babypuncher

Absolutely, as soon as the midterms are over these corrupt buttnuggets will roll right back over and let the data center construction resume unabated.

My oldest OLED is 8 years old and doesn't have any burn-in. Just don't leave it on some shitty news channel 24/7 and the automatic panel refresh cycles take care of the rest.

Lots of reputable reviewers on YouTube. Some do catch this problem, but they value the greater full screen peak brightness of the LCD panels. What the new RGB backlighting does specifically that they like is narrow the gap between OLED and LCD in terms of color accuracy in wide gamut colorspaces.

I think most people run their TVs too bright, usually because they use them in spaces with terrible lighting conditions (i.e. TV mounted too high above a fireplace facing a west-facing window). I think it's easier to control the lighting in my house than it is to make my favorite TV show look good on an LCD.

Obviously that's still a valid use case, and one where LCD genuinely makes more sense than OLED, but my issue is with the displays being touted as "OLED Killers" when they aren't; they are displays that excel in a very different set of circumstances than an OLED. If I replaced the 8 year old OLED in my basement where 2,500 nits of full screen brightness would be downright painful to look at, the RGB miniLED panel would be a straight downgrade.

I have an 8 year old OLED TV in my basement, a 4 year old OLED in my living room, and a 3 year old OLED monitor for my desktop. With proper care, none of these are showing any real signs of burn-in. All of them absolutely destroy the 4 year old reasonably high end Samsung LCD in my bedroom in terms of picture quality.

I've been seeing people go crazy over these new "RGB" mini LED panels and as an OLED user for almost 10 years now I just don't get it.

The first thing I do to test any LCD panel is fire up an episode of Star Trek: The Next generation. Invariably, one of two things happens as soon as we are presented with an exterior shot of the Enterprise

1. LCD backlight bleed makes space look dark grey/blue instead of black as originally intended.

2. The localized dimming kicks in, presenting truly black space, but rendering the stars (which are smaller than the smallest local dimming zones) super dim or nonexistent.

These latest generation RGB local dimming LCD panels being touted as OLED killers still fall under the 2nd scenario, they don't actually fix the problem at all. LCD is functionally a dead end when it comes to picture quality.

The only reason the US doesn't like the ICC is because we have leadership guilty of crimes the ICC was created to prosecute.

Ah, so the class of people least impacted by the chaos happening down here. The class of people who couldn't care less about things like "civil rights" and "social safety nets" for the poor as long as they get their tax cuts.

Nobody really wins in a race to the bottom

I still don't see the actual point, as the meaning of the dash is already clear from the context around them. The em dash is surrounded by spaces, the en dash is surrounded by numbers, and the hyphen is used in compound words. A single character, the one that already exists on my keyboard, works fine for all three.

SpaceX stock has been tanking since its IPO, I don't think last night's scrubbed launch is the culprit.

Might have something to do with Musk making outlandish promises (AI datacenters in space) and the fact that most of the company's value is tied up in xAI, the shittiest AI provider.

Leap days are predictable whereas leap seconds are not.

If I were to speculate, the point of phillips head was to just be easier to use than flat head while still being easy to manufacture 90 years ago. The better heads introduced since then have more intricate designs that require more precise manufacturing than a simple stamp

Two things can be true: Big Pharma can be evil, and their products are much better vetted for safety and efficacy than random peptides sourced form mystery factories.

> Plenty of people purchase digital movie rentals from Apple, Youtube, etcetera because they know they will watch it once, and the lower price in exchange for a temporary license is acceptable to them. I don't think banning this is pro-consumer.

Many of these services offer cheaper rental options. When you go for the more expensive "buy" option, the assumption that you are actually buying it to keep should hold true.

They're both to blame. Studio Canal insisted on a licensing agreement that works this way, and Sony agreed to it to sell their content.

For Sony, the correct move here would have been to not list Studio Canal titles in the first place, and put out a very public statement saying that they aren't being listed until Studio Canal agrees to make purchased licenses perpetual as they should be.