From wikipedia: "The name 4K is derived from the horizontal resolution, which is approximately 4,000 pixels."
Since standards have almost always used vertical resolution in naming until now, this is confusing to the point that I suspect it was motivated by the intent to mislead.
The religious are stupid, and worthy of ridicule. A desire to protect them from words is a desire to suppress opposition to stupidity. Any politician who does so should rightly be called out for allowing religion to dictate his/her political views... great fun when your representatives share your own religious outlook; not so fun when you're the one being oppressed. Try to keep that last bit in mind.
People who can't distinguish between being religious and being unable to react reasonably to criticism are stupid.
It's certainly a worthy goal to never need to change the monitor mode. However, I don't think we're quite there yet. Most games that rely on 3D acceleration cannot maintain the maximum frame rate at the maximum resolution supported by the monitor. Therefore, users need to be able to choose resolution to tune the game to their machine and preferences. Once frame rate is truly independent of mode, there should never be a need to reduce resolution.
Or, perhaps they feel using a drone to make an attack, rather than risking American soldiers, is the better choice?
Are you implying it's a viable option to invade Pakistan and Yemen, both supposedly friendly countries, in addition to Afghanistan? Even if the US military had sufficient ground resources to take over two new sovereign nations, there is not the political will to do so. Therefore, the choice is between drone strikes or nothing.
It's going to happen some day. The world will be dominated by Islamic idiots because the rest of the world will do nothing but appease them.
One little tragic baby step at a time.
I doubt the Saudis are deluded enough to think this proposal will go anywhere. In the extremely unlikely event that something were accomplished in the UN, it would be ignored by everyone who isn't already interested in censorship of this kind.
If you have "one overriding idea,"
Like "everything is an object" in Git?
What you have to keep in mind is that the idea that "one overriding idea" is wrong is a pretty overriding idea itself. Linus doesn't believe in absolutes except when he does.
Sure, maybe those rotating platters are ok in some NAS box that you keep your big media files on (or in that cloud storage cluster you use, and where the network latencies make the disk latencies be secondary), but in an actual computer? Ugh.
Hey Linus, guess what's my favorite kernel to run on that NAS computer? Yours. And yes, it is an "actual computer." Sorry if it's not sexy enough for ya.
Linus made it clear that storage isn't his thing. I'm glad we've had other equally brilliant people contributing to XFS, Btrfs, LVM and other storage technologies in Linux. Linus seems quite content to leave that stuff to people who care about it and have put a great deal of work into it. Now if he could just have the same attitude toward GUIs and those who design them, I'd have a bit more respect for him.
A luxury or a human right. What there isn't a middle ground here?
Yes, they asked a leading question based on a false dichotomy and got a stupid answer. Internet access is a utility, like electricity or clean water. Like those things, the more people have access to it, the better off they will be. However, equating utilities with the likes of freedom of speech and freedom from slavery is a slap in the face of anyone who has struggled for those true human rights.
I respectfully disagree. Without utilities like the information superhighway, or the actual highway, or clean water, things like 'freedom of speech' and 'freedom from slavery' are almost meaningless. I'm reminded of the scene in the movie 'The Matrix' where Neo first encounters 'supernatural' physics. After Neo demands his 'right to a phone call', agent Smith wryly states - "What good is a phone call, if you are unable to speak" (as Neo's lips become sealed shut due to the Matrix's master's control over 'reality'.
I didn't think I'd have to point this out, but the Internet is not the Matrix. Reality as we know it didn't come into existence in the 1980s. The Internet is a very young tool for people to communicate with each other. It is very important now and will only become more important. However, unless you're playing WoW all day long, it's probably not your primary source of sensory input.
Something else that should be pretty obvious is that people have been fighting against slavery and for free speech for a lot longer than the Internet has existed. What were the authors of the United States Bill of Rights talking about if they didn't have the Internet to give it meaning?
As ludicrous as it is to call Internet acces a human right, I do agree that it's very important and the more people that have it, the better. I'd put it a bit behind access to clean water and electricity in importance.
Rights are only appropriately applied to liberties. You never have the right to someone else's property or labor. Goods and services are not something you can have a "right" to.
Access may be a compelling social good but it is absurd to call it a right.
I couldn't agree more. There seems to be a lot of muddled thinking out there these days that assumes that if something is important to society, it is a right. Regardless of how important Internet access or health care are, they will never be rights any more than it is a right to have a steady income.
A luxury or a human right. What there isn't a middle ground here?
Yes, they asked a leading question based on a false dichotomy and got a stupid answer. Internet access is a utility, like electricity or clean water. Like those things, the more people have access to it, the better off they will be. However, equating utilities with the likes of freedom of speech and freedom from slavery is a slap in the face of anyone who has struggled for those true human rights.
If I were to sell a house for 500k in San Francisco, it might be called cheap, where if were to try to sell the same house in BFN, California, it would be laughably overpriced... but they're still both 500k. You can't say one is "cheaper" than the other. This might be an interesting fact about the US that was determined, but the fact is definitely -not-, "beer is cheaper in the US than anywhere else in the world".
Also that first sentence was interesting, as it turns out, it is as a great example of something we call a "runon sentence", a remarkably unreadable one.
You clearly didnt read TFA, which did not compare price in dollars, but in time. Amount of time in a day is one thing that is truly universal across the Earth.
It considers abominations like Bud Light to be beer.
There are probably equally terrible local brands in India.
With so many people ditching Cable and Sat TV plans in favor of an Internet-Only household, and with the Cable Companies being the majority providers of Internet Access, of course we had to see this coming.
Vz and Comcast aren't going to sit idly by while their subscribers ditch the media services and keep only the delivery service, and spend their money at Netflix and other media services.
The question is, will it be considered anti-competitive for them to allow unlimited delivery of their own media over the pipe, while charging extra for media from their competitors? I certainly think that's anti-competitive, and where net neutrality needs to come into play. But, I doubt we'll see it happen, at least in the US.
Of course it's a giant conflict of interest that cable companies provide Internet service. However, it's not obvious how this should be fixed. So far, it doesn't seem likely that truly independent ISPs will come along as a result of purely market forces. The government could force the businesses to be separate, but they don't have a terribly good record dealing with stuff like that.
This is a good thing, but corporations contributing to Free Software projects has been business as usual for over a decade now. Generally, they do so because they correctly perceive that cooperation is more beneficial to their respective bottom lines than keeping everything secret. Even Oracle, a corporation with a clear history of hostility to Free and Open Source software has supported development of the Btrfs Linux file system for many years. Cooperation between competing corporations is nothing new. Observe how Apple continues to buy essential components like CPUs from Samsung while both continually beat on each other in court.
Too bad they didn't test Nuka Cola as well.
This is how you MAKE Nuka Cola.
No, it's how you make irradiated Nuka Cola. The regular stuff was made before the bombs fell.
The best way to accelerate a Macintoy is at 9.8 meters per second per second.
