While efficiency is a laudable goal (to which most engineers already aspire), eking by with extreme conservation is highly anti-productive
No...this means we'll have enough coal leftover if and when Yellowstone finally blows.
There's no doubt that nuclear fuel is useful, but that's completely off-topic to the point you started out making.
Yeah, it will. Is QAM-256 in that wide of usage? That might explain why my cable Internet has been so flaky at times. There's a good bit of line noise where I'm at. I'll admit to not looking at my modem to see what modulation it's using.
Car dealers are the worst. I once left a message asking for a quote on a repair. They never called me back....until they tried to sell me a car 6 months later.
If they know the bounds of IPv6 addressing, they'll be somewhat likely to know that IPv5 used the same addressing as IPv4.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
Yes - it wasn't that long ago that VHS-quality video streaming was an edge case.
I think it's worth restating. You will never get a better picture from cable than OTA. Cable uses the existing broadcast stream that already has compression artifacts - the best it can do is preserve that as-is, but that's not realistic.
Cable usually has a very good SNR, but VSB is not used by cable - at least not without a cable box. The link they posted clearly says everyone's using QAM. And QAM-64 is going to put them at around 26Mbps.
When I moved into my current apartment, I discovered that Charter forgot to install a TV filter. I compared two TV's side by side - one OTA and one cable. And the difference was like VHS vs. DVD. Even from 10 feet away you could easily see blurry macroblocking on the cable source, and virtually no artifacts on OTA. On top of that, the contrast was missing, so the signal probably went through some analog equipment before being re-compressed.
OTA is compressed too, but you typically get one "main" virtual channel per real channel. PBS is one exception to that, but with NBC I get probably 15Mbps of picture quality on the main channel, and 1Mbps on the weather subchannel.
No, it doesn't. I don't keep a Facebook tab open, mostly for that reason.
Heh....I guess welfare is an off limits issue huh? It's okay to tax and spend but don't mention people living on the public dole, leeching off the people who produce. Not paying taxes is wrong and illegal, sucking up tax money on welfare is wrong but totally legal. I don't care what you think about my bitching I pay my taxes and I'm fully entitled to bitch about freeloaders. Don't worry though, the cashless society wont bother the entitled.
There is no ad revenue to be made from a video recorded by a friend starting to play automatically in my feed. It plays the video, not an ad.
...as well as actual corporate lobby from GM, etc
I'm not sure about that. GM may lose a good amount of sales to Tesla, but being able to cut out the middle man from every new vehicle sale would more than make up for it.
I wasn't aware that Jackson had ever performed with The Supremes.
...low hanging fruit like cutting the 37% of their bandwidth used on videos by 20-30% by getting HEVC or VP9 really working well
If they wanted to tackle the low-hanging fruit, why not stop auto-playing video at all?
if your president decides who sells what, where, when, and how... you aren't free.
"If your president..." - that's the only part I agree with.
Don't forget that you aren't free when you live in a society with a government. Freedom involves giving up some personal freedoms. For example, for my neighbors to be free to breathe clean air, my coal power plant's emissions are regulated. That is a government limiting personal freedoms for the greater freedom of all.
In the case of car dealers, they offer little of value, and should not be a required part of a car purchase. But you can't make a blanket statement that regulating commerce = evil.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo. - Andy Finkel, computer guy
