The very fact that you can only mention a few specific accidents, despite thousands of nuclear power plants in active use around the world, should tell you something about how safe it actually is.
It's a bit like flying. It is extremely safe, so we tend to get every single accident blown up in the news, precisely because it happens so rarely, so it's a big story when it does happen.
That's called binaural recording, and is perfectly contained in a stereo track. The drawback is that it usually doesn't sound particularly good when played back on loudspeakers.
Yes, the DVD-Audio format is extinct, which is why surround mixed music usually come out on audio-only DVD-Video. Probably because a lot of cheap DVD players weren't/aren't DVD-Audio compatible.
And I agree that surround sound music is a bit silly. If I want that sort of experience, I'll go to a concert. Other than that, just give me stereo.
A set of high-quality stereo speakers and a sub or two to fill out the frequency range at the bottom end and done.
I don't need wizz-bang bullshit going on behind me or above me or whatever. If the move isn't immersive enough without surround sound, it's not a good movie, and hence not worth watching.
Yes, my ideal solution is to reduce our consumption of future trash as much as humanly possible. If packaging is never produced, it will never become trash. Why is toothpaste in a plastic tube, inside cardboard, wrapped in plastic? There's no reason for it.
The average disposable shopping bag is about.5 mil. Trash bags start at.7 mil and go up to 1.4. So to begin with, they're more material, which makes them more expensive to manufacture.
OK, you're talking about the thin and stupidly flimsy shopping bags that tear if you as much as look at them wrong. I'm talking about the bags that can actually hold weight and have handles that don't tear off if you put 2g too much weight in the bag.
No, it isn't the root cause. If you have banana peels littering the streets, the banana peels aren't the root cause.
No, the people throwing the garbage are the problem. And since we seem to be unable to make people not be lazy fucks, we have to change the garbage they throw, to at least not be stupidly damaging to the environment.
Blaming the garbage collectors for the trash people throw in the street is insane.
You actually need to reuse your cotton shopping bag more than 500 times to bring its environmental impact below that of single-use plastic bags. Cotton is horrible resource-intensive to grow and process.
The best balance is something like an Ikea shopping bag, made from cheap recycled plastic and ridiculously durable. I've been using mine as laundry bags for decades.
The biggest logistical problem with all of these idiotic "Let's ban plastic [insert product here]" ideas is that almost invariably there is no adequate alternative. California's grocery bag ban, for example, means that we have to buy trash bags that use several times as much plastic, took several times as much diesel fuel to drive them to the store, and cost a couple of orders of magnitude more money. It is basically a poor tax masquerading as an environmental policy.
Those garbage bags are made using recycled plastic, they use a very little material per bag) and they don't have to be emblazoned with logos and so on, which further reduces their environmental impact. How do you think the shopping bags got to the store? They don't just magically appear. And no, they are not actually more expensive per bag.
This proposed law is no exception to that rule. The problem is not plastic utensils. There are no viable alternatives to plastic utensils that can be made anywhere near that price point, so when you order food to go, expect a significant cutlery surcharge if this goes through. For people who can afford that, it's probably no big deal, though at some point, we've just replaced an excess of plastic waste with an excess of metal waste.
Metal? What? No.
Bamboo cutlery is widely available, cheap and already in use many places. I have yet to see a single restaurant changing their prices because of a different type of cutlery.
Plastic and metal are not the only options. There a a lot of biodegradable alternatives, such as wood, bamboo, various starches, even pasta.
Now if they carve out a broad exception for biodegradable plastics, this law would be fine, but it also wouldn't solve the problem that they claim to be trying to solve (plastic utensils on the beaches) because they still don't degrade that quickly.
But as with all the plastic ban laws, the real, fundamental problem with this particular law is that they're trying to treat the symptom instead of the root cause. When we ask ourselves why these utensils are turning up in streams and rivers, we come up with only three real possibilities:
Street sweeping doesn't happen often enough to take care of occasional litter (accidental or otherwise)
Garbage pickup doesn't happen often enough to keep cans from overflowing and bits getting left behind
Automated garbage trucks have a spillage problem
Notice what all of these have in common? They're all failures of the government to do their f**ing jobs. And instead of solving the real problem, they're trying to find ways to make it everyone else's problem but their own. It's time that we started choosing elected officials who will actually do what we're paying them to do, by requiring their employees to do what we're paying them to do. That's the only real solution. Everything else is just trying to apply a thousand 1" Band-Aids over a missing limb.
What are you even on about? Plastic cutlery is the root cause. If it wasn't there, we wouldn't have to spend time and resources cleaning it up.
It seems you just want to jump onto any random issue in order to fire off an ill-conceived anti-government rant.
Popular music has always been 99% suck. The only reason you think music was better in the 60s is because you only remember the good songs, it's blatant survivorship bias.
That's because the boomers are still desperately hanging on to the last remnants of their cultural monopoly.
Every notice how all the popular christmas songs are from the 50s and 60s? That's when the boomers grew up, so that's the music they like, and thus force on all of us, because obviously their music and traditions are superior to everything else/s
The same goes for music, basically everything "classic rock" and "evergreens" should be referred to as "shit boomers like for no good reason". Sure yeah, The Beatles were kinda cool and wild back then and they helped popularize rock. BUT IT WAS FUCKING 50 YEARS AGO! Get over it!
Top 10, Top 40, Top Whatever lists are always 100% manufactured. Either directly through payola, or indirectly by "encouraging" bars and clubs to play the same shit over an over again, so people enter a sort of Stockholm Syndrome, where they only "like" the hits because they recognize them or because "everyone likes it". People are afraid of new experiences, they actively seek to be superficially the same as everyone else. Even if that means "enjoying" utter garbage.
I run uBlock Origin (in default-deny mode), Privacy Badger, CanvasBlocker, Decentraleyes, FB Purity, First Party Isolation, Cookie Autodelete, Link Cleaner and Smart Referer. I don't have any personal details on my FB, except a throwaway email account. The only things I ever comment on or share are related to music I listen to. I don't engange in news discussions, politics or anything of that sort. I don't play any games on Facebook, I don't participate in any quizzes, I don't have any apps installed, I don't use my FB account for logins anywhere other than FB, and I haven't tied my FB account to anything else (Spotify and so on with FB integration).
Pretty much all FB knows about me is that I listen to metal, go to a lot of festivals and concerts, that I volunteer at a local historic motor race once a year and work out 1-2 times/week in a local gym. That's it, I'm exceedingly private with sharing details anywhere, for any reason.
Nope, that's just stupid. It's blatantly "brain storm" (or "grain stall", it is really bad quality), there is nothing even remotely resempling "needle" in there.
Under ideal conditions, it's good. "Ideal conditions" meaning direct support for MP4/Ogg/whatever at both ends. Unfortunately that is extremely rare, and thus most headsets fall back to AptX transcoding or SBC, which can be acceptable at high bitrates, but falls apart extremely quickly at lower bitrates.
These minute lost data is often what idiots attribute warmth or depth to the music.
Fixed that for you.
The quantization artifacts in 16-bit PCM audio are at approximately -96dBFS, in other words way below any audible level. If you do amplify an otherwise silent section up so the noise is audible, you'll find that it's more less just benign white noise, aka "tape hiss".
Analog recordings are also "approximations of the actual sound", except they're much much worse than digital recording, due to nonlinear frequency response, crosstalk, speed variation and a host of other issues.
Slashdot Mirror
Coal/oil power plants put out a lot more radioactive material than any nuclear power plant.
The very fact that you can only mention a few specific accidents, despite thousands of nuclear power plants in active use around the world, should tell you something about how safe it actually is.
It's a bit like flying. It is extremely safe, so we tend to get every single accident blown up in the news, precisely because it happens so rarely, so it's a big story when it does happen.
That's called binaural recording, and is perfectly contained in a stereo track. The drawback is that it usually doesn't sound particularly good when played back on loudspeakers.
Yes, the DVD-Audio format is extinct, which is why surround mixed music usually come out on audio-only DVD-Video. Probably because a lot of cheap DVD players weren't/aren't DVD-Audio compatible.
And I agree that surround sound music is a bit silly. If I want that sort of experience, I'll go to a concert. Other than that, just give me stereo.
A set of high-quality stereo speakers and a sub or two to fill out the frequency range at the bottom end and done.
I don't need wizz-bang bullshit going on behind me or above me or whatever. If the move isn't immersive enough without surround sound, it's not a good movie, and hence not worth watching.
It's called "Open Document Format for Office Applications", not "Open Office XML".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Yes, my ideal solution is to reduce our consumption of future trash as much as humanly possible. If packaging is never produced, it will never become trash. Why is toothpaste in a plastic tube, inside cardboard, wrapped in plastic? There's no reason for it.
By reducing as much as we can, we lessen the load on the garbage crews, making their jobs easier, making them less likely to miss some trash.
The average disposable shopping bag is about .5 mil. Trash bags start at .7 mil and go up to 1.4. So to begin with, they're more material, which makes them more expensive to manufacture.
OK, you're talking about the thin and stupidly flimsy shopping bags that tear if you as much as look at them wrong. I'm talking about the bags that can actually hold weight and have handles that don't tear off if you put 2g too much weight in the bag.
No, it isn't the root cause. If you have banana peels littering the streets, the banana peels aren't the root cause.
No, the people throwing the garbage are the problem. And since we seem to be unable to make people not be lazy fucks, we have to change the garbage they throw, to at least not be stupidly damaging to the environment.
Blaming the garbage collectors for the trash people throw in the street is insane.
You actually need to reuse your cotton shopping bag more than 500 times to bring its environmental impact below that of single-use plastic bags. Cotton is horrible resource-intensive to grow and process.
The best balance is something like an Ikea shopping bag, made from cheap recycled plastic and ridiculously durable. I've been using mine as laundry bags for decades.
No, the better solution is to reduce the amount of garbage the sweepers have to handle.
The biggest logistical problem with all of these idiotic "Let's ban plastic [insert product here]" ideas is that almost invariably there is no adequate alternative. California's grocery bag ban, for example, means that we have to buy trash bags that use several times as much plastic, took several times as much diesel fuel to drive them to the store, and cost a couple of orders of magnitude more money. It is basically a poor tax masquerading as an environmental policy.
Those garbage bags are made using recycled plastic, they use a very little material per bag) and they don't have to be emblazoned with logos and so on, which further reduces their environmental impact. How do you think the shopping bags got to the store? They don't just magically appear. And no, they are not actually more expensive per bag.
This proposed law is no exception to that rule. The problem is not plastic utensils. There are no viable alternatives to plastic utensils that can be made anywhere near that price point, so when you order food to go, expect a significant cutlery surcharge if this goes through. For people who can afford that, it's probably no big deal, though at some point, we've just replaced an excess of plastic waste with an excess of metal waste.
Metal? What? No.
Bamboo cutlery is widely available, cheap and already in use many places. I have yet to see a single restaurant changing their prices because of a different type of cutlery.
Plastic and metal are not the only options. There a a lot of biodegradable alternatives, such as wood, bamboo, various starches, even pasta.
Now if they carve out a broad exception for biodegradable plastics, this law would be fine, but it also wouldn't solve the problem that they claim to be trying to solve (plastic utensils on the beaches) because they still don't degrade that quickly.
But as with all the plastic ban laws, the real, fundamental problem with this particular law is that they're trying to treat the symptom instead of the root cause. When we ask ourselves why these utensils are turning up in streams and rivers, we come up with only three real possibilities:
Notice what all of these have in common? They're all failures of the government to do their f**ing jobs. And instead of solving the real problem, they're trying to find ways to make it everyone else's problem but their own. It's time that we started choosing elected officials who will actually do what we're paying them to do, by requiring their employees to do what we're paying them to do. That's the only real solution. Everything else is just trying to apply a thousand 1" Band-Aids over a missing limb.
What are you even on about? Plastic cutlery is the root cause. If it wasn't there, we wouldn't have to spend time and resources cleaning it up.
It seems you just want to jump onto any random issue in order to fire off an ill-conceived anti-government rant.
Washing bottles for reuse involves the use of a lot of water and noxious chemicals.
Washing out and reusing soda bottles is actually worse for the environment, because of the harsh chemicals used.
And the line goes "reduce, reuse, recycle", in that order.
Oh, I don't know. These maybe:
http://www.babyboomerradio.com...
https://www.theatlantic.com/en...
Popular music has always been 99% suck. The only reason you think music was better in the 60s is because you only remember the good songs, it's blatant survivorship bias.
That's because the boomers are still desperately hanging on to the last remnants of their cultural monopoly.
Every notice how all the popular christmas songs are from the 50s and 60s? That's when the boomers grew up, so that's the music they like, and thus force on all of us, because obviously their music and traditions are superior to everything else /s
The same goes for music, basically everything "classic rock" and "evergreens" should be referred to as "shit boomers like for no good reason". Sure yeah, The Beatles were kinda cool and wild back then and they helped popularize rock. BUT IT WAS FUCKING 50 YEARS AGO! Get over it!
Top 10, Top 40, Top Whatever lists are always 100% manufactured. Either directly through payola, or indirectly by "encouraging" bars and clubs to play the same shit over an over again, so people enter a sort of Stockholm Syndrome, where they only "like" the hits because they recognize them or because "everyone likes it". People are afraid of new experiences, they actively seek to be superficially the same as everyone else. Even if that means "enjoying" utter garbage.
The business types get control of art, and they homogenize it into a fetid featureless river of shit.
Luckily, there is so much creativity outside of the mainstream, if you only cut the feed of shit they feed you, and go explore on your own.
The web player and Chromecast stream 256kbps AAC at the highest quality setting, for some reason.
I wish they would move to Opus. The could cut around a 3rd of their bandwidth usage for the same audible quality.
That is not relevant. She lost, remember? We're dealing with Trump's idiocy, not hers.
I run uBlock Origin (in default-deny mode), Privacy Badger, CanvasBlocker, Decentraleyes, FB Purity, First Party Isolation, Cookie Autodelete, Link Cleaner and Smart Referer. I don't have any personal details on my FB, except a throwaway email account. The only things I ever comment on or share are related to music I listen to. I don't engange in news discussions, politics or anything of that sort. I don't play any games on Facebook, I don't participate in any quizzes, I don't have any apps installed, I don't use my FB account for logins anywhere other than FB, and I haven't tied my FB account to anything else (Spotify and so on with FB integration).
Pretty much all FB knows about me is that I listen to metal, go to a lot of festivals and concerts, that I volunteer at a local historic motor race once a year and work out 1-2 times/week in a local gym. That's it, I'm exceedingly private with sharing details anywhere, for any reason.
Nope, that's just stupid. It's blatantly "brain storm" (or "grain stall", it is really bad quality), there is nothing even remotely resempling "needle" in there.
Absolutely not worth it.
Under ideal conditions, it's good. "Ideal conditions" meaning direct support for MP4/Ogg/whatever at both ends. Unfortunately that is extremely rare, and thus most headsets fall back to AptX transcoding or SBC, which can be acceptable at high bitrates, but falls apart extremely quickly at lower bitrates.
These minute lost data is often what idiots attribute warmth or depth to the music.
Fixed that for you.
The quantization artifacts in 16-bit PCM audio are at approximately -96dBFS, in other words way below any audible level. If you do amplify an otherwise silent section up so the noise is audible, you'll find that it's more less just benign white noise, aka "tape hiss".
Analog recordings are also "approximations of the actual sound", except they're much much worse than digital recording, due to nonlinear frequency response, crosstalk, speed variation and a host of other issues.
It is blindingly obvious that you have no idea how digital sampling works. Educate yourself: https://xiph.org/video/vid2.sh...