electrograv

15 ms·

61.
by electrograv 7y ago
Sorry to say, but looking at these specs and price, this is not even in the same ballpark as the image quality offered by modern flagship TVs — which you will get (and should expect in 2020) in this price and size range, and also have the
62.
by electrograv 7y ago
Yeah it’s hard to know how amazing modern OLEDs are from Best Buy demo reels, sadly. It’s something you have to experience in a dark room at home with good content to appreciate to the fullest. BTW I highly recommend you do some research in
63.
by electrograv 7y ago
By any chance is your experience with TVs from Samsung, or bargain brands? Among the top tier brands (LG, Sony, Panasonic, Samsung) only Samsung is notorious for intentionally bad out of box calibration (because oversaturated colors is a ch
64.
by electrograv 7y ago
Sure, a bottom of the barrel TV vs a highly rated PC monitor is going to have a different outcome - no surprise, since that’s not a fair comparison. Compare high end models in similar price ranges (as I have) and you’ll see what I’m talking
65.
by electrograv 7y ago
Unfortunately, the image quality of computer monitors pale in comparison to modern TVs. I recently switched from a Dell P4317Q to an old Samsung Q7 for my gaming monitor, and the quality (contrast, colors) improvement is profound, even with
66.
by electrograv 7y ago
These military jets use what are effectively stabilized infrared telescopes, capable of tracking flying objects many miles away — long before human biological vision has any hope of seeing them. This is crucial because modern aerial warfare
67.
by electrograv 7y ago
I’ve always liked pronouns like “they” because it never made sense to me (when growing up and learning “proper grammar”) why our only singular pronouns must be gendered. It seems better for everyone to focus on the substance of the sentence
68.
by electrograv 7y ago
Rarely is a popular slippery slope argument (whether an accurate prediction or not) an actual logical fallacy: Most of the time when people accuse something of "The Slippery Slope Fallacy", they're mistaken as to what an
69.
by electrograv 7y ago
A legitimate logical fallacy should always "be wrong". The problem is that many people often mistakenly over-accuse arguments as being logical fallacies: the ironic fallacy of false fallacy accusations :)
70.
by electrograv 7y ago
Ah, that’s a good point. I’m a fan of extra safety, though we’d need to make a few extra changes to get around C’s lack of private variables: We could make the internal member instead a size_t, and cast to pointer form when needed inside th
71.
by electrograv 7y ago
Even an inlined function only has value if our goal is to open the door to implementation changes in the future. But because the current implementation is zero-cost (an inlined no-op), any behavioral change will necessary compromise perform
72.
by electrograv 7y ago
As another reply has suggested, you can design the wrapper struct so you can simply write: legacy_fn(my_text.s); Versus the current: legacy_fn(my_text); I don’t think saving two characters per legacy function call is even remo
73.
by electrograv 7y ago
The downside to using a non-inlined conversion function is that (1) it will be slower than just accessing the member directly, and (2) it’s much more verbose. Why not just use the member explicitly? This way, converting a STS string into a
74.
by electrograv 7y ago
Regarding binary trees: You can always go back to using old-fashioned arrays and indices. A few simple contiguous arrays of nodes (e.g. a key array and value array) is often all you need, where nodes simply refer to each other via int indic
75.
by electrograv 7y ago
Yes, both Rust and Zig are two of the most promising languages in this field IMO. Rust's generics is probably the best example of the 'best of both worlds' (high level abstraction, with predictably high performance), but it&#
76.
by electrograv 7y ago
Achieving “not far away from C++ levels of performance” with anything but a procedural-style language is very difficult, rare, and usually comes with severe trade-offs, unfortunately. For example: Haskell has been trying to bring the per
77.
by electrograv 7y ago
Yeah... at this point I half expect to read from Apple: “When we changed the key travel from 1.0mm to 0.5mm, it was so much better that it became the best keyboard in the world. And now, with the change from 0.5mm to 1.0mm, we’ve made it e
78.
by electrograv 7y ago
But let’s imagine for the moment a candidate was actually rejected for being “too introverted”, as an example for the sake of this argument. Disclaimer: I’ve not seen anyone rejected for this reason explicitly, but I have heard an instance
79.
by electrograv 7y ago
With the price difference between a Model 3 and a regular car, you could install an entire theater room system with absolutely top-of-the-line sound quality and power, a cutting-edge HDR projector (or a big OLED TV) which would absolutely p
80.
by electrograv 7y ago
When I see you say “any brand of FIFO loses” in the same post as “what you need is a ring buffer”, it shows that there’s a terminology disconnect here: A “ring buffer” used for streaming data is a brand of ”FIFO” :) Therefore, the impleme
81.
by electrograv 7y ago
I just finished writing a custom FIFO allocator for an extremely high bandwidth and low latency data processing (and UI) system written in C/C++ (even std::deque was doing WAY too many heap allocations, not to mention the allocations
82.
by electrograv 7y ago
Of course, and we’re already seeing incredible results, even from size-compressed deep neural networks running on custom acceleration hardware embedded now in most major smartphones. I was simply responding to the parent post’s false claim
83.
by electrograv 7y ago
> The human brain doesn't use a billion dollars in compute power, figure out what it is doing. This may not be true, if we’re talking about computers reaching general intelligence parity with the human brain. Latest estimates plac
84.
by electrograv 7y ago
That’s right, and this is confirmed by many benchmarks I’ve seen. I agree with pretty much everything in this article except the repeated claim that “Go is fast”. Of course “fast” is relative, but I would reserve it for languages that are n
85.
by electrograv 7y ago
Firstly: I agree that with dithering, properly mastered CD quality should be more than enough in almost all cases. Yet, despite my agreement here, the meta-analysis I posted above clearly demonstrates that empirically we are both wrong!
86.
by electrograv 7y ago
Claiming that a 10db pin drop can be accurately reproduced with only 3 bits per sample without dithering is a rather extraordinary claim, given that human hearing is sensitive to far more than 8 levels of amplitude <= 10db absolute SPL.
87.
by electrograv 7y ago
As others have said, you appear to be confusing bit depth dynamic range for total loudness. They are related in a way, but not in the way you seem to think. (I will demonstrate to you below how even 20 bits per sample can be extremely insuf
88.
by electrograv 7y ago
Source: Section 3.5 (page 9) of this peer-reviewed meta-analysis days “it is well known that the dynamic range of human hearing may exceed 100db. Therefore, it is reasonable to speculate that bit depth beyond 16 bits may be perceived.” htt
89.
by electrograv 7y ago
As far as DACs are concerned, you’d be surprised: A few hundred dollars (e.g. Topping D50) can get you drastically better performance than many multi-thousand dollar “audiophile DACs”: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/foru
90.
by electrograv 7y ago
I agree that if we’re pursuing sheer audio fidelity, CD quality is objectively superior to vinyl in every way. However (as others mention), many vinyl listeners are not after objective sound fidelity perfection: For them, the flaws are part

More ›