conciselyverbose

There are a bunch of free channels on the internet that some TVs can just stream without a dedicated app. These channels are supported by ads like cable/whatever channels, but not locked behind a subscription. VLC is supporting whatever formats they use to allow (or make it easier; IDK) people to watch them if they want.

The other part is that they’re working on web assembly to allow sites to use VLC as their embedded video player.

It’s really not.

In poor countries sure, but not the US or Europe. You will get sued and you will pay if you do that at any scale.

The problem is that “don’t let people game you” is extremely difficult.

It’s many, many orders of magnitude easier to provide a useful search of sites that tell you the truth about what they are than it is when 99% of sites lie to you.

I’ve had decent experience with nobara with a 2080. I had a couple hiccups early, and had to reinstall basically right away, but after that it’s been solid.

But still declared them liable for the actions of their users.

Bad ruling, just less bad than it could be.

If I put the over/under at 10x male pirate to female, are you taking the under?

I’ve definitely noticed the results suck ass, but this is a nice breakdown.

That shouldn’t work. They should still be unconditionally liable for anything the rep said in all scenarios, with the sole exception being obvious sabotage like “we’ll give you a billion dollars to sign up” that the customer knows can’t be real.

“AR” has always been sci-fi. The details you’re discussing have never been part of the discussion because it was fiction.

This is far more AR than any of the shitty displays that project on glasses (all of which also are distorting and changing the light from the real world) and don’t have meaningful capacity to interact with the real world inputs. Any reasonable definition of AR absolutely is including the Apple Vision. It’s the real world, in real time, with all the inputs and processing capability required to interact with it.

All your other complaints have nothing whatsoever to do with your silly definition of AR made for the sole purpose of excluding the most exciting piece of tech in the space ever. Weight and battery capacity are also completely unrelated to any possible valid definition of what AR is.

They didn’t do a clear coat like everything else ever made lol.

deleted by creator

Apple hasn’t called it AR.

But it absolutely is AR. If you can see the real world in real time, with additional information on top of it, that’s AR. Your requirement that it not be on a screen is completely arbitrary and has no basis behind it whatsoever.

Wow that’s hilariously idiotic.

For first party stuff, Nintendo launches finished games (though Sony does too).

For third party, cartridges are expensive enough that it’s not uncommon at all for companies to straight up make a bunch of content download only. A lot of “multiple game” collections only put some of the games on the cartridge (not counting the ones that tie some to keys).

I don‘t see a reason why these cardridges wouldn‘t work in 20 years anymore.

Because, just like discs, they’re a crappy pre-launch build that relies on day one patches or additional content to actually work correctly.

I would be shocked if the newer versions don’t have a software hack way before that.

The fact that the first version was easy to hack made later versions lower priority, but at some point for the sake of preservation or to have the OLED, the new ones will catch up.

To turn every comment, no matter how on topic, into obnoxious spam.

I really want absolutely no part of people who don’t understand code using LLMs to submit things they don’t understand. That’s a disaster waiting to happen at best.

If you don’t understand every line you’re submitting completely, you should not be submitting code. It absolutely does need to be restricted to people who know what they’re doing.

It already has legitimacy. It’s their hardware that doesn’t, despite the decent raw flops and high memory.

I’m not sure what you think is contradicting me. I put “free” in quotes. But they’re not making meaningful additional license purchases by changing the name from 10 to 11 with how much they’re begging people to upgrade. And Mac straight up makes zero from licensing fees, so again, a new name doesn’t mean anything. They abandon hardware with new versions when enough core functions need hardware features to work properly, which happens regardless of what they call it.

Enterprise pays plenty for Windows, but those licenses are all subscription based so new versions don’t mean anything there either.