Really? I've heard the last few Trek outings were absolute shit. I've been too busy to see many movies, but after Paramount's shenanigans began I couldn't see making time to give them any of my money. The fans made Trek - if they want to shit on the fans, then the fans can u make Trek. Except that most of them are p'tak.
That's why they're making it hard to cancel and impossible to get your money back.
We canceled our cable subscription about a year ago, and while I was OK with it my wife hated not having certain live TV channels. We'd tried Sling, but it was hit-and-miss on the stuff we wanted. Some channels, like BTN, aren't available at all on Sling. DirecTV is only a little more and actually covers the live programming we want.
Make no mistake, the launch was rough. I don't think they allocated enough hardware or bandwidth to handle their initial demand, so streaming cut out constantly. It's finally getting to be pretty solid, though, and I'd much rather pay Sling a few bucks than have anything to do with Comcast.
Thank California for that. Because apart from the landslide in California, she lost handily in the rest of the 49 states.
There a fundamental flaw.
Brain are extremely parallel and highly distributed processing units.
Some region are more specialised in some tasks, but as a whole, no part of the brain absolutely needs another part for the brain to keep working.
From that perspective, CPU are a small single function device. They either work, or not. It's hard to have a *half functionning" CPU (unless you very specifically manage to burn a peculier par of the silicon that isn't core to the functionning. I don't see how that would be possible on a 6502 - except maybe burning a part of the microcode that is seldom used. Maybe on modern processors it would be possible to burn some acceleration core while keeping the main function intact).
If they wanted to apply fault analysis to analyse computers, the best situation would be approximated by randomly pulling *daughter boards* and see whcih function go missing and/or cause the boot process to hang.
(e.g.: remove the graphics adapter. Computer still boots but produces no video output, thus correctly confirming that these daughter board was the CGA).
Or you could reason at the scale of a cluster, by remove nodes.
(But that won't be much interesting. In a cluster, usually most nodes are entirely interchangeable. It would be as much informative as applying the method to analyse sponges).
You need to find the glasses when you want to watch 3D
and make sure their button batteries didn't die since the last time you used them,
if your 3D googles are of the more popular active variety.
(as opposed to passive glasses with polarized lens [like the cinema theater ones] and the TV screen itself is a polarized emitter).
When you have a display that can handle the frame rate necessary to alternate the picture anyway... what's the cost?
- The weird proprietary connector, that goes to the weird proprietary array of infra-red emitters that needs to send the signal to sync the eyes.
- The integrated IR emitter in the TV that emits the sync signal to the 3D googles.
or, for TV that don't use active glasses
- A weird structure in the pannel that makes sure that every pixels emits light in a different polarity than it's neighbours
(either alternating horizontaly in scanlines, or vertically in column, or in a checkered pattern... whatever, as long a "left image" and "right image" pixels emits different light polarities that will subsequently get filtered by the passive 3D glasses)
(BONUS point : this setup gives dual-viewer capabilities (viewer A and B get to watch 2 different channels thanks to the glasses) which might be popular in some market with cramped living rooms ? Japan ?)
or, for display that do not use glasses at all (e.g.: Nintendo 3DS)
- an even more complex lenticular filter that makes sure that 2 different images are sent in 2 different directions (a little bit like a privacy screen, but viewable from 2 different angles, each showing only half of the horizontal resolution).
and starting from New 3DS, an even more elaborate viewer's face tracking technology to make sure that each of the view eyes get the correct image at the correct perspective.
So, in short : only the most clusmy 3D glasses are those that require the less hardware.
Out of them, only the first variant (proprietary connector) is the easiest to remove (say that the 3D pulse can be sent of the almost-never-used analog headphones jack),
and will still require a clunky setup (an IR emitter bar and active glasses) that will be quite off putting.
Meaning that even less people are likely to try the 3D, except to the 2 geeks at the back over there.
Lots of TVs have headphone jacks, but only a vanishingly small number of people use the jack.
And in fact, you could output 3D image purely with a software upgrade by outputing the "alternate frame" pulse signal over the audio-out jack.
So 3D can be 100% software solution, no hardware required.
(Most of the headphone users are probably anyway getting their audio over bluetooth for the convenience of avoiding cable accross the living room.
And for the last 2 geeks that are interested in 0ms audio latency provided by analog AND want to use 3D, we will probably get entirely fine using one of the other outputs of the TV - cinch, scart, etc.)
Now I come to think about it, I'm sure that during the last craze around VR glasses on PC (late 90s, early 2000s - when glasses started to use standard connectors) there should be at least 1 geek who attempted to hack such a contraption to get around lacking VESA DDC pin support with soundcard output instead.
(I personally went for parallel port hacks and later auto-flipping + interlaced output abuses).
My Panasonic 50-something in TV is *not* a smart TV, and it's about 2 years old. I specifically shopped for a "dumb" TV. The features of smart TVs will quickly become outdated and cumbersome, and I hope to keep a TV for a good 10+ years. It was cheaper than the smart versions.
If the Endowment is large enough they can give every student free tuition. If there is no endowment, everybody pays. In the middle, they need enough people paying full-boat to subsidize the kids who need a full ride. Look at the economics before you assume ill intent. There is no magic money and locking kids into thirty years of debt is no magnanimous gesture.
The whole thing smelled of bullshit from day zero. It's much easier for the US to get someone extradited from the UK than it is for them to extradite someone from Sweden, so the whole running-to-the-embassy thing never made sense, except as a possible means to escape being tried for rape. If the US really wanted him, they'd have had the extradition process started with the UK long before Assange went to the Ecuadorian embassy.
I think the police have actually stopped guarding the Ecuadorian embassy. I'm sure there's still surveillance and they'd catch up with him pretty quick if he did attempt to leave, though.
"Our vision is to speed up time, eventually eliminating it." -- Alex Schure