I remember one famous game, where the winning side spends the last turns throwing away pieces, only to force a mate through to position gained. I wonder if that play would have been discarded with this approach?
While I agree that claiming a better picture from more expensive HDMI cables is just empty sales-talk, there is a valid point which is often/always overlooked in the HDMI debate: You *can* make a better digital cable. Just look at the different grades of network cables (CAT5, CAT6, etc). So there is a very real reason to make better HDMI cables - they will work over longer distances.
I'm not sure that higher price equals better quality, but no matter what, there is such a thing as a "good" and a "bad" HDMI cable. And since none of us really have any idea of the characteristics of the different cables being discussed here, we can't judge whether the cheap ones are as good as the expensive ones. They may very well be, but it isn't a god-given truth, that only simple, non-technical people would doubt.
There are many. many good reasons to laugh at the pricing of many HDMI-cables and the outrageous claims about what they will do, but I feel that a few more nuances in the debate would suit it.
We report on a computation of congruent numbers, which subject to the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture is an accurate list up to 10^12.
Real programs don't eat cache.