Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | maayank's commentslogin

wait. If I use VLC (for example) on AppleTV to play something from my network using SMB or DLNA, I cannot get Dolby Atmos?

Right. I'm under the impression that it's a licensing thing. It also can't do TrueHD Atmos in general. Just lossy Dolby DD+ for audio. It also doesn't do Dolby Vision properly, only supporting the profiles meant for streaming that use less data.

Similarly, It CAN do Atmos for E-AC3 audio, but E-AC3 is meant for streaming, so it's really rare to have that in a file you're playing back locally.

Basically, it just falls back to whatever the next best thing it can support is at the hardware level.

This is one area where Android wins. The Nvidia Shield, despite being ancient, is your best bet for local playback. It's still limited on the supported Dolby Vision profiles, but can just pass the audio through to your receiver without mucking with it. So you get all the bells and whistles.

Other than the shield your only alternatives are weird dedicated devices that are literally built for playing back UHD blu-ray rips (Dune HD, etc).

https://community.firecore.com/t/help-get-more-dolby-atmos-o...


Dolby TrueHD and DTS:X audio tracks (from Bluray) are played as lossless 7.1 PCM.

Only Dolby Atmos from WEB-DLs will play, and you need to use a supported player (like Infuse or VidHub).

It’s a tvOS limitation.


Why would that be a game changer? Genuinely curious.


> old favorite hasbada tactic

If you're going to use anti-semitic online trolling tropes at least spell them right. It's "Hasbara" and no Israeli under 80 years old uses this word on any day to day basis.


Thanks for the spelling correction. Autocorrect on my phone didn't handle that word right.



> when I asked it how, it mentioned that it knows I live nearby

Did it mention it in its chain of thought? Otherwise, it could definitely output something because of X and then when asked why “rationalize” that it did it because Y


Is “they were bought because they’re Israeli intelligence” the new “Jews control the banking system”? Please update, I’m somehow missing the residuals from both :(


if you read all the previous Wiz related threads, you'd know that the elders of zion had decided to finance their world domination efforts through selling companies that start with W to Google


How do you make virtual cards?


Lots of banks have them these days. In the US there's also stuff like privacy.com (unaffiliated, not even in the US personally :p)

Last I used Revolut 2 years ago, they even had a "disposable" virtual card, meaning after 1 charge it's automatically deleted.


They can force-post right past Privacy.com's veil, NYTimes did it to me. Here's what Privacy's support rep had to say about it:

> Hi, Firstname

> I've been reviewing your dispute and wanted to touch base with you to explain what happened.

> It appears that the disputed charge is a "force post" by the merchant. This happens when a merchant cannot collect funds for a transaction after repeated attempts and completes the transaction without an authorization — it's literally an unauthorized transaction that's against payment card network rules. It's a pretty sneaky move used by some merchants, and unfortunately, it's not something Privacy can block.


How does the force post get to you though? Surely that involves privacy.com participating.


Exactly. The number of times I've caught support for various companies outright lying to me is actually fairly alarming.

It's also very obviously not against the payment network rules, otherwise privacy.com wouldn't be actively participating.


This is my speculation, but I think privacy.com isn't actually in the middle as thoroughly as we think they are. They're just making up a new card number that still corresponds to my same old account, and they're responding to verification queries saying "yup, that's the right name and address, verifies just fine!", which provides the privacy they claim to.

Note, their name isn't SpendingLimit.com.

This shook me plenty and I no longer use them for anything I actually need a spending limit on. They're still good for their namesake privacy, with a very limited scope (i.e. scummy merchants), but it's a very thin veil and easy to pierce.


Aye, 'privacy.com' is who I go with. Would prefer a first-party solution like other countries/financial services.

It's a little counter-intuitive to introduce another party to improve privacy. I find it worthwhile for the pausable and vendor-locked cards.


Is it just me or the post and the hn title don’t match? All I see is several paragraphs and a summary to the effect of “managers of managers should trust their decisions to terminate ICs” - no discussion on how to actually manage the ICs you can’t fire as a manager, which is the content the title (“Managing People You Can't Fire”) states


The titles match, but the article is rambling and indecisive.


what brands get proprioception well?


I think anything whose soles are really thin and not too hard. I'm partial to Xero, but there's a lot of possibilities.

I do think all shoes, except those original Vibram Five Fingers, are not a great substitute for barefoot running itself. Running barefoot on a nice grass field feels so much nicer and more fun, too! But the minimal shoes do help force you to feel the ground and not just slam into it, so I think they can help.

Whatever you do, I'd only make changes slowly: try 10 minutes of barefoot running or with different shoes, a couple times a week at the end of a normal run, and go from there.


Yes, but it requires a truly disciplined management layer to foster such an environment, e.g. not commenting negatively in 1:1s on the comments of a 3rd party and remediate immediately any such accidental remarks that might hurt the safety to be vulnerable.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: