Relativistic effects are observed with many other 6th and 7th period elements. For example, the yellow colour of gold and caesium comes from altered electron energy levels due to relativistic orbital contraction, so are the special catalytic and bonding properties of platinum.
A lot of earlier digital timepieces come with arbitrary date range limits and I have always wondered what is the reason behind such limitations.
For example, a lot of camera date backs (used to physically embed time and date on film) could not be set to any date post a certain year, most commonly 2020 but I’ve also seen 2019 and 2029 as cutoffs. Even models that has a 4 digit year format isn’t immune from this issue, and sometimes it’s possible to bypass it by setting the date to Dec 31 2020, let the it roll over naturally to Jan 1 2021 and you will then be free to fast forward the date.
Maybe it’s similar to the YEAR 10000 bug on modern Windows OS where many internal variables could overflow beyond a certain datum so it would make sense to prevent it in the front end.
This paper you linked does not even involve aspartame. The only sweetener they experimented with is saccharin. You can check out the main figures from the link below:
I would be very reluctant to read too deep into this given saccharin is known to behave very differently in animal models - for a long time it was thought to cause bladder cancer, but follow up studies proved that it’s an idiosyncratic reaction only found in female lab rats and no other gender/species combination. Not to mention the dose used was unrealistic to begin with.
It’s entirely plausible that sugar analogs like sucralose and non-calorific sugar alcohols such as erythritol and maltitol can cause long term changes in the gut biome but high quality evidence is still lacking.
Scenario C is more likely the culprit. I have seen multiple examples of prebuilt PCs and laptops defaulting to software RAID mode for reasons unknown, and they did not always have a toggle just like in OP’s case.
The only time I have come across scenario B was with a VAIO laptop from around 2011. The machine was advertised to come with “fastest SSD on the market” which turned out to be four (!) off the shelf eMMC modules in RAID 0 through a hardware controller. As janky as it sounds, OS compatibility was never an issue because the controller was a fairly common model with well established driver support rather than some bespoke mystery.
IMO this is still a passive type of security through obfuscation. Active defence would be more like returning zip bombs to known intruders in order to crash the process.
> Given the other context of your comments I doubt this is a confession of contribution of hubristic affluence contributing to our modern disposable society but I feel like this underscores the point I'm trying to make in my reply.
Let me assure you that none of what I said was meant to diminish your point of view which I agree with mostly.
What I was trying to convey was that people’s mindsets were rather different during the last decade of CRT. CRT had been around since the end of WWII, it may have gotten bigger over the years but the form it took on largely remained the same so there was a sense of continuity as people handed down old TVs when they got something nicer.
When cheap LCD TVs came to the market it represented something more akin to a paradigm shift as people with limited space at home could now easily own screens 30 inches and up. My parents are actually rather frugal with my dad borders on being a tech hoarder who insist on keeping every single cell phone and laptop he ever owned somewhere in his garage. However even he was unable to justify the sheer bulk and running cost of CRT TVs back in that period. Even if he were to give it away there would have been very few takers of any.
Therefore it’s not inconceivable that this model could have been sold in the US or even few more places outside Japan. Most of them simply disappeared without a trace because at some point they were probably worth less than the space it occupies, and people were overly eager to embrace the flat panels without realising that they are not getting some of the utilities back.
> everyone I knew either donated theirs and/or moved CRTs into smaller rooms when they replaced a working one.
That might have happened for a while but by 2008-ish CRTs were being dumped left right and center. My city runs a annual kerbside collection program for large appliances and furniture, and I distinctly remember metal scavengers cruising the street gutting old CRTs people have left out for the copper coils, leaving whatever remains to be collected as hazardous e-waste. Around the same time, my parents got rid of a 16:10 CRT IDTV they bought in the 90s and semi-forced me to throw out a 21 inch IBM P275 I had because "it's using too much power".
In any case I doubt any corporate (or rich household) owner of a 47 inch CRT back then would think too much about replacing it with a larger screen that took up less space. After all it's just another piece of asset that has depreciated to zero value on their books.
Yes, I am aware of those arguments and I am inclined to agree with you. Compared to cultural artifacts which are mostly neutral in terms of externalities, relics of the industrial era suffer more from the cobra effect.
Others in this thread have bought up the future of ICEs and classic car preservation. Back in the early 2000s the US government offered people cash incentives to dispose of their fuel inefficient cars, and by disposal they meant running the engine with an abrasive liquid instead of oil until it is totally ruined beyond repair. Mechanics will tell you horror stories of rare car models being destroyed this way so the owners can claim a few hundred bucks from the DOT. I'm sure car collectors had a field day back then but with such a glut in the market they could not save everything that's worth saving.
Shank Mods was able to obtain a copy of the service manual in English from somebody in the US. This fact probably means that the TV was sold on (or imported to) the domestic US market for a while. (Sony have always allowed individuals to order parts through an authorised service centre, and the latter often insist on requesting a repair manual first even if you are 100% sure of the part number) It's very likely that a number of them existed in the US only to be unceremoniously thrown out by their owners when LCD TVs became more popular. I bet nobody batted an eyelid when that happened.
The other parties you mentioned would probably have less motivation to preserve it, let alone restore it to a fully functional state. I find it rather bizarre that many posters here seem to think that it’s morally preferable for the TV set to rot in Japan rather than getting the proper care in the hands of an American collector, all because of some imaginary cultural baggage.
> I love gaming, and I destress by playing games, but it's not worth the now much higher opportunity cost to play the newer (usually worse) stuff.
This appears to be the reason with all the recent remakes of “not so old” games. People like us are much more likely to pay to relive our past joys in 4K resolution.
However a part of me often wonders if video games have got to the point where every viable idea has been attempted and it’s only downhill from here. When I was a teen, I definitely did NOT envision myself still playing Age of Empires 2 PvP with strangers online but scene is still here.
There is a system wide setting that changes all non-Unicode text encoding to another code page e.g CP932 for Shift-JIS. Third party tools are available to do the same conversion on a per application basis.
It’s not as bad as trying to load some really old CJK web pages on mobile devices: few mobile browser has an accessible option to select character encoding and there appears to be none on iOS. The only option is to change the system language and that didn’t always work for more obscure character codes.
Not surprising because only the edges of the back glass are glued for iPhone 15 so most of the surface is just floating there without support. On prior generations the entire panel is glued.
Not sure what the justification for the change would be, if anything it does make changing the back glass much faster as there is no need to scrape or laser blast the entire surface to remove all the adhesive. It would be interesting to see if this is also the case for the 16th gen.
Hi, OP here. I did not respond since another poster had beaten me to it but here we go.
The reply above yours is mostly correct though I have to admit that “data center IP” could be a bit of a misnomer when it comes to IP reputation. There are essentially 4 categories:
- Residential landline connections are the most mundane but are also least restricted because this is where your average users are found. The odds of bad actors on the same network is fairly low, and most ISPs will overlook minor transgressions to not incur additional customer support costs.
- Mobile data connections are often behind CG-NAT. Blocking entire IP range tends to generate a lot of false positives so it doesn’t happen very often.
- Institutional IP ranges (such as 17.0.0.0/8 or any org that maintains their own ASN) tends to get a pass as well because they tends to have their own IT and networking department to take collective responsibility if something untoward was to happen.
- This leaves public could and hosting services on the lowest tier because these networks have very low barrier of entry for bad actors . Connections from these IP addresses are also far more likely to be bots and scrapers than a human user so most TDS systems are all too happy to block them.
I had to read the article twice to be sure that it was a utilitarian move (however questionable it might be) rather than a grand ideological stand that the article seems to spend much time portraying.
FWIW, data center IP addresses are already being treated as second class citizens by major content/service providers, and this has become an escalating barrier to self hosting. I am honestly not sure what the author is trying to accomplish.
> P67 chipset was trivially electrically compatible with LGA1156 CPUs
Well it’s possible to shoehorn in support for the determined but iGPU support is definitely out of reach and I am not sure what segment of the market is that targeted to. Seems like an excuse for AsRock to get rid of their excess stock. The socket change was actually very well received by everybody in the industry.
> Haswell was a generation with ~0% IPC uplift so no big loss there
You are right that FIVR did not last long in that particular iteration. However Haswell does have a 10% to 30% IPC advantage over the previous gen depending on the test[1].
Haswell also added AVX2 instructions which means that it will still run the latest games whereas anything older is up to the whims of the developer (and sometimes denuvo, sadly)
Intel actually intended for LGA1151 to remain unchanged for Coffee Lake but found out late in the testing process that many existing motherboards did not have enough power delivery capability to support the planned 6 and 8 core parts. Hence the decision to lock them out in software only. They are probably aware of the bad optics but decided that it’s better than trying to deal with the RMAs later.
It’s very similar to what had happened in 2006 when the 65nm Core 2 series were released in the same LGA775 package used by 90nm Pentium 4s, however the former mandated a specific VRM standard that not all comtemporary motherboards supported. Later 45nm parts pretty much required a new motherboard despite having the same socket again due to power supply issues.
AMD went the other route when they first introduced their 12 and 16 core parts to the AM4 socket. A lot of older motherboards were clearly struggling to cope with the power draw but AMD got to keep their implicit promise of all-round compatibility. Later on AMD tried to silently drop support for older motherboards when the Ryzen 5000 series were introduced but had to back down after some backlash. Unlike the blue brand they could not afford to offend the fanboys.
P.S. Despite the usual complaints, most previous Intel socket changes actually had valid technical reasons for them:
- LGA1155: Major change to integrated GPU, also fixed the weird pin assignment of LGA1156 which made board layout a major pain.
- LGA1150: Introduction of on-die voltage regulation (FIVR)
- LGA1151: Initial support for DDR4 and separate clock domains
This leaves the LGA1200 as the only example where there really isn’t any justification for its existence.
I am not too worried about anything pre-2000 as emulation has got really good over the last few years, just in time as the surviving legacy hardware became prohibitively expensive to acquire. The internet archive has also made it easier than ever to access old software.
What concerns me are early 2000s stuff with DRM and server-side content to make preservation difficult if not impossible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_quantum_chemistry