For the record, yes, you can hear the difference between a tube amp and a solid state amp. The tube amp will be "warmer", meaning it will distort the audio in a manner some find pleasing. The solid state amp won't do this, and will instead require those effects to be simulated in a DSP.
Then why have every study done double-blind shown that audiophile claims aren't represented as claimed? People can't tell the difference. When you avoid edge cases (clipping/distortion), the cheap equipment matches the expensive equipment.
This display is only around 100DPI. Even using the "20/20 vision" measurement of 1 arcminute resolution, that means you're still going to see benefit all the way out to three feet.
Being able to resolve the differences doesn't mean it makes a difference to the viewing.
I don't believe that is an accurate description of human vision, anyway. I tested, and I can resolve a single pixel (stuck green on a bad LCD) at less than 1/10th the "minimum" you list, and my vision is worse than 20/20. I can see that it's lit, so it's obvious I can see it, and it'd smaller than your numbers indicate I should be able to see. I understand that's not what the tests test for, but it proves to me that the human eye can "resolve" things smaller than what's looked for in vision tests.
But there are so many limitations in source material that it doesn't matter for TV/movies. IT would matter for sitting close to a 4k computer monitor seeing text, but a moving image filmed with flawed human-made optics and motion blur will make no difference. I know people who own 1080p TVs that think my 720p TV is better. Setup and source material matter more than resolution.
A vouncher system? The ones that give tax rebates to the rich that already have their children in private school, but have no effect on the proportion of poor in private schools?
And Asia and Africa, also not continents. Until the Suez Canal, you could walk from Africa, through Asia, and then to Europe. Theoretically without ever getting your feet wet. The continent model was based on geographical boundaries. Water being obvious, mountains for convenience (for Europe).
Now we have a more tectonic view, but mostly retroactively applied to match the old ways. In a more practical sense, there are 3 continents. "Eurasia-Africa", "The Americas", and "Other".
Yes, the common US English way of describing it should be "Latin America", which includes Central America (Mexico to Panama, inclusive) and (optionally) South America.
The non-US confusion is that in US English, the two continents of North America and South America can be referred to as "The Americas". In other places, "America" can refer to both together, but usually only by non-native speakers confused by false cognates.
in English; this is somewhat disputed in part on the basis that it's confusing, in part on the basis that some consider it an insulting synecdoche that erases most of the continent, and in part because nerds like to deconstruct words and figure out what they "should" mean etymologically rather than what they do mean; but it's hard to dispute that it's used as a synonym and that it has historical precedent.
I find the greatest difficulty in people who know the etymology, in that "America" was a borrowed word, and in the language it was borrowed from, it was used differently. So the non-native speakers argue (correctly) that it crossed the language barrier incorrectly, and use that knowledge to deliberately mis-understand the word as it does mean.
Um... just no... that is completely and totally false, I wish people would stop repeating that nonsense... Maybe YOUR eyes suck and you can't see a difference, but put them side-by-side, sitting 6 to 10 feet away, the difference is clear and obvious to most people...
Yes, and you can tell the difference between a tube amp and solid state one as well.
Most people can't see the difference. Or can you point to a study that shows people can tell the difference?
I've got a 55" 720p plasma. People who own 1080P TVs comment on how nice it is.
I've "experienced" 4k. At 8' from a 55" TV, I can't tell the difference. Even if all the source was 4k, I don't think most people could tell the difference between the two. Gets to be one of the audiophile/vidoephile discussions. They can't "prove" they can see a difference, and won't be swayed by proof they can't.
Because when I speak, I don't go along with statist propaganda about my own views.
OK, so you make up your own words. Got it. Since you choose to ignore a common language, I guess there's nothing else to say. Whenever caught in stupidity, you'll just claim I'm using the "statist" definition or something.
It was scale, and this one, in a test case (harder than expected usage) was kW, not MW. Why are you demanding more for a hobby project than needed for a 1000 mph car, just to prove it's possible?
Face it, these guys grabbed the brakes off a 1000MPH+ vehicle, without thought, then they broke, so they tried something else. They didn't "research" anything. They iteratively tried things based off intuition until something worked. That's not science. That's not even very interesting.
Prison is the opposite of rehabilitation. It was always meant to be in the US. It's a shame that reforming people is considered "soft on crime". It's cheaper and more effective, but not politically acceptable. That always proves to me that Libertarians aren't about "small" or effective government, but sociopathic hate of everyone else.
Just because you lie about your identity to troll others doesn't mean I do the same. You are a lying idiot. And I've never posted AC since I bothered to register for an account. Certainly not to waste time trolling a lying idiot like yourself.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3663... He confessed. There was no doubt that he was the man. He did it. That the trial assumed that a little more than normal, but hardly "unfair". Had there been some defense, he'd have had an opportunity to present it. Which parts of the trail were unfair? The "report" isn't a trial.
Why do you specify "other people" when that was not stated before? Every champion of "liberty" over "social harmony" means their own liberty over the liberty of others.
At my high school, the teachers all got 1 and only 1 prep period. And some of those were lost to administration (hall monitoring, and other duties). So ti becomes 0-1.
For me it is my only break of the day.
Now that you mention it, the problem of unions is that they are required (essentially by law). The law (in many places in the US) requires a 30 minute lunch minimum, with no work duties, and a 15 minute break in each 4 hour block. The teacher work schedule is illegal. So they get out of that with special deals with unions and such. I have no idea how much of those laws are state and how much is federal, but it'd be interesting to see a challenge go through for the illegal sweat-shop rules imposed on teachers.
You know how many "teacher prep" periods the average US teacher gets now?
Nope. I don't know. And based on your insinuation without cites or numbers, I don't think you know either. At my high school, the teachers had 0-1 prep periods.
Gives bad answers isn't the same. The intel chips that were wrong weren't labeled "permanently crashed". A crash is a reset. It takes significant physical damage to induce anything like a reset. Like a lobotomy. Or some specific cases of mental illness, but those are very rare.
The brain runs without compiling, and re-writes its own source code and hardware while under use. It never crashes. Nothing has ever tried to come close, and those that pretend to emulate it have always failed miserably.
Random - That's the impression a HUMAN driver would have. A better term for "random" would be "unpredictable". And since the autonomous vehicle would be monitoring the relative location of nearby vehicles, people, and other objects the main criteria is "will that object with its current velocity and potential acceleration impact this vehicle?"
That's the impression a bad driver would have. The person weaving doesn't say "oh, I traveled 10*RND(x) seconds, I'll change lanes to [left/right]." They say "I wish to be going the speed that should be legally set, and I'll weave to go it. I'll go in the open space to the right." And yes, there are documents indicating that Dallas was notified that they broke State law in setting artificially low speed limits, but they ignored it and set illegally low limits for a while until people started fighting in court, and managed to win. Drivers knew the limits were unenforceable, so many went very fast with impunity, as the limits were illegal.
The driverless car, going the speed limit in the presence of the driver you mention who is "speeding", would ignore the aggressive driver. And nothing bad would happen.
Why do so many people complain about those in front of them going faster than them? They are in front of you, and going faster than you. They will not affect you in any way, unless they crash, which happens very rarely (on a per-passenger-mile scale).
There's still an axle within the hub, even if it's smaller than the width of the wheel. The upright attaches to the wheel's axle, proving the wheel has an axle.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, so your stance is "I don't like your opinion, so I'll disagree with you, despite the fact I have no support whatsoever for my opinion".
If I'm wrong prove it. Otherwise, I'll take that as an admission of defeat.
For the record, yes, you can hear the difference between a tube amp and a solid state amp. The tube amp will be "warmer", meaning it will distort the audio in a manner some find pleasing. The solid state amp won't do this, and will instead require those effects to be simulated in a DSP.
Then why have every study done double-blind shown that audiophile claims aren't represented as claimed? People can't tell the difference. When you avoid edge cases (clipping/distortion), the cheap equipment matches the expensive equipment.
This display is only around 100DPI. Even using the "20/20 vision" measurement of 1 arcminute resolution, that means you're still going to see benefit all the way out to three feet.
Being able to resolve the differences doesn't mean it makes a difference to the viewing.
I don't believe that is an accurate description of human vision, anyway. I tested, and I can resolve a single pixel (stuck green on a bad LCD) at less than 1/10th the "minimum" you list, and my vision is worse than 20/20. I can see that it's lit, so it's obvious I can see it, and it'd smaller than your numbers indicate I should be able to see. I understand that's not what the tests test for, but it proves to me that the human eye can "resolve" things smaller than what's looked for in vision tests.
But there are so many limitations in source material that it doesn't matter for TV/movies. IT would matter for sitting close to a 4k computer monitor seeing text, but a moving image filmed with flawed human-made optics and motion blur will make no difference. I know people who own 1080p TVs that think my 720p TV is better. Setup and source material matter more than resolution.
A vouncher system? The ones that give tax rebates to the rich that already have their children in private school, but have no effect on the proportion of poor in private schools?
Remind me again how that benefits the poor.
And Asia and Africa, also not continents. Until the Suez Canal, you could walk from Africa, through Asia, and then to Europe. Theoretically without ever getting your feet wet. The continent model was based on geographical boundaries. Water being obvious, mountains for convenience (for Europe).
Now we have a more tectonic view, but mostly retroactively applied to match the old ways. In a more practical sense, there are 3 continents. "Eurasia-Africa", "The Americas", and "Other".
The non-US confusion is that in US English, the two continents of North America and South America can be referred to as "The Americas". In other places, "America" can refer to both together, but usually only by non-native speakers confused by false cognates.
in English; this is somewhat disputed in part on the basis that it's confusing, in part on the basis that some consider it an insulting synecdoche that erases most of the continent, and in part because nerds like to deconstruct words and figure out what they "should" mean etymologically rather than what they do mean; but it's hard to dispute that it's used as a synonym and that it has historical precedent.
I find the greatest difficulty in people who know the etymology, in that "America" was a borrowed word, and in the language it was borrowed from, it was used differently. So the non-native speakers argue (correctly) that it crossed the language barrier incorrectly, and use that knowledge to deliberately mis-understand the word as it does mean.
Um... just no... that is completely and totally false, I wish people would stop repeating that nonsense... Maybe YOUR eyes suck and you can't see a difference, but put them side-by-side, sitting 6 to 10 feet away, the difference is clear and obvious to most people...
Yes, and you can tell the difference between a tube amp and solid state one as well.
Most people can't see the difference. Or can you point to a study that shows people can tell the difference?
Yeah, and you can hear the difference between a tube amp and solid state amp, or whatever the audiophiles are claiming.
I've got a 55" 720p plasma. People who own 1080P TVs comment on how nice it is.
I've "experienced" 4k. At 8' from a 55" TV, I can't tell the difference. Even if all the source was 4k, I don't think most people could tell the difference between the two. Gets to be one of the audiophile/vidoephile discussions. They can't "prove" they can see a difference, and won't be swayed by proof they can't.
I guess I've never worked for an alternately regulated job. Nor worked anywhere where in a union.
Sometimes I feel like the last reasonable American
I felt the same, so I moved. When nobody wants to fix the obvious problems, there's nothing left to do.
Lower taxes, more services, less corruption. Better in every way, so long as I don't want handguns for defense (guns are legal and "common", rare).
Because when I speak, I don't go along with statist propaganda about my own views.
OK, so you make up your own words. Got it. Since you choose to ignore a common language, I guess there's nothing else to say. Whenever caught in stupidity, you'll just claim I'm using the "statist" definition or something.
It was scale, and this one, in a test case (harder than expected usage) was kW, not MW. Why are you demanding more for a hobby project than needed for a 1000 mph car, just to prove it's possible?
Face it, these guys grabbed the brakes off a 1000MPH+ vehicle, without thought, then they broke, so they tried something else. They didn't "research" anything. They iteratively tried things based off intuition until something worked. That's not science. That's not even very interesting.
Prison is the opposite of rehabilitation. It was always meant to be in the US. It's a shame that reforming people is considered "soft on crime". It's cheaper and more effective, but not politically acceptable. That always proves to me that Libertarians aren't about "small" or effective government, but sociopathic hate of everyone else.
Just because you lie about your identity to troll others doesn't mean I do the same. You are a lying idiot. And I've never posted AC since I bothered to register for an account. Certainly not to waste time trolling a lying idiot like yourself.
Billions? Try trillions.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3663... He confessed. There was no doubt that he was the man. He did it. That the trial assumed that a little more than normal, but hardly "unfair". Had there been some defense, he'd have had an opportunity to present it. Which parts of the trail were unfair? The "report" isn't a trial.
Why do you specify "other people" when that was not stated before? Every champion of "liberty" over "social harmony" means their own liberty over the liberty of others.
No rights were denied anyone through that, so why would you require a "fair trial"? The due process was denied to Magnitsky.
For me it is my only break of the day.
Now that you mention it, the problem of unions is that they are required (essentially by law). The law (in many places in the US) requires a 30 minute lunch minimum, with no work duties, and a 15 minute break in each 4 hour block. The teacher work schedule is illegal. So they get out of that with special deals with unions and such. I have no idea how much of those laws are state and how much is federal, but it'd be interesting to see a challenge go through for the illegal sweat-shop rules imposed on teachers.
You know how many "teacher prep" periods the average US teacher gets now?
Nope. I don't know. And based on your insinuation without cites or numbers, I don't think you know either. At my high school, the teachers had 0-1 prep periods.
Gives bad answers isn't the same. The intel chips that were wrong weren't labeled "permanently crashed". A crash is a reset. It takes significant physical damage to induce anything like a reset. Like a lobotomy. Or some specific cases of mental illness, but those are very rare.
The brain runs without compiling, and re-writes its own source code and hardware while under use. It never crashes. Nothing has ever tried to come close, and those that pretend to emulate it have always failed miserably.
Random - That's the impression a HUMAN driver would have. A better term for "random" would be "unpredictable". And since the autonomous vehicle would be monitoring the relative location of nearby vehicles, people, and other objects the main criteria is "will that object with its current velocity and potential acceleration impact this vehicle?"
That's the impression a bad driver would have. The person weaving doesn't say "oh, I traveled 10*RND(x) seconds, I'll change lanes to [left/right]." They say "I wish to be going the speed that should be legally set, and I'll weave to go it. I'll go in the open space to the right." And yes, there are documents indicating that Dallas was notified that they broke State law in setting artificially low speed limits, but they ignored it and set illegally low limits for a while until people started fighting in court, and managed to win. Drivers knew the limits were unenforceable, so many went very fast with impunity, as the limits were illegal.
The driverless car, going the speed limit in the presence of the driver you mention who is "speeding", would ignore the aggressive driver. And nothing bad would happen.
Why do so many people complain about those in front of them going faster than them? They are in front of you, and going faster than you. They will not affect you in any way, unless they crash, which happens very rarely (on a per-passenger-mile scale).
There's still an axle within the hub, even if it's smaller than the width of the wheel. The upright attaches to the wheel's axle, proving the wheel has an axle.