robbrown451

It's about time. I curse the stupid page breaks every time I use it. The chance of me ever printing a document has been near zero for decades now.

I run into the same thing with Inkscape, where it seems to assume I am drawing on a piece of paper and I have to jump through hoops to not see the stupid page borders.

Ok would anyone like to do a long term bet with me? I bet that Carmack/Atwood's bet will be too ambiguous to resolve, and, neither wanting to look bad, they will both pay out to charity.

Not to enforce border patrol. They are used against enemy combatants. If you are against weapons that kill at a distance, you might as well complain about the invention of rock throwing. Regardless, that is an entirely different situation.

I don't see a problem here. There are remote controlled cameras surveilling the border. That's a long way off from remote controlled guns patrolling the border. And an even longer way off from autonomous guns patrolling the border.

The only reason guns have been legally used at the border is when an agent's life is in danger. Agents can't just shoot a migrant to stop them from crossing the border. So what good is a gun going to do on a drone dog? You're just making up non-existent problems.

> You think a government that xenophobic wouldn't also put a gun on a drone?

When they do, I'll complain. They aren't doing that now. I don't think guns on drones at the border with Mexico will happen in my lifetime.... I'd put money on that.

> Or that Biden and the Democrats are that different?

Yes. Yes I do.

And people might see that as that you are working from home, but not willing or able to allocate a dedicated space for it so you can actually be as effective as possible. Nor are you willing to purchase or make a simple backdrop.

Which seems to be accurate, and in my opinion rightfully creates a negative impression in their minds.

Why does he hate HN? Kind of weird, since he appeals to the same sort of people.

The robo-dogs aren't shooting them, only being used for surveillance. Basically, they are high-tech cameras. Saying "well, they could eventually mount guns on them" is like saying the same for the cameras in stores used to help prevent shoplifting.

This is a far better idea than a border wall, anyway. I don't see the big problem other than in the imaginations of people who have read or watched a lot of dystopian science fiction.

Blurring the background is different than putting some other sort of background there. That doesn't bother me nearly as much.

Regardless, I am someone who never pays for a haircut and has very casual clothes. But this is something that, to me, indicates a complete lack of sensitivity to aesthetics, and in a large number of jobs/roles, that's a really bad sign.

There's also a bit of the "what is so important to hide?" question.

It's great if you can ignore such things, but not everyone can or does. This is almost like someone who has poor hygiene, who has dirty hair or a bit of a smell to them. Anyone would advise such a person to put in a bit of effort if they want career success. Same thing.

The problem is that those people don't grasp how ridiculously awful it looks. Do you pay money for decent clothes and a decent haircut? Then spend the money on either a greenscreen, or anything else to put behind you to cover whatever you want to cover without making you look like a special effect done by a third grader.

Heh, yeah I was told that too but I figured the drugs were also reality, but from an interesting new perspective. :)

"The difference is I felt guilty as hell when I sacricied things I could look forward to in my real life day for a one day 20 hour DOTA binge."

That's how I would feel too.... I just get the impression that most here don't have that sort of negativity toward video games (and the way they can pull you away from "real life" things) but meanwhile feel such hostility toward this.

I liked the ad. (even though I dislike Facebook and Zuckerburg with at least a bit of passion)

I see a ton of comments about how it encourages people to escape the depressing real world.

How many of you play deeply immersive video games? I don't, but so many of my friends do. It depresses me sometimes, for the same reason that people find that video depressing. I really don't see the difference.

That's not to say immersive video games are bad, or even that taking a break from often-shitty reality is a bad thing. I just think perspective and balance is needed.

My biggest issue with the concept of Meta-verse (which to me is nothing different Second Life almost 20 years ago, albeit the tech has improved), is that it will be owned by a company that values engagement so much higher than the overall well-being of its users. If it was anyone but Facebook (and it's still freaking Facebook, despite their renaming of the company when they were in the middle of a publicity crisis), I'd be a lot more excited about it.

Still, whoever put this video together deserves some kudos. I thought it was very well done. I think the "wouldn't it be nice to die?" angle was undeserved and highly biased.

I'm all for cultivated meat, but I don't agree with the reasoning being that animals used for food experience pain and suffering. And I most certainly don't agree with this assumption:

"Factory farms are not what animals evolved for, so the unnatural conditions in which they're raised very likely induces suffering and pain in the raised livestock."

What makes you think that "natural" means free of suffering? Nature is spectacularly cruel. Many domestic animals (think well-loved family pets such as cats and dogs) live lives incredibly free of the suffering of their non-domestic ancestors.

It is certainly possible to raise animals for food where they have an easy life, and feel no pain at the end. I can't speak to whether it is economical (obviously, ensuring this would be expensive), but still. It is NOT impossible, or really all that difficult.

If you want to make the argument that killing animals with brains is bad, fine. I can go with that, and would prefer meat that doesn't involving killing. But basing it on false assumptions about how much pain the animal must experience is just going to make me say "let's just make laws that say animals must be treated very well and have a perfectly painless and stress free death."

Because I'm just not convinced, at all, that a well treated animal automatically suffers more than one in the wild.

But where did the money come from to create an $800B market cap? It came out of investor's pockets. The early ones might have made more money than they lost, but the later ones lost money.

Yes of course. But the point is that it costs a lot to mine, and that is subtracted from any profits made.

This is unsurprising. The cost to mine it is lost.... that isn't coming back. So it is a supremely negative sum game. Clearly a lot more money has been lost than made, and that which has been made is essentially borrowed from the future.

I enjoy modern Legos (with my now 7 year old) but only because I have them a giant bin, unsorted. I managed to get an enormous collection for $150 from a kid that I guess was growing out of them and wanted the money. And I immediately disassembled all the "kits" (like the Slave I ship now known as "Boba Fett's Firespray gunship") so they were just random pieces. Yes it is fun that there are a ton of weird minifigures, some recognizable and some not. There are all kinds of interesting pieces in there.

But I really hate the idea that you should approach it like an airplane model or the like, where you put it together the one correct way. That is boring. I don't expect to ever buy a kit like that.

I know that's the popular cynical view, but I'd think with such a position (especially given that it was advertised as reduced hours), there would be 20% lower expectations as to what you'll accomplish. In other words, they'd expect it would take five weeks for you to do what someone else can do in four.

I mean, that's all they have to determine/enforce how much you time you put in currently... general expectations.

Some people say you work the hours needed to get the job done, but that doesn't really make sense. Somehow the work the company needs to get accomplished gets divided up and distributed to employees. And ultimately you've got to think of how much is reasonable to accomplish. Here, that expectation of reasonableness is going to get reduced by about 20% if they are hired to work that many less hours.

"Sometimes, boring can be exciting."

Well, not really. They are pretty much direct opposites. Do you mean "sometimes boring can be good"? I can get on board that. But it can't be exciting, because then it isn't boring.

Not sure I see the point. If you want to post a fake Wordle unicode that shows you got it right in one try, no one is going to believe you because it is so easy to fake it by just editing the text.

This thing will be likely to fool people, because they won't think you went to the effort to go into a paint program and faked it. (admittedly, that isn't hard either, but still.... )

Should this allow OBS to not capture the actual OBS window itself? I'd think it would be nice to eliminate that from what is captured, for those poor people who only have a single monitor. :)

I imagine that is how someone who doesn't understand nuance would characterize it.

If you understand why such legal concepts as fraud and defamation exist, you would understand that there is indeed nuance to the concept of freedom of speech.

Right, but of course on most recordings (including Neil's own), that seems very unlikely to be an issue.

More significantly, though, the Pono format took about 30 times the amount of data as lossless CD quality. While you are talking more like 1.5 times.

https://www.mouser.com/applications/high-resolution-audio/

Taking a wild guess you aren't a writer. It's simply a colorful (and memorable) analogy that simply uses a situation that is well known as a gag within our culture (similar ones involve anvils and safes).

Nobody here is finding it funny when a piano actually falls on someone. But we've all seen Roadrunner vs. Wile E Coyote, and most of us aren't so uptight that we get upset at such concepts.

Would you have found it better if he said a television set? Because hundreds of people are actually killed by toppling TVs every year. No one has ever been killed in the way depicted in the gag (and alluded to in the article), which is the piano is hoisted on a cable and falls on someone below (typically it is when moving a piano, and it is above a city sidewalk).

To compare it to joking about people with disabilities is just bizarre. Are you just concern trolling here?

https://www.straightdope.com/21344194/has-anyone-ever-been-k...

> you're being severely shortsighted

Do you mean the royal you, or me specifically?

I think mastering is far more important. And I agree other audio formats aren't all great.

But uncompressed CD quality audio is perfectly fine, in terms of resolution, humans can't detect beyond that. Neil's Pono stuff was a waste.... it was MASSIVE datawise for no good reason.

I like Neil, saw him in concert long ago and have listened to a ton of his music over many decades. Admittedly, hardly any in recent years unless I go on a nostalgia binge for a day or two. He is, or at least was, brilliant.

I agree with him here, mostly. I wish a bunch of other artists would do the same. Censorship is a complex issue, but there is a lot of mass delusion going on recently and a lot of lives lost because of it.

I haven't really listened to Rogan except clips of what he's said on this issue. But I liked him a lot on Newsradio.

It's not like it is going to hurt Neil, he doesn't need the money. I can't see a huge amount of people streaming his music anymore.

That said, if Neil wants to be "pro-science," he should have never pushed his high res music stuff which sure doesn't stand up to double blind testing.

Weird comment. It's a piano because falling pianos have been in movies and cartoons as a gag since forever. (Pianos have been raised and lowered via cranes above the sidewalk)

But no one was suggesting " dedicating 100% of the world gdp" to vaccine production.

I'm simply saying that using more boosters in wealthy countries in no way depletes the vaccine, or raises the prices for it, in poorer countries.

I mean, would you agree that wealthy people buying more television sets does not in any way reduce the ability of poorer people to buy television sets?

I would imagine we'd have the capacity to make as many vaccines as someone will pay for.

Yes the factories have to be ramped up but that can be done quickly enough. If those low to middle income countries were offering big bucks for vaccines, the vaccine makers would have just put more resources on it.

The only reason it might make sense that we should stop boosting because it is taking them away from people who need them more, is if the vaccine makers made more than needed, or built more capacity than needed, simply because they didn't anticipate hesitancy.

It would be great if the US and other wealthy countries wanted to subsidize vaccines for poorer countries.... I mean, I'd vote for that. That just means we have less money, though, not fewer doses of vaccine.

(and just to be clear, I'm not saying we should overdo it if there is no point. I'm just saying the article and the position of the WHO is not logical)