At the risk of being snarky, you seem to have no idea what you're talking about. So why did you bother with the post?
Except to truly appreciate what the artist "meant", you'd have to use exactly the headphones they used when mixing. If they used Beats, and you use ones with "flat" response, you're still getting the "wrong" experience. Even more complicated, you really need to be using the headphones that an artist thought you'd be using. They might be using headphones with "flat" response in mixing, but purposefully dialing back on the bass knowing what the effect would be for fans listening through Beats, such that the experience the artist "meant" is best experienced through Beats.
Probably makes the most sense if people just use the headphones that provide sound they like, and not try to act all self-righteous when posting on the internet about headphones.
I always think it's funny when people get really snarky making wrong grammar corrections.
"Their" refers back to "Apple and Bose", although "stall" should be plural. The sentence is saying "so why should we care about which crap is pulled from Apple and Bose's respective stalls".
Which is why this line was included in the description:
"Creating this kind of curved spacetime in the lab won't reveal any new physics but it will allow researchers to study the behavior of existing laws under these conditions for the first time."
I know this is off-topic, but that girl is amazing.
There's no one trick in there I haven't seen before, but the presentation is refreshingly new/fresh.
First it evaporates. It photo-oxidizes once's its freely floating in the air.
Have you read the article?
I know... stupid question.
The hypothesis is that evaporated siloxanes photo-oxidize (in the presence of hydroxyl radicals), then condense onto nanoparticles (that have been separately created by different sources), causing them to grow into the size range that's harmful for humans.
This stuff is also heavily used in building materials -- sealants that keep water from soaking into concrete, for instance. I'd be curious to see why they dismiss such building materials as a source, focusing only on personal-care products. It's possible that there is simply so much more used in personal care products. But the one link that isn't slashdotted doesn't explain why the focus on personal-care products.
This does not seem to have anything to do with method of application. The stuff evaporates off your skin into the air.
The nerds are all off typing two-at-a-time on their keyboards.
The future is now. And it's freaking cool, man.
Oh, I'm sure some nay-sayers will be like "but who really needs this?"
To which I say "need? Who cares about need?"
obligatory picture of that crazy aliens guy goes here.
The right to be forgotten should apply to Facebook as well. What it doesn't apply to is first-party stuff that gets covered by freedom of the press, as that is considered to trump the privacy freedom. Don't ask me how they decide whether or not to consider Facebook "press". I quickly get lost in the mind-boggling logic of telling Google not to list something in an index that is sitting publicly on a website.
You could have a robot unplug/plug HDs, but once you're accepting the latency of disk changes and spin-up, I imagine Blu-Ray disks would be much, much cheaper than a similar capacity of HDs.
I think the point is that if you want access to stuff from an HD, it's got to be plugged into something. The more storage you have, the more of those "somethings" you need, along with the routers and logic to connect them all together. All of that stuff takes power, even when the HDs themselves are asleep.
You could do something similar to the Blu-Ray setup, where a robot plugged/unplugged hard drives instead. But I'll bet once you're going to accept that kind of latency, a robotic Blu-ray juke-box with lots of Blu-Ray disks would be a whole lot cheaper than a robotic HD juke-box with lots of HDs (the lots of Blu-Ray disks vs lots of HDs being where the savings would really be found).