wyager

27 ms·

451.
by wyager 3y ago
> Midi 1.0 is still in active, since they didn't change the protocol until 2.0 This is not correct at all. There are tons of active extensions on top of the midi 1.0 protocol, even outside of sysex. It's not like they just wrot
452.
by wyager 3y ago
> Not really interested in arguing with you (you seem to be very set in your ways) I've had my mind changed (sometimes in significant ways) many times on HN. I would love it if vegans were correct on this topic, but unfortunately th
453.
by wyager 3y ago
I didn't miss that. I'm saying it's concerning that Germany's energy availability is so impoverished. To quote myself: > I wonder what it would take to get German energy consumption up to a better level.
454.
by wyager 3y ago
Yes, the top 0.001% of genetic freak athletes with the world's best nutritionists and fitness consultants can get away with a highly constrained diet (for a while, at least). BTW, famous vegan athletes almost never start vegan, and t
455.
by wyager 3y ago
> "Biological imperative" at the peril of the planet. I essentially don't care about the state of the planet if there are no humans around to enjoy it. The larger long-term risk to sentient life is that anti-energy people
456.
by wyager 3y ago
Wow, that's terrible. Do Germans not have as good of climate control or something? I wonder what it would take to get German energy consumption up to a better level. It looks like wholesale electricity costs in Germany are around 4x hi
457.
by wyager 3y ago
> Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single biggest way’ to reduce your impact on Earth Also the 'single biggest way' to become unhealthy, weak, and scrawny. There is no conceivable way that the (putative, but questionable) negative e
458.
by wyager 3y ago
Re B, I'm not talking about MIDI 2 > a new pseduo JSON-rpc framework Is this supposed to make me feel better? The primary reason MIDI 1.0 is still in active use is basically that it did not do anything like this.
459.
by wyager 3y ago
My main complaints about MIDI are that: A) The full protocol seems to be proprietary to some degree. To access the official specs, I believe you need to be a paying member. There are other sources, but this is not an ideal state of affairs.
460.
by wyager 3y ago
When was this written? Isn't this kind of of solved by MPE (which I believe Linn makes use of)? We're starting to see several MPE-capable instruments hit the market. I have a pre-order out for the Osmose keyboard, which has per-ke
461.
by wyager 3y ago
> What you appear to be thinking of when you talk about calculating the center is the geometric center, not the center of mass. No, I mean something along the lines of $Integral_V x*m(x) dx / Integral_V m(x)dx$ where $m$ is the mass
462.
by wyager 3y ago
OK great, a couple further questions: > A volume by itself doesn't have a center of mass. Why not? This seems like something we could calculate in an invariant way (I have not actually tried coming up with an expression; this is a s
463.
by wyager 3y ago
Excellent, thank you so much for the detailed response! A couple questions come to mind: 1. In the latter case, where we use e.g. FRW coordinates to define our volume, can we use the usual hack for defining an invariant energy of defining t
464.
by wyager 3y ago
Fair point, AMOLED is basically just an inverted CMOS sensor. I was thinking of PMOLED, but I guess these days that's probably less common.
465.
by wyager 3y ago
Human angular resolution is often quoted at ~1MoA (the estimated angular resolution of this display), but I suspect this is one of those misleading underestimates. Certain types of visual acuity, like Vernier acuity, are much tighter, on th
466.
by wyager 3y ago
CMOS sensor pixels and LED output pixels aren't the same type of circuitry at all.
467.
by wyager 3y ago
If you fix a sub-volume of the universe where the boundaries of the volume are subject to the expansion of space, you can calculate the energy in the volume. The question upthread is clearly "does the energy in this volume increase due
468.
by wyager 3y ago
I have read all of your comments and not one of them actually says anything concrete. It's the exact same vague objection repeated over and over again. Please explain exactly why you think calculating the total gravitational potentia
469.
by wyager 3y ago
How is your objection not a useless and unfalsifiable catch-all that applies to calculating any quantity over a volume?
470.
by wyager 3y ago
Why is it not meaningful? "Isolated systems" seems meaningless - there is no objective cutoff where a gravitational system becomes "isolated", except perhaps in the sense of "non-intersecting light cones".
471.
by wyager 3y ago
> if you fail, you're not destitute and without healthcare If an American businessman fails, they just get another job and life goes on. They still make 3-10x as much as they would in europe.
472.
by wyager 3y ago
> Why can't Europe build amazing high margin software businesses or any hyper growth companies? The regulations are onerous and the taxes are high. Why would anyone take the extreme risks associated with building a high-risk high-re
473.
by wyager 3y ago
The 1st amendment was written in the era of printing presses - should we scrap that too? After all, there's no way they could have predicted the internet.
474.
by wyager 3y ago
Aliens would probably not care that french people have more vacation days.
475.
by wyager 3y ago
Both are collapsing.
476.
by wyager 3y ago
> The f-stop is a physical ratio. Which tells you precisely nothing at all without having other specs to multiply it out. It's a useless spec, in the format presented by Apple. > gauge some arbitrary level of performance The fact
477.
by wyager 3y ago
> fstops are a ratio of focal length to aperture size This number in isolation is completely useless for telling anything about how the resultant image is going to look. As opposed to, say, equivalent focal length, which tells you val
478.
by wyager 3y ago
The only invariant way of specifying gain is ADC linear brightness units per incident photon per subtended angle, in which case the iPhone's gain is vastly higher.
479.
by wyager 3y ago
> The f/1.5 is an actual rating. You're not disagreeing with my actual argument, which is just "they should use the equivalent ratings for both focal length and f-stop". If you prefer physically-based specs, you shoul
480.
by wyager 3y ago
> For exposure purposes, f1.5 is the accurate and most important spec for that lens. This is a very common misunderstanding. To whatever extent the camera "looks like" it's using a 35mm-format f/1.5 lens from an expos

More ›