Yes, they're so good at materials and mechanical product testing that they specifically tested the iPhone 6 for bend strength and still had bending issues! Okay, okay, I'll grant you that they probably test their products quite well; that they truly suck at is acting on test failures so they don't happen in the wild.
When you have to be a pedant to make your argument, you truly don't have much of an argument to make.
The Mac is generally much nicer, more robust, has much better keyboard ergonomics
That was sort-of true in 2014; not so much today. I speak from experience, having upgraded from the 2014 MacBook Pro (late 2013, actually; there was no early 2014 model) to a 2016 model.
Well, I had an issue with my F key for a while, with two commercial air filters in my apartment and a dust cover on the keyboard, so I'm going to say yes, even if you keep your laptop clean and free of dust, these issues are real.
Nice way to deflect the fact that Apple apparently addressed the issue, at least going forward.
What good does that do for those of us who bought affected machines? And how can you still deny the issue while admitting that Apple has "addressed" it?
When will Apple address the issue for those of us who are actually affected by it? No, replacing the keyboard with the same piece of this that failed does not count. If the v2 truly are better, give us those if they're compatible; else, make a compatible v2 as a replacement for failed v1's. That would be addressing it, but Apple won't do that until after they lose in court.
Yes, and I have my own recording studio. That doesn't mean either of us know what the fuck we're doing in those facilities. As an owner of one of the affected laptops (and a slew of other Apple gear dating back to a Mac Classic), I can say I probably know better what I'm doing in the studio than Apple does in their testing facility, today at least. They used to produce quality hardware, but that's become less true each year since Jobs passed.
Seems to me he was just questioning how useful the internet would be if that were to happen, kind of like asking how useful your phone is with a dead battery when considering whether you should buy a power bank for it. It's not that you're sure your battery will run low someday, more of a preparation just in case.
An argument between ganjadude and dave420? Where's my popcorn?
Also, there's no evidence it won't happen. I see no nonsense being spread here, only someone positing something that might actually happen. Time will tell; perhaps you shouldn't go around screaming "that won't happen" (an absolute) in response to someone positing that it might, lest you look like a fool if it does?
Furthermore, those protocols formed the basis for WebRTC, and contrary to anyone's opinion, RTP/RTCP/RTSP have been around since 1996, meaning none of this is new.
But WebRTC hasn't seen wide adoption and I'm not aware of a modern browser that supports the others, or SIP for that matter, so none of them except for WebRTC (if you want to limit your audience significantly) are relevant to a discussion about building your own video delivery website. That would be why I never brought them up.
That said, it really isn't that difficult to set up an RTSP-to-WebRTC gateway, for the handful of browsers that properly support WebRTC. The question remains, then, how do you support the majority of your viewers, and how do you pay for it all if you're coming from YouTube who used to pay you for your content (and are, thus, losing a revenue stream)? I guess that's two questions, but they remain nonetheless.
While nothing you wrote was wrong, my point was more that 20c/GB is actually an extremely high price for bandwidth. I pay my provider half a penny per GB at a relatively small scale, and that's if I consider the RAM, CPU, and storage as being given to me for free with the bandwidth purchase. Why the fuck would I ever pay 20c/GB?
Plus, and I said this exact thing elsewhere in the thread, if we want to support YouTube's "right" to remove perfectly legal content from their service, what stops any CDN or hosting provider from doing the same? The reality is you can't act as both a public commons and a private space at once, which is what YouTube is trying to do now; thus all the backlash.
If someone is evaluating a drug by watching videos rather than by reading then I guess they do need brain enhancement drugs, so I'll give you that the target market probably needs videos.
Again, why limit to nootropics videos when YouTube is attacking many topics?
Probably. There are 11 possibilities, just within the realm of computing, and that's if we limit to only those listed on that wiki page, though; so it's a bit irresponsible to simply use the acronym in this case.
You really think YouTube is paying 20c/GB? Of course there are other options; I'm not doing your research for you. As for why nootropics ads need to be 10 minute long HD videos, why don't they? Or why does any video need to be 10 minutes long, or HD? People expect HD content now, and someone "researching" nootropics for their own use might want a long format presentation of all the pertinent details of the products they're evaluating. I can think of at least a dozen reasons an informational video about any product might need to be 10 minutes long, or longer. Stop being purposely dense, it doesn't look good on you.
If you're moving form a platform that used to pay you to a platform for which you now have to pay, any non-negative price is the definition of "costs too much" IMO. Thankfully, I don't have a ton of video to host so I don't have any skin in this game, but... if I did, I know how to host it properly -- most content creators, however, do not, nor could they afford the services of someone who does, such as myself.
Plus, if we want to support YouTube's "right" to remove perfectly legal content from their service, what stops any CDN or hosting provider from doing the same? The reality is you can't act as both a public commons and a private space at once, which is what YouTube is trying to do now; thus all the backlash.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, they're so good at materials and mechanical product testing that they specifically tested the iPhone 6 for bend strength and still had bending issues! Okay, okay, I'll grant you that they probably test their products quite well; that they truly suck at is acting on test failures so they don't happen in the wild.
When you have to be a pedant to make your argument, you truly don't have much of an argument to make.
I never claimed it was a problem, only that the proposed solution was unhelpful.
The Mac is generally much nicer, more robust, has much better keyboard ergonomics
That was sort-of true in 2014; not so much today. I speak from experience, having upgraded from the 2014 MacBook Pro (late 2013, actually; there was no early 2014 model) to a 2016 model.
Well, if you can get the Fiat for less than the price of the Mercedes repair...
And it keeps working after you drive it down a dusty road.....
Well, I had an issue with my F key for a while, with two commercial air filters in my apartment and a dust cover on the keyboard, so I'm going to say yes, even if you keep your laptop clean and free of dust, these issues are real.
Nice way to deflect the fact that Apple apparently addressed the issue, at least going forward.
What good does that do for those of us who bought affected machines? And how can you still deny the issue while admitting that Apple has "addressed" it?
When will Apple address the issue for those of us who are actually affected by it? No, replacing the keyboard with the same piece of this that failed does not count. If the v2 truly are better, give us those if they're compatible; else, make a compatible v2 as a replacement for failed v1's. That would be addressing it, but Apple won't do that until after they lose in court.
Eh? It takes far less than a coffee spill.
Think a speck of dust blowing in the wind and landing under a key.
Yes, and I have my own recording studio. That doesn't mean either of us know what the fuck we're doing in those facilities. As an owner of one of the affected laptops (and a slew of other Apple gear dating back to a Mac Classic), I can say I probably know better what I'm doing in the studio than Apple does in their testing facility, today at least. They used to produce quality hardware, but that's become less true each year since Jobs passed.
3. You CAN disable the Touchbar in s/w. Have you tried this?
You mean he can disable the ESC and F-keys he just told you he actually needs in software? That seems super helpful!
I know at least two...
But a child wouldn't remember something before their time.
Anyone who belongs in a nursing home is old enough to know what you just stated. I think you meant daycare.
And, again, as I have no EU presence, they can kiss my ass as far as enforcement.
Seems to me he was just questioning how useful the internet would be if that were to happen, kind of like asking how useful your phone is with a dead battery when considering whether you should buy a power bank for it. It's not that you're sure your battery will run low someday, more of a preparation just in case.
An argument between ganjadude and dave420? Where's my popcorn?
Also, there's no evidence it won't happen. I see no nonsense being spread here, only someone positing something that might actually happen. Time will tell; perhaps you shouldn't go around screaming "that won't happen" (an absolute) in response to someone positing that it might, lest you look like a fool if it does?
even if a place doesn't do business in the EU, if an EU resident visits a site, the site has to comply.
And they can kiss my ass as far as enforcement.
Furthermore, those protocols formed the basis for WebRTC, and contrary to anyone's opinion, RTP/RTCP/RTSP have been around since 1996, meaning none of this is new.
But WebRTC hasn't seen wide adoption and I'm not aware of a modern browser that supports the others, or SIP for that matter, so none of them except for WebRTC (if you want to limit your audience significantly) are relevant to a discussion about building your own video delivery website. That would be why I never brought them up.
That said, it really isn't that difficult to set up an RTSP-to-WebRTC gateway, for the handful of browsers that properly support WebRTC. The question remains, then, how do you support the majority of your viewers, and how do you pay for it all if you're coming from YouTube who used to pay you for your content (and are, thus, losing a revenue stream)? I guess that's two questions, but they remain nonetheless.
So you proactively complained, on behalf of others. That's actually worse.
Howso?
You sound and act incredibly arrogant.
Hi, Pot, I'm Kettle!
and that's if we limit to only those listed on that wiki page
In other words, there's no guarantee it's any of those 11.
That said, I really didn't need the breakdown, but many others here may have, so thank you for providing it, I guess?
Asshole.
Plus, and I said this exact thing elsewhere in the thread, if we want to support YouTube's "right" to remove perfectly legal content from their service, what stops any CDN or hosting provider from doing the same? The reality is you can't act as both a public commons and a private space at once, which is what YouTube is trying to do now; thus all the backlash.
If someone is evaluating a drug by watching videos rather than by reading then I guess they do need brain enhancement drugs, so I'll give you that the target market probably needs videos.
Again, why limit to nootropics videos when YouTube is attacking many topics?
Because investors decide what gets done (people need to be paid for the work they do) and they don't care about security.
Probably. There are 11 possibilities, just within the realm of computing, and that's if we limit to only those listed on that wiki page, though; so it's a bit irresponsible to simply use the acronym in this case.
How about a full name, rather than an ambiguous acronym?
You really think YouTube is paying 20c/GB? Of course there are other options; I'm not doing your research for you. As for why nootropics ads need to be 10 minute long HD videos, why don't they? Or why does any video need to be 10 minutes long, or HD? People expect HD content now, and someone "researching" nootropics for their own use might want a long format presentation of all the pertinent details of the products they're evaluating. I can think of at least a dozen reasons an informational video about any product might need to be 10 minutes long, or longer. Stop being purposely dense, it doesn't look good on you.
If you're moving form a platform that used to pay you to a platform for which you now have to pay, any non-negative price is the definition of "costs too much" IMO. Thankfully, I don't have a ton of video to host so I don't have any skin in this game, but... if I did, I know how to host it properly -- most content creators, however, do not, nor could they afford the services of someone who does, such as myself.
Plus, if we want to support YouTube's "right" to remove perfectly legal content from their service, what stops any CDN or hosting provider from doing the same? The reality is you can't act as both a public commons and a private space at once, which is what YouTube is trying to do now; thus all the backlash.