But 2K and 4K do refer to the horizontal resolution. There’s more than one resolution that’s referred to as 2K, for example 2048 x 1080 DCI 2K, but also 1920 x 1080 full HD, since it’s also almost 2000 pixels wide. The total number of pixels is in the millions, not thousands.
For 4K some common resolutions are 4096 x 2160 DCI 4K and 3840 x 2160 UHD, which both have a horizontal resolution of about 4000 pixels.
That’s not as effective, since it can’t block anything that’s hosted from a hostname that also serves regular content without also blocking the regular content. It also can’t trick websites into thinking that nothing is blocked and it can’t apply cosmetic rules. I use it for my devices, but in browsers I supplement it with uBlock Origin (or whatever is available in that browser).
I’m not going to defend Apple’s profit maximization strategy here, but I disagree. Most people won’t end up buying a cable and adaptare because they already have one, and in contrast to those pieces made of plastic and metal, the packaging is mostly made of paper. I’m pretty confident that the reduction in plastic and metal makes up for the extra packaging that’s produced for the minority that does buy a cable and/or adapter.
I would look into how Matrix handles this, for example. It involves unique device keys, device verification from a trusted device, and cross-signing. It’s not just some private key that’s spread around to random new devices where you lose track of.
They’ve implemented it in such a way that you only have access to an encrypted chat on a single device, so no syncing between devices. Syncing E2EE chats across devices is more difficult to pull off, but it’s definitely possible and other services do that by default.
I don’t understand the relevance of what you’re saying. Do you mean that the platform should have the right to allow biological females only (following the definitions of your law system)? Do you think that that’s implied when a platform is female only and defensible in court? Not a snarky remark, just genuinely curious what you mean. This case was all about gender identity discrimination and I don’t see how biological sex fits into the picture.
She had sued the platform and its founder Sally Grover in 2022 for unlawful gender identity discrimination in its services, and claimed Ms Grover revoked her account after seeing her photo and “considered her to be male”.
Judge Robert Bromwich said in his ruling that while Ms Tickle was not directly discriminated against, her claim of indirect discrimination was successful as using the Giggle App required her “to have the appearance of a cisgender woman”.
Judge Bromwich said the evidence did not establish Ms Tickle was excluded from Giggle directly “by reason of her gender identity although it remains possible that this was the real but unproven reason”.
“Uncensored”: https://x.com/KarlMaxxer/status/1823753493783699901. I don’t know if this is really true, but if it is, it’s something that they should’ve called out in their article.
Right, I see what you mean now. I misread your comment as explaining something that was already clear.
A false positive is when it incorrectly determines that a human written text is written by AI. While a detection rate of 99.9% sounds impressive, it’s not very reliable if it comes with a false positive rate of 20%.
“Our analysis shows that the two voices are similar but likely not identical,” Berisha said.
They also point out the main differences between the two voices in the paragraphs below this quote. I do believe that they hired a voice actress and that they didn’t train on SJ’s voice, or at least not entirely. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was big push for finding a voice similar to SJ’s voice in Her, no matter how much they deny this.
For me they only work in relatively quiet environments, or with earplugs. As soon as a car drives by it completely drowns out the sound. With music that might not be an issue, but with podcasts or calls it’s very annoying. I’ve bought earplugs especially for this, as my other earbuds have issues with wind while running, but it does feel like it’s defeating the purpose a bit. I guess turning them all the way up would also work, but that doesn’t feel healthy. Other than that I like them and the mic quality is also good according to people I’ve spoken with over the phone.
It is, though. Safari has native support for 3rd party adblockers, it’s just that many people don’t know. AdGuard is one of the good options. Safari is doing the actual blocking for the most part (the extension just hands over the filterlists), but nowadays some of the adblockers include an optional extension that applies some rules for complex ads that are not supported by the Apple API, such as on YouTube. As an end user you just have to install and enable the adblocker.
Then there are also other browsers available with built-in adblockers. Admittedly those are all limited in some ways because they’re forced to use the same browser engine (outside of the EU), but they are very effective at blocking ads.
For me it works fine, but I guess that might be because I use the flatpak version of Firefox.
deleted by creator
Note, however, that the mere fact that all those apps exist for iOS adds a lot of value for Apple too. Apple wouldn’t sell nearly as many iPhones if the most important apps weren’t available on their platform. They spin it as if they are only creating value for the app developers without asking for much in return, while the App Store is an enormous cash cow, which they’ve been able to build due to the lack of restrictions (pre DMA). A good API is not just a service for app developers, it’s a way to enhance the user experience and sell more phones, because of all the work that app developers do to turn it into useful and exciting features.
I don’t doubt the fact that they take some margin to extend the lifetime of the battery, but if we take iPhones as an example, they:
This makes me suspect that that the margin between what’s reported in software as 100% and the actual capacity of the battery is less than 20%. This also makes sense from the standpoint of the consumer expecting a long battery life on their expensive high-end device, putting pressure on the companies to make the margin smaller and the charging algorithms smarter. Just my observations, of course.
I’m pretty sure that Chrome’s alternative is designed by Google to track you in a way that’s harder to block and gives them more control over the advertising market by forcing advertisers to play along and use their method instead of collecting your data directly. Sure, it’s more private, but it’s still tracking you.
Firefox, on the other hand, is focusing on completely blocking cross-site tracking. They have no incentive to completely block 3rd party cookies as long as there is also a legitimate use case for them, but I guess they will eventually also block them if Chrome is successful in forcing websites to stop relying on them for core functionality.
But then when you’re talking about 10:00 hours without specifying anything else, it actually means something completely different in the local context, apart from it being the exact same time globally. It doesn’t tell you whether it’s night or day at the other persons location. Your default point of reference in that system is the world, while even today, time is mostly used in a local context for most people. When I’m talking to someone abroad and I say “my cat woke me up at 5:00 in the morning”, I expect the other person to get the meaning of that, because the other person understands my local context.
When planning meetings you’d have to now the offset either way, because I’m not going to meet at idiotic times if there is an overlap in working hours between the two countries, which is something that you’d have to look up regardless of the time system. And if I send out a digital invite to someone abroad, the time zone information is already encoded inside it, and it shows up correctly in the other person’s agenda without the need to use a global time. In that sense UTC already is the global time and the local context is already an offset to that in the current system. We just don’t use UTC in our daily language.
But if it helps: I do agree that in an alternative universe the time system could’ve worked like that and it would have functioned. I just don’t see it as a better alternative. It’s the same complexity repackaged and with its own unique downsides.
But with such a system in place, what are we actually solving? If we’re agreeing on offsets (which would happen in a sane world), we’re just moving the information from one place to another. In both systems there is a concept of time zones, but it’s just the notation that’s different, which adds a whole new bunch of stuff to adapt to that’s goes very much against what is ingrained into society, without offering much in return. It’s basically saying “it’s 10:00 UTC, but I’m living in EST, so the local offset is -5 hours (most people are still asleep here)” [1]. Apart from the fact that you can already use that right now (add ISO 8601 notation to the mix while you’re at it), it doesn’t really change the complexity of having time zones, you just convey it differently.
Literally the only benefit that I can come up with is that you can leave out the offset indicator (time zone) and still guarantee to be there at the agreed time. Right now you’d have to deduct the time zone from the context, which is not always possible. That doesn’t outweigh the host of new issues that we’d have to adapt to or work around in my opinion.
[1] In practice we would probably call that 10:00 EST, which would be 10:00 UTC, but indicate the local offset.
It’s off by default, but activated when you end your search query with a question mark. That option can be turned off.