.
This is what I am talking about. A practical thing. Of course, you will never see more than 85 frames with an 85 hz refresh.
Anyway, some people can tell the difference between a game at 85 hz and 100 hz. It really is irrelevant if you have 85 hz or 100hz. What you are impling is that people that (example) have 15 hz monitors could not tell the difference between 15 hz and let's say 60 hz. Of course they can, you just need a better monitor.
"Aren't companies solely a bunch of people combined by a collective goal?"
Nope...companies are a set of assets owned by the collective shareholders. That includes the services of the people working there, the fixed / var assets, their IP, the brand. The thing is the companies goal is to maximize revenue, all other goals are second class goals.
There's NO unowned company that I know of. If it's not, it's something else.
85 hz has a nice balance. The things is some people can feel the difference. How much you can feel depends on the colors in the (let's say) movie and how much things are panning/sec. Of course, you will need to to have a good monitor that can display 100 hz.
When you talk about games the thing changes quite a lot but for practical reason. If a card benchmark against game X shows and average framerate of 120 FPS, it's likely you'll have at least 80 or 100 in the slowers more dense part of the game. f it shows 83, at some point it will certainly display less than that. This is a practical thing, not that you can see 120 FPS, just that beign able to play a game at 120 average is a good thing for these reasons.
Anyway, 85 hz is pretty good, some people may notice an improvement at 100 hz, but it's not a significaty improvement.
What part of the definition of science makes you think manually managing memory allocation and deallocation is better than having a smart algorithm for handling it?
What school or university did you attend (if any). Could be usefull so tat I know where not to send my kids.
It can feel up to 100 FPS really. I can definetly feel the difference between 50 FPS and 100 FPS. Not like i will miss any detail at 50FS, but at 100 you can be sure you eye "refresh rate" will ALWAYS cat a new frame everytime.
Some people may not notice beyond 60 FPS. Some people do, and 100 feels better for them. More real. Of course, you mostly notice under FPS because they happen at very high speed and everything moves when you make a turn.
Slashdot Mirror
He doesn't yet know, but the day (if ever comes) that we can understand everything in OUR universe, will be the day you'd be an IDIOT not to believe in god.
There will be no more magic. Things behave "this" way. Reality is "this" construct that works this way. So fucking what??? That is NOT ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS. And our last source of answers, our last hope of "solving -not-for-god" will be depleted.
Time to be brothers. Untill then, let there be war and despair...
"which couldnt make anything extinct 250000 years ago"
Are we REALLY really _re-a-lly_ reeeeeeaaaaaly s-u-r-e about this? The fact that many species managed to survive is no indication of how much did not survive.
I particularly don't care if we humans survive, if it will mean the end of life as we know it (say for example, enough food). We can be very advanced, but if for any reasons growing crops gets harder we'd be in real trouble feeding 5B humans.
Scholasticus, the church I know plainly states religion is about faith. It can't be proved wrong or right. Some folks may think they have proved god exist or not, but it's 100% clear it's an act of will to believe.
But athists are very happy thinking that because it can't be proved, and since they won't believe anything not to have been proved right, then they are wrong.
God exists or does not. It doesn't what we believe so it's perfectly feasible for atheists to be blatantly wrong, and ignoring what God mandates.
So why do you blame people that don't believe the apollo mission was faked? They haven't PROVED it, and they refuse to believe in that.
SO I'd say you are in the same boat that creationists are. You just believe it, and nobody has proved you wrong (and even that is irrelevant if you don't agree with the "evidence").
And efficient low voltage CPU means nothing if you monitor and HD eat a high share of your batteries. The agregate "power saving" of using a crusoe instead of a low die underclocked pentium is negligible.
If any other company could deliver a really low power display, and a really low power bus/memory then things would be completely different.
If a miracle happens and very low power displays and storage is achived, transmeta could make a real difference. The bad thing is that in this case, probably a low power pentium could also deliver what the consumer wants (ie: if you can have your tablet on for 2 days with pantium and 4 with a crusoe, both good be prety usefull. Who needs the 2 extra days).
They are doomed, they should focus on teaming with whoever is trying to lower power consumption of the other devices, and focus on the flexibility of the crusoe in the meantime.
"Creationists ... belong in exactly the same camp as the ... Holocaust-deniers.".
You seem to be more Nazi than the Nazi, putting people into places without any explanation needed. Why should everyone that believes life on earth is not 100% coincidence in all aspects have to be aligned with Holocaust-deniers?
Holocaust-non-deniers are also having their little Holocaust at palestitians, which they also deny.
Now, I do not know if the first moon landing was true. I have 90% confidence it was true, though I cannot completely rule out that it was a fake. I will act as if it's true because there's not enough evidence to not believe it.
Whatever you or I believe or think we have proven will not change facts. What happened was and no amount of "your proving" is change that.
You actually start believing in cospiracy tales only after you have access to certain sources in the grand scheme of things. I know this myself, though I would admit 90% of the conspiracy theories are complete BS, there is significat amount of them that are not.
Because they didn't let MS buy it and Quicken has support from finantial institutions (they don't personal finance to be swallowed by MS).
A lot of widows and orphans had their retirement accounts with investment houses that hold large amounts of Netscape, Lotus and Novel stocks.
Microsoft torn them appart by illegaly abusing a monopoly position, and their stocks droped like a rock.
How many widows and orphans own stock of good companies that have/are seing/will see their revenue streams destroyed because Microsoft leverages their monopoly position?
Your post strikes my as non insightfull... I am not modding it because if preffer to reply (after all, if someone mod it up, there are lots of chance others might agree with him).
Also, I don't know if they have bought or not the DoJ. So I can say they have't, as far as I know. You need to have a little trust. And if you the your representatives not agreeing with you, you'll just need to start educating people and start forming a political group.
Complaining and whining doesn't get you anywere.
The thing is Microsoft can just kill ANY software product that needs a profit to survive. Netscape this or that, could put could not put blah blah. Microsoft doesn't need to argue. They can decide they want Netscape to die and just invest X money on a bundled broswer. That's it, Netscape HAS to close.
So as long as you don't control the entire software bussiness, you are in risk of getting your revenue stream killed by Microsoft. If they REALLY want to, they could kill you. If you depend on a revenue stream, better not get in the way of Microsoft. It doesn't matter how innovative or well done your product is (ICQ, webmail, whatever), they will just put it free.
No wonder why AOL can't make revenues and Microsoft can. Because Micrsoft just needs 2 or 3 products to be sold to compensate ALL the loses in ALL the other fields (read: Office + Windows + some other products pay for everything).
And then they keep on "embracing and extending". That's why they must be stopped. They MUST be split, so they cannot leverage their positions. I lve Windows, I love Office, I love Explorer, I love . But I don't love them leveraging that so wipe competition. I can only lose in the long/mid term.
Simply not true. Money in the bank can be unused. If your economy is growing to fast, you'd see few "idle" bucks at the banks. If your economy is "cold", you'd see a _lot_ of idle money in the bank. Reinforcing these, when investors see that companies earnings at expected to go down, they sell but NOT to buy another hopefully underpriced stock, but to put it in the bank. (Just look at the interest rates falling. And that's also why the fed lowers rates, but they try to lower them beforehand, before people decide to cancel proyect as a countermesure of getting colder than needed. If they cannot prevent the ice formation, at least there is less incentive to sit the money on bacnks, and olso the projects VAN is measured against this rate).
Buy money owners couldn't care less earning less from having the money sitting in the bank, they are now "safe". Also, many projects are canceled in real life, because demand falls and thus you have extra capacity (you only need capital reposition, if anything). So new projects get postponed because of lack of oportunities.
So what would be desirable? To let companies AND people that will NOT sit their own revenues or even wealth. Of course, we all know that these are companies that either do reinvest all their extra earnings and people that consume all their income.
When this start getting cold, you need the "rich" individuals to start spending money (thepoor have already DONE that! They have no choice) and the rich (=very profitable) companies as well (the others are already speding all their income!)
So your argument COULD be not wrong. But it is in fact wrong. People cannot really find very good project to start right now. And the only ones that can decide to use that money ANYWAY are the ones that own that money. That is Microsoft et al (money bank sitters).
If they don't do it, then the goverment must do it. So you can expect a lot of deficit. And many taxes raised (so they can take away profiting power from the profiters that are not spending it, and then Spend It Right Away. Of course, this hurts companies that where not very profitable). Well, all this means inefficiency and can be a very dangerous game.
I don't really know how can people speak SO HIGH when there a lots of capable human beigns unemployed all over the countries, and a lot of factories underutilized. Is this an efficient use of resources?
And no, money is a limited resource only when it is beign used! Not when sitting in banks. (and if you want to force loans at near 0 interest rates and such, you'll see banks collapsing after a while, because loaned money will be used in stupid projects that can't pay the loans back, and the low margin of intermediation will not compensate the loses.).
So no... the right thing to do is not to profit from monopoly and make it sit on the bank for the "goodwill of the US citizen". The thing is to actually have them to use the money. And they don't want that (after all, shareholders can simple just SELL the stock if they want cash).
Freedom has no price. The right tool for humanity is freedom. You can ignore that fact and freeride from the hard work lots of "irrational idiots" that are sacrificing themselves to provide you freedom.
.doc, .xls problem. The right tool for the job costs everyone in the world $400 to just be able to use the standard documents, spreadsheets and presentations.
Hey, this is not theoretical. The "right tool for the job" today may have a huge impact in what you can do in the future. Look at the
But your tip is aprecciated, because there will always be people working for your freedom for free.
That's like saying Vans (or make your pick) are unsecure cars because women are atracted to them. Giving uses something as simple as PHP is indeed a problem for them. Even suposedly experienced programmers make a lot of mistakes.
I've sen lots of codes where input was not being validated. And seen data that came through forms beign validated in intermediate steps and not the final one, or FORM info including what "table" to use (jikes).
It's not PHP fault though...
Tell that to Yahoo finance (spoiler: they use MySQL)
Everything that can be sold can be though as a service. You think of software as long term investment (infinite stream of service actually). But in reality, it's just like any other good, some have an infinite lifetime (say "Calculator App"), while some others do not (games for example).
Simple example:
You sell chess boards. Most people that like chess probably have one or two boards. So after catch up, you sales will only be (at most), newcommers to chess that need a board. That means your sells grow like your population does plus GPD growth (because some poors can now buy the wooden board, let's say). Once everyone is rich enough, you are only left with population growth (everyone else ALREADY has some nice boards).
Also, you have icecreams, you can sell as people feel like tasting. The "installed base" at t+1 is zero.
With software happens the same. You have very volitile "consumer" software and non-volatile "investment" software. So everything depends on what market you are in.
Examples: a computer game (obsoletes)
Office: obsoletes slowly
Calculator App: does no obsolete
Last thing, software has zero marginal cost, so it is very apealing for non-big-companies to enter this market. If you get it right, you can sell millions of them at no additional cost. Who cares if you can sell the product 10 years from now?
It doesn't have any statistical meaning because it's not hazardous. It probably only means that BSD users do NOT reboot they cumputers often and can get away with it.
It doesn't mean other can't stay online for as long as they want. I am pretty sure most unises can stay for as long as they want or until hacked.
Besides, you do argue a little circularly, before you come up with the decent explanation. If things were fastened down, you'd just assume that gravity could fail, but didn't this time.
Well, if they had things fastened down and gravity wouldn't fail in a critical power loss, then I'd be really _annoyed_.
So they did the wise thing and did NOT fasten stuff. Also, it's wise of them to not do very expensive "features" (like ingravity) that add no content and that could be "almost tolerable" if you can think of a magnet.
Size of screen. I WOULD like to read in the train with these things, download books, browse the newspapers, etc. There's always a way to add a small keyboard when you have the $.
/pda). Very very handy!!
:), so may be usefull for them also :) :)
Also, for watching movies in a train, bus, whatever, using it as a portable DVD player, as a portable Audio Center.
It's just a spreamlined PC slim and without big moving parts or lots of cables. Chances are this tables will be widely used when Wireless becomes widespread. Both concepts reinforce themselves.
Would be nice if it had a slot to Dock your (small) PDA and access it in a remote way (ie: as a window in your tablet, and drives mounted as
Most people will use to take porn everywhere (bath, office, etc
I know, I was just making the distinction because everyone usually quotes average FPS and don't know it's instantaneous FPS what matters. That is, many people think they can feel 100 FPS when they cannot (but some still clearly can).
Anti-abortion = Neo Nazi? I don't know, but I don't like abortion. Just like you can't kill someone alive and outside, you can't kill someone inside.
In reality, I don't kind abortion (meaning getting the child out of you) as long as you don't kill it.
Abortion = preserve a human live
Nazi = genocide non-arians
This is really fsckd up. Law != Truth. Nazism is bad and abortion is not, no matter what law has to say about it. Really.
That's the easiest way, really. And the benefit of having nicely documented DTDs. OO is the true compatibility XML file format for office files.
That's why MS need to have their own. Because if they don't do it, many companies will use OO as a gateway (many not just yet, but soon).
So they have to do XML, plus MS is wanting to integrate Office + Windows Programing + WEB Frontends + EVERYTHING in an interoperable way. They can dictate the standard of what the WORLD will have to use in the future.
They will always be in the middle, and their revenue models will adapt to it just fine. The MS layer if you want to call it.
That depends. In theory, it's absolutely correct.
In practice, it may depend. The key variable is if the FPS are time constant. That is, a movie played back with a good decoder, and assuming it has 86 Fps, you can only see 85 FPS.
For a game, it depends. If for any reason you cannot deliver say, frame 40 of second 1, and you can afterward "process" 46 more frames, you'll only see 84 real frames.
This is what I am talking about. A practical thing. Of course, you will never see more than 85 frames with an 85 hz refresh.
Anyway, some people can tell the difference between a game at 85 hz and 100 hz. It really is irrelevant if you have 85 hz or 100hz. What you are impling is that people that (example) have 15 hz monitors could not tell the difference between 15 hz and let's say 60 hz. Of course they can, you just need a better monitor.
"Aren't companies solely a bunch of people combined by a collective goal?"
Nope...companies are a set of assets owned by the collective shareholders. That includes the services of the people working there, the fixed / var assets, their IP, the brand. The thing is the companies goal is to maximize revenue, all other goals are second class goals.
There's NO unowned company that I know of. If it's not, it's something else.
85 hz has a nice balance. The things is some people can feel the difference. How much you can feel depends on the colors in the (let's say) movie and how much things are panning/sec. Of course, you will need to to have a good monitor that can display 100 hz.
When you talk about games the thing changes quite a lot but for practical reason. If a card benchmark against game X shows and average framerate of 120 FPS, it's likely you'll have at least 80 or 100 in the slowers more dense part of the game. f it shows 83, at some point it will certainly display less than that. This is a practical thing, not that you can see 120 FPS, just that beign able to play a game at 120 average is a good thing for these reasons.
Anyway, 85 hz is pretty good, some people may notice an improvement at 100 hz, but it's not a significaty improvement.
What part of the definition of science makes you think manually managing memory allocation and deallocation is better than having a smart algorithm for handling it?
What school or university did you attend (if any). Could be usefull so tat I know where not to send my kids.
It can feel up to 100 FPS really. I can definetly feel the difference between 50 FPS and 100 FPS. Not like i will miss any detail at 50FS, but at 100 you can be sure you eye "refresh rate" will ALWAYS cat a new frame everytime.
Some people may not notice beyond 60 FPS. Some people do, and 100 feels better for them. More real. Of course, you mostly notice under FPS because they happen at very high speed and everything moves when you make a turn.