• 0 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 10th, 2023

help-circle




  • I agree. That would be absurd.

    However, I don’t like not having the option of using HTTP if I want to use it. It’s okay if the webserver redirects me, but I don’t like if my browser does it when I didn’t tell it to. I might want this when doing development, port tunneling, VPN stuff, etc. In most cases, it won’t matter, but when it does, it will be a pain in the ass.


  • I disagree. While in practice, this is often the same website, it is a different protocol and a different port. It just happens to use the same DNS address. You’re explicitly giving your browser a FQDN, and it is ignoring it and doing something else.

    I hope this feature can be disabled. Google has been ignoring the W3C and has shipped proprietary, insecure features in their chromium engine for a while now, so it wouldn’t surprise me if they made it permanent 🤷



  • For real. It’s so much better to think about using the screen space you already have. People can do what they want, but I am happy with one screen, a tiling window manager, and workspaces. I can have a dozen or more things going on, and have it packed on a workspace. Fullscreen a window of I need to, then pop it back.

    It’s incredibly efficient. I see stuff like this, and I imagine what it’s like to have text several feet away, screens covered by other screens, lots of neck fatigue, all the monitor borders… like it’s truly bad. It feels like someone watched a lot of TV and “felt” that this was the best way to do it without trying it.

    Butt I digress. It’s not my setup. If they’re efficient with it, more power to them.





  • Otherwise monitors, cables and video cards would have compatibility issues.

    You’re right, and this was absolutely a thing. Video cards could produce whatever they were capable of, and monitors could display whatever they were also capable of. You could also push resolutions and refresh rates to monitors that was beyond the monitors’ specs, and you would also risk damaging the monitor by doing this.

    I don’t think you were pushing 4000x3000 resolution through VGA.

    You don’t need to believe me. That’s your choice. I had friends that could do the same. This was with a Matrox card and a 21" Acer CRT. The display was nearly impossible to read, and the color mask broke up the individual pixels too much, anyway.

    Just like today no one is pushing video streams to giant building sized screens over consumer HDMI or DVI.

    Digital video has upper limits in its specs. This is the whole point of this conversation.

    Another example is XLR VS 3.5mm jack. In theory you can push audio signal of any quality over both, but XLR by spec is balanced and shielded, while 3.5mm is not. This means that XLR is capable of pushing much better audio.

    A bit of incorrect information here. There is no “unshielded 3.5mm spec.” Good cables have shields, but not all. XLR doesn’t have the ability to transport higher frequencies because it’s balanced, or “much better audio.” On paper, unbalanced audio is better for short runs because there is more opportunity for XLR signals to have extremely minute signal quality issues due to the hot and cold signal mirroring, but it’s so small that it doesn’t matter.

    Anyway, it’s been fun. I lived this era, and am speaking from experience. I’d be wasting my time if I was making this stuff up. Cheers.


  • In general, what is the highest frequency that can be carried over a wire?

    I know it can do these resolutions in practice because I have personally operated CRTs at 4000x3000 resolution in the early 2000s. This could be considered “the 4:3 of 4K.” It was not done on fancy equipment or high-end monitors. Analog stuff really could just go to really high resolutions and refresh rates with above-average, but typical stuff.

    CRTs simply respond to waveforms for red, green, blue, vertical sync, and horizonal sync. That’s it. If you want more horizonal pixels, make your scan lines denser. If you want more vertical pixels, add more scan lines. Want a faster refresh rate? Simply run all the signals faster.

    There is no hard upper limit to it. With digital signals, there are throughput limits per spec due to bit rates, but with analog, there are no bits. Resolutions like 40k x 30k are theoretically possible. The difficult parts are rendering the signal at these high frequencies, and being able to meaningfully display them. The VGA connection itself has no limits.




  • This is my opinion, too. Their “autopilot” feature is a glorified driving aid. It’s not self-driving. It’s supposed to help with driver fatigue, and you’re supposed to keep both hands on the wheel. If it makes a mistake, that’s okay, because you’re driving the car, right?

    Traditional cruise control without radar will maintain the speed you asked and it won’t stop for emergency vehicles, but we don’t blame that. Even though the “autopilot” feature does more automation, you’re supposed to drive the car in an identical fashion with identical attention compared to traditional cruise control.

    But safety is still what matters first. If you’re sending a freeway-speed land missile into motorcyclists and police cars, I don’t care if you were driving a 90s Civic or a car with automated driving features. The car hit someone. Fix that problem first, then figure out who to blame later.

    In my option, until we have cars that are guaranteed to function as a completely autonomous experience, and the manufacturer of the car doesn’t tell you to keep your hands on the wheel, you’re still driving it. It’s your responsibility. You can still steer, brake, change lanes, evade, etc. That’s on you. As far as I’m concerned, anyone who thinks otherwise might as well blame their heated seats or radio station.

    I understand that Tesla would be improving their software, and I agree with this, too. It’s not great that they are fudging things quite a bit by pushing the self-driving rhetoric. They should focus on this, and it should be improved. But I still think that negligent drivers are at fault.





  • I wouldn’t want to reduce security by allowing privileged ports as any user, or running modified operating systems that have lessened security baked-in. This security principle is in place for good reasons, and they should remain in place.

    If you are exposing your LAN to your Internet connection, you’re doing something wrong. If you are not, but are using a firewall that doesn’t support NAT, then I don’t trust your firewall. If your firewall supports NAT, and you’re attempting to subvert Linux security measures instead of using it, then you’re doing something wrong.