CDs do not have enough bandwidth to provide surround-sound for starters, which is a pretty surreal experience listening to a SACD that is put together well.
there are plenty of other reasonable/logical reasons to go with SACD, like increased resolution, reduced noise, higher fidelity and dynamic ranges...it isn't just a blind raping like Monster HDMI cables or being trapped by a special power adapter on your phone.

That is a great argument.

But do you really believe CDs, that were invented in the 80s, cover everything our ears can hear? KiloHertz, really?

There's a reason Sony produced the SCAD and theres a reason it's popular among audiophiles.

If your hearing is better than that, you're probably a dog.

according to who?

did you perform those scientific studies? or are you referring to the ones possibly financed by Sony?

there's a reason they started working on the Super Audio CD

there's fidelity and dynamic range and all sorts of other stuff that KILO hertz can't keep up with. Sorry to burst your bubble...single static sounds might be reproduced just fine on a CD, but buddy it ain't perfect!

a CD isn't lossless. It peaks at a crappy 44khz and some other numbers. anything digital is broken down into a set of 1's and 0's which eventually, if zoomed in enough, looks like big lego blocks and is missing the smooth curves of reality.

Saying 'lossless' is akin to saying something is 'infinite'.

If you can quickly pick out the difference between 256kbps and 320kbps, I feel bad for you, it'd be a curse because everything would sound shitty. But lossless? comeon, just like Unlimited internet, eh Comcast... nothing in the universe is unlimited, and nothing digital can be 'lossless'.

It sucks that Gearbox has to put their name on this piece of crap.
...because it's actually impressive they got dumped a giant mess of software and were able to polish it up and sell it. Something Broussard wasn't able to do after 13 years.

I'm still shocked by this outrageous quote from the summary

the last unproven piece of the physics puzzle

maybe according to the Current standard model...maybe...but hardly the last physics phenomenon that exists, even at microscopic levels.

I disagree. Etymology is always past-looking, its a neat concept to tract the evolution of speech, but is inappropriately used for 'coining a phrase'. The first use of a word is what makes it unique and new. The word 'finger' is not 30,000 years old, as English was not around back then...even if there was a grunt or motion to indicate the concept. The concept of a 'system the governs the body' has been around since Galen, circa 160 AD.

I like this date better.

Facebook Admin 4: Dammit Jackie Chan is in a lot of photographs!!

The linux guests share ram nicely,

...until all of your linux boxes need ram at the same time.
at least with overprovisioning, you know you won't tip the scales if all your machines burst at the same time.

that was my first thought. i'd sign it and blast him anyway, WTF?

I hardly felt like the Tsunami was pushed back to page 5.

Maybe you need to tone down your sensationalism as well.

CTRL + SHIFT + B will pop the bookmark bar up/down for you.

But I guess I am expecting too much for people to RTFM.

And no, I haven't memorized hundreds of keyboard shortcuts. Just the ones that I found interesting/useful. (probably 5 or 6)

maybe he was trying to kill her.

Link1
Link2
Link3

Do you even read tech/science news?

Put a billion dollars on a Macbook and people will fuck it up beyond recognition. At the moment, the popular virus toolkits and script kiddies all focus on MS, but that is slowly changing.

**I spent 10 seconds googling 'mac vulnerabilities'. I probably could have found some better links, but I don't want to waste any more time on someone so misinformed.

How much work is it to avoid installing fake antivirus?

That is not a problem inherent to Microsoft operating systems.

Just because you haven't seen those popups on your Macbook yet, doesn't mean they aren't right around the corner.