It is my guess that everyone in the thread with "Hey, I don't type normally either and my speed is just fine" comments are likely staring at the keyboard when they type. All two-finger typists I've personally witnessed, even the extremely prolific Roger Ebert, couldn't effectively transcribe a printed document with their learned typing style.
If you never have to type something you're reading, I'm sure unique typing styles are just fine.
I mean, in my case, you could not possibly be more wrong. I haven't looked down at the keyboard since I was 8 or so and would assume most here don't program staring directly at their keyboard. Do you think it impossible for muscle memory to work outside of home row or something?
I used to, until entire notable topics within a certain culture were deleted as "not notable" by editors unfamiliar with the topics.
"not notable" is the cancer within wikipedia. You can't claim to be the sum of human knowledge but also arbitrarily remove articles to meet some imaginary criteria.
> Painting out these movie mistakes as part of a restoration is wrong.
As part of a restoration, yes. As part of a remaster, no.
If the remaster is overseen by the primary creative (such as everything done to the Aliens UHD 4k release, which was overseen and approved by Cameron), then it's official -- and as an audience member, you have to examine how you feel about that. For example, some enthusiasts lament the removal of film grain in Aliens, but Cameron has said in interviews that he hated the grain in Aliens because he was forced to use a particular film stock and didn't like the result. So it was never the director's vision to have excessive grain in that movie, and the audience should accept the 4k UHD release as canonical and authorized.
These debates are colored (no pun intended) by nostalgia, much like the vinyl vs. digital debates.
Movies don't belong exclusively to their authors. They belong to audiences as well, if not more.
If I hate the color grading of a remaster, and this becomes the only version readily available, I don't care whether the original author oversaw the process -- it's a net negative.
And this garbage with color grading happens often :(
I did not play with a controller, which made Dark Bramble effectively impossible to finish because the keyboard is all-or-nothing thrust. Had to cheat to get past it. They should have said that using a controller was mandatory, not recommended.
It's not mandatory, there's 1 part in Dark Bramble where you can go a little faster if you use a very small amount of thrust. You can just use the momentum you came in on though, there's still plenty of time
Biasing the tool for a developer audience would hurt it's usefulness to more general audiences. I did not get the impression the tools were meant only for developers.
In the 1990s, we frequently used the phrase "launch a website" to mean "navigate to the website", so your prompt could have been clearer than just three words.
Your reaction proves the entire point of the Oxford comma -- to eliminate this kind of confusion. It absolutely should have been written as "...Buyser, an AI, software, and data engineer."
There are more reasons to use an Oxford comma than not, and I remain continually surprised that it is not taught as the default.
I intentionally included "a semicolon" in my comment, because, no, even the sentence you wrote is susceptible to garden-path parsing. One _could_ read it as "...written by Buyser, and by an AI, and by software, and by...hmm, wait, there's no indefinite article on 'data engineer', I need to back-up and reparse".
(Just sharing grammatical curiosity, one ~~pedant~~ enthusiast to another - I agree with your second paragraph!)
You're downplaying "Of course those were interlaced to two sets of 262.5 lines". That is what makes interlaced video 59.94 different images per second, and the difference between 30hz updates and 60hz updates is most definitely noticeable.
The eye's response to changing color is slow, but the response to changing luminance is very fast.
You have expertly summarized the first and last lines of my original post about Color NTSC. Interlacing is effectively dithered color super-resolution at low frame rate with blur from fast motion line tearing at the interlace rate.
Your cones are surprisingly low bandwidth (why old color TVs even worked at
30Hz), while your rods provide danger/flicker cues outside the fovea.
Uncorrelated subpixel scale dithering works just fine at 30Hz.
You misinterpreted what he wrote. He wasn't saying that mode 13h didn't work; he meant that the optimizations in the mode 13h path of the executable weren't as good as the Mode Y path. It's the optimization that didn't work, not mode 13h itself.
If you never have to type something you're reading, I'm sure unique typing styles are just fine.