TheRealKuni @ TheRealKuni @lemmy.world

Posts

2

Comments

1,888

Joined

2 yr. ago

I agree. The enemy considering using the spell doesn’t know the HP totals. Why should the DM controlling that enemy?

All they’d need to do is generate thumbnails for every period on video load. Make that period adjustable. Might take a few extra seconds to load a video. Make it off by default if they’re worried about the performance hit.

There are other desktop video players that make this work.

Well sure, that’s why I couched it with “I would expect.” My guess is that most cars, even the Peel P50, have enough mass to surface area ratio to reach 420mph. But I haven’t done the math.

Sprinkle a bit of sugar on there and it’s fantastic. Doesn’t take much, just a touch to offset the bitterness.

I would expect that any commercial car can go 420mph if you drop it from high enough.

That’s more terrible than great.

They didn’t call Alexander the Great that because he was a good dude. “Great” doesn’t inherently mean beneficial. The iPhone changed the world. As did Apple stealing their concept for a GUI and cursor from PARC and running with it.

ARM is its own thing.

Sure, but not every ARM processor is the M-series. The M-series proving the capacity of running a desktop OS on ARM in a meaningful way was important.

As someone who is not a musician - crushing all those instruments into one crazy thin form factor may allow me to play around with music but I’d never claim to be a musician

Sure. Although I wouldn’t say someone who creates music entirely on an iPad can’t be a musician.

This is similar to other forms of art. I’ve played around with visual arts on the iPad in ways I otherwise never would, but I wouldn’t call myself an artist. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t artists whose entire medium is iPad.

I was so frustrated by the controversy over that introduction. I thought it was a great way to represent how much the device can do in such a thin form factor. If I were more conspiracy-minded, I would think Apple created the controversy themselves for extra attention. It just seemed so ridiculous.

People got pissy because, in an effort to show all the things the new iPad Pro can do in an insanely thin form factor, Apple made an advertisement in which a bunch of paint cans and musical instruments and books and other stuff were crushed by a giant hydraulic press, and when it rises up, we’re left with a crazy thin iPad.

I thought it was creative. And the new iPad Pro is WILDLY thin. Discounting the camera bump it’s the thinnest device Apple has ever made, thinner even than the iPod Nano.

But the internet got all butthurt because it was disrespectful to art and music or something. They thought the ad was saying we don’t NEED paint or instruments anymore. But obviously the point of the ad was that all of that stuff is squeezed into this device, not that we can destroy everything else.

You know how the internet is. Someone will always be mad about something.

Edit: For the record, I’m a musician myself. I’ve sung with a professional orchestra for fifteen years. I’ve played violin (albeit not very well) for most of my life. And I use an iPad for my sheet music. Before anyone tries to tell me that I just don’t get it because I’m not in the offended demographic.

Apple? The iPhone was kind of a big deal. It wasn’t completely original, but nothing ever is. It made the smartphone worthwhile for the average consumer in a way that Palm and BlackBerry and others simply didn’t, and directly led to the mobile ecosystem we have now.

Obviously there were plenty of players in the space but Apple had right combination of features and potential market due to the popularity of the iPod.

Edit: Oh, also the M-series processor. That’s pretty great.

And yet they turned down having thumbnails for seeking because it would be too resource intensive. 😐

Man insurance is such a scam. They'll only actually offer hypothetical coverage if they know you won't need it 😅

Actually need it? "Well, we have to make a profit! Why would we pay for that thing you're paying us to cover?"

An insurance company takes the data it has about whatever someone wants to insure, uses its actuarial system to find out what its risk value is, and then charges you slightly more than that value over time.

You will probably never need the service, but if you do, they’ll help you out. Because they’re charging more than the actual risk value, over time and over a large enough subset of clients, they’ll make some profit, even while paying to replace or fix people’s houses. Which is fine, they are providing a service and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with profiting from providing a service. You win, they win, everyone benefits.

In return, you get the peace of mind of knowing that if the worst happens, you’ll be at least somewhat better off and able to afford to rebuild.

If the risk of event X gets too high in an area, and the company isn’t allowed to say, “You’re covered for everything but X,” the company would either need to charge enough to cover essentially the value of the house on such a short timeframe as to be untenable, or stop providing coverage. They don’t have infinite money, so if they‘re forced to provide coverage at a lower rate than the risk level, and something like a massive hurricane or flood or fire happens, they go bankrupt. Now no one gets their house rebuilt.

Just because a company only operates where they make a profit doesn’t make them a scam. They aren’t a charity or a public service.

There are plenty of people affected by this fire who are not super rich. Something like 1 in 34 Americans lives in LA County, IIRC, and most of them aren’t super rich. Yes the Palisades area is pretty affluent, but not all of the surrounding areas are. What’s more, the effort to STOP the fire protects everyone.

Besides, most of who we think of as rich in LA is nowhere near the level of the ultra-wealthy whose wealth we should be redistributing. The 400 richest Americans have over $5 trillion in wealth. A-list actors and directors and movie producers are a drop in the bucket in comparison.

The numbers in this are now out of date because it’s from 2021, but it’s still worth looking at.

Money on Zuck been making his own version of TikTok on Facebook.

That’s just Reels, already on Facebook and Instagram.

From there it just talks about a lot of things we could do with a fraction of the wealth of the wealthiest 400 Americans. Things like ending homelessness in America, ending malaria worldwide, and many others. By mildly inconveniencing 400 people, who would still all be absurdly wealthy billionaires even if 60% of their wealth were taken, we could dramatically improve the world.

Stop demonizing your neighbor. Demonize the 1%.

Even more than the 1%, the 0.0001%. An excellent resource to illustrate this point:

Wealth Shown to Scale

I feel like everyone should go through this at least once. It’s eye-opening. Even people who we generally think of as crazy rich, like the average hedge fund manager, are just a drop of water in a pond compared to the ultra-wealthy.

When I first bought my LG TV, the homescreen was great. The cursor-thing with the remote was annoying, but it didn’t really have ads, it had every app I needed, etc.

But it kept updating and then demanding I give it more permissions. Kept getting worse and worse as time went on. So recently I said fuck it, bought an Apple TV, and did a factory reset on the TV. The TV is just a TV now, it has no WiFi access so it doesn’t ever bother me. And the Apple TV is better than the LG OS ever was. Also I can bring the Apple TV to hotels (if they have accessible HDMI ports) which is pretty neat.

I'll let you guess which OS I was using.

Windows 2000 Professional SP4, obviously.

You’re not the first fellow TheReal

<Something>

Most (but not all) music has something to recommend it. If you don’t like entire eras of music it’s not because the music is “bad,” it’s because it’s not to your taste anymore (or, for stuff you didn’t listen to, never was).

Much like with food, if you can find what makes a particular genre enjoyable and listen for that, you can enjoy a lot more. I would never listen to Taylor Swift the same way I listen to Rush or Pink Floyd, but I still loved Midnights. I wouldn’t listen to Bach the same way I listen to Nightwish, but they’re both fantastic.

There’s nothing wrong with being discerning in your tastes. But there’s also nothing wrong with the styles of music you don’t like, it’s just a different flavor. I don’t like cilantro and never will, but I understand why people do. And I didn’t like coffee until I learned how to taste it properly. The same is true of music.