I think they don't have sufficient evidence on that, and they're just wondering if the timing is coincidence or not. (And there are many ways the two could be connected -- it wouldn't have to be a direct FBI op.)
I appreciate so much the pragmatist's approach to their methods. They mentioned the coincidence and that they had no evidence to support that hypothesis. They did not accuse anyone of anything, they only requested investigation.
I'm stating this because I think it might be the most important distinction in our lifetime. I think that wars are fought, lives are lost, and maybe even society itself will be lost, on that distinction and those of its like.
bit dramatic but arguably true. then again most of the time when people make such accusations that lead to conflict, they do it while punching downwards. here they're likely being careful not to make the accusation mostly for fear of the wrath of the FBI. if it it were someone a little less fearsome perhaps they'd be less careful
VR is particularly bad for this because, on OLED, higher brightness = greater burn-in and VR headsets generally significantly over-drive their tiny displays.
Naturally the solution to all of this is MicroLED which will have the benefits of OLED without the downsides. But until then, the only device I'm using OLED for is my phone (and only because I no longer have a choice).
> Even modern OLED experience burn-in (despite them announcing every year that "this time we solved the burn-in issue!"):
Yes, but it's not degrading as fast as OLED haters makes you think. I spent days playing the same games (so HUD is in the static place) on multiple OLED screens I owned for years. No noticeable burn-in and still looks better than my only IPS screen.
(rewriting this comment because the spec sheet has seemingly been updated)
Looks like it can do 4k 120hz, but since it's limited to HDMI 2.0 it will have to rely on 4:2:0 chroma subsampling to get there. Unfortunately the lack of HDMI 2.1 might be down to politics, the RDNA3 GPU they're using should support it in hardware, but the HDMI Forum has blocked AMD from releasing an open source HDMI 2.1 implementation.
I'm not sure that would work. From what I can tell, the adapters are basically dumb straight through cables, they aren't converting anything. And it's the actual GPU that's outputting a HDMI signal over the Displayport connector, which the adapter than rewires in to a HDMI shaped connector.
> And it's the actual GPU that's outputting a HDMI signal over the Displayport connector, which the adapter than rewires in to a HDMI shaped connector.
There are two kinds of DP to HDMI adapters. The passive ones are like you said, they need special support on the GPU (these ports are usually labelled as DP++), IIRC they only do some voltage level shifting. The active ones work on any DP port (they don't need AFAIK any special support on the GPU), and they do the full protocol conversion.
... but isn't it using a wireless dongle to connect to the headset to the PC so HDMI doesn't get involved?
It seems to me the wireless is pretty important. I have an MQ3 and I have the link cable. For software development I pretty much have to plug the MQ3 into my PC and it is not so bad to wander around the living room looking in a Mars boulder from all sides and such.
For games and apps that involve moving around, particularly things like Beat Saber or Supernatural the standalone headset has a huge advantage of having no cable. If I have a choice between buying a game on Steam or the MQ3 store I'm likely to buy the MQ3 game because of the convenience and freedom of standalone. A really good wireless link changes that.
So, in the specs for the mini-pc, it claims the video out can do 4K @ 120Hz (even faster if displayport). I assume the 4K @ 60Hz you saw is from the "4K gaming at 60 FPS with FSR" line.
I reckon it can probably stream at 4K@120 if it can game at half that.
Considering how much they talk about Foveated rendering, I think it might not be constrained by the traditional limitations of screens - instead of sending a fixed resolution image at whatever frequency, it'll send a tiny but highly detailed image where your eyes are focusing, with the rest being considerably lower resolution.
It's all in the same direction. The kind of ignorance a question like "What’s divisive about a pride flag?", even if sincere really highlights this. There are a lot of people and thoughts in the world, and there is a lot of effort trying to forcefully suppress some to then trying to make other things appear "non-divisive". This hegemony that is in effect in a lot of places has way too much similarity to authoritarian regimes where there is no visible criticism of Dear Leader, because if any is spotted, off to the gulag you go. See, Dear Leader is loved by everyone!
In the end, people that tend to say things like "kill/punch/etc [group]" just because of their own inhumanity and need to say such things because they feel some groups are "fine as targets", while trying at their best to put said labels on anyone they disagree with (with almost no one actually truly belonging under those labels!), tend to be the same crowd that go in the direction of the less extreme political signaling. This is why the common solution of just banning stickers altogether is the norm when a solution is put in place. Sadly legit relevant signaling like showing one's knowledge of specific technologies with stickers suffers as collateral damage, but is not comparable to the damage of losing team spirit in a team that could otherwise pool their resources and knowledge on a task they CAN work together with.
And I say this as someone who has been in a leadership position in teams where I knew there was a lot of potential for such things to ruin everything. If I didn't witness things being kept professional in said teams, especially in one of them, I wouldn't have believed it could ever even have worked as well as it did, and it did so well. Better than other parts of the company even, given there was genuine effort put in to stay kosher and people ended up being more mindful of each other.
>but you don’t seem to have the courage to respond.
What? I wrote my comment literally yesterday lol. Now looking at the replies, most of them either don't seem to have much sincerity to them or have little chance of furthering anyone's understanding if engaged. I've learnt that it's better to minimize time wasted on trolls when there's little benefit to arguing with them even for the public representation when I can instead use my time working on my projects.
I struggle to believe you don't understand what they mean. There is many a homophobe in the world. GP isn't saying homophobia is good, simply that espousing a pro-LGBT viewpoint may upset people. Maybe they deserve to be upset, but that doesn't change that it may become your problem.
> simply that espousing a pro-LGBT viewpoint may upset people.
Y'know, I'm pretty much fine with upsetting bigots. I'd assume that people inclined to be upset by a scary pride flag are also upset by my _existence_, so, y'know, I don't see a strong reason to moderate my stickers to protect the delicate feelings of idiots. If they're a homophobe they'll have a problem with me _anyway_.
Sincere or not, the obvious should be stated here that distain for extremely politicized gender movements has little to do with outstanding opinions for said actual sexualities. I've personally voted for (several!) gay political candidates and attended a gay wedding, among other similar things.
The current day form of the lgbt(...) movement has done more damage to their representation than the natural, mostly not strong but dismissive opinions of the common folk could ever have. The screaming intentional ignorance of criticism of its increasingly radical extensions and effects sometimes makes me think we're not just living in the world of Idiocracy, but in the version of the world that comes after it ...
People can become upset for a great variety of reasons. I think it's better to accept to some extent that it happens than to design your life around not upsetting anyone.
I’ve been tempted, but a lot of the forum feedback (ie not the breathless YouTube “reviews”), suggest that optically they are pretty bad, especially near the edges.
The xReal ones are extremely workable. Like, you wouldn't want to do it by preference if a good monitor was available, but easily good enough for a situation where you don't want to use a monitor or don't have one.
I also have the Viture Pros. They are awesome for airplane/hotel use. Not great as second monitors, as you say optically they aren't perfect and text makes that show a bit more... but if you hook up a steamdeck or want to watch Netflix on the go it's great!
Don't get me wrong, they work as a monitor in a pinch on a plane when you need privacy it's just not going to ever replace a real monitor for you.
>> What I mean is you can’t just look at a board and know the ko “state” - but yes I’m sure in practice it’s not that important.
> Chess also has this "problem" thanks to rules like castling and en passant capture.
Chess is intended to be stateful. If you forget whether a castle has occurred (and then the king walked back to its starting position, and a rook repositioned into the corner) or not, chess players will note that you've messed up the game. The castling rule is there to stop you from castling more than once.
Go is not intended to be stateful, and if you forget that a particular board layout may have come up in the past, go players will not note that you've messed up the game. It doesn't matter. The ko rule isn't there to stop you from repeating a board twice. It's there to stop you from having to repeat a board layout an infinite number of times, because things like the need for food and sleep would interfere with the game.
Wrt the implementation concern, this distinction means, for example, that you must always track the castling state regardless of whether a player asks for it, whereas you're fine not bothering to track the history of a go board unless a player asks for it. You can just say "if you want to invoke ko, press this button, and we'll remember that board layout, and if it's already been flagged, the game will draw". That isn't done, but it could be done.
I'm not a Go player so I don't really know how it works in practice, but what you are saying seems to disagree with the wording in Wikipedia, so I'm curious which one is correct?
You say:
> if you forget that a particular board layout may have come up in the past, go players will not note that you've messed up the game. It doesn't matter. The ko rule isn't there to stop you from repeating a board twice.
Wikipedia says:
> Rule 8. A play is illegal if it would have the effect (after all steps of the play have been completed) of creating a position that has occurred previously in the game.
> Consequence (ko rule). One may not play in such a way as to recreate the board position following one's previous move.
> While its purpose is similar to that of the threefold repetition rule of Western chess, it differs from it significantly in nature; the superko rule bans moves that would cause repetition, whereas Western chess allows such moves as one method of forcing a draw.
To me that sounds like you do need to track this, in both chess and in Go, though for different reasons (to force a draw vs to prevent an illegal move). Is this not enforced in practice?
More wind means less mosquitos. One step forward and one step back.
Also don't fly with sas to the faroes. They turn back and try again the next day like in the article. Fly atlantic airways, they have equipment to fly through the fog or they will refuel in iceland and try again same day.
If you want to enjoy a day in an airport hotel and be late for what you are travelling for then sure. Sas plane is full of tourists who don't know. Locals all use atlantic airways cause they know they actually land.
I don’t know if you didn’t read or didn’t believe what the other poster said about Atlantic Airways, that they have the equipment to manage the fog and the ability to refuel in Iceland and therefore can try again the same day if necessary. The implication being that SAS have neither - that’s presumably the ”reason they choose to do what they do”.
It’s not unreasonable to think that Atlantic Airways, being a Faroese airline, are better equipped than others to get people to the Faroe Islands.
Pretty much every commercial pilot is ILS rated... but it depends on the airline if they are okay with landing in fog or with extra expense flying all the way back and providing a hotel;)
I'd expect a Scandinavian airline to be prepared for bad weather; rain, fog, and snow are completely common occurrences in all major Nordic airports, can't see why nor how SAS would be able to operate without pilots being well-trained on flying in bad conditions.
Can't help ya. A big flat major airport in fog is different to a tiny runway with steep terrain in proximity in fog that's just it. If lose ILS at the wrong time, some turbulence and you meet a mountain.
I’d say the same about East Anglia in UK, but in early ‘90s there was a tremor strong enough to notice. It was particularly strange then because you had to wait for the news on TV or radio to mention it.
That in itself is quite shocking really.