Now I'm kinda curious what age cohort is most likely to be Reddit memers
Do you think 30s is peak Reddit, yet you manged to be a lucky outlier? Or that peak Reddit skews older/younger and you're of a lucky age?
As an older Millennial in my 40s, I see this a lot in my 35-43 friend group. And always figured peak Reddit was younger Millennials (now in their 30s).
The Internet itself is the loophole in this analogy.
Minors shouldn't have unfettered + unsupervised access to the Internet, that's the solution.
The open Internet isn't a kid friendly place, isn't meant to be, and won't be no matter how many laws you pass.
Children grow up to become adults, and spend most of their lives as adults. It's important to weigh the lifetime cost of safety laws.
A child with unfettered access to the Internet at say 8 years (IMO, way too young should be 15+) is only protected for 10 years. Then goes on to spend ~60 years negatively impacted, fighting ever growing censorship and risking extortion/blackmail when data leaks. It just doesn't seem worth it in this case.
I'd much rather laws mandate special child-safe phones/laptops that could only access a subset of the Internet, rather than forcing every website/app to collect PII and inconsistently enforce age verification for all visitors for all time.
And all of this is besides the point anyway. Social media and cyberbullying are the real threats to minors online. Porn access isn't good, but it's not causing suicides and mental health crises left and right.
Perhaps times have changed, but when I was in grad school circa 2010 smartphones and tablets weren't yet ubiquitous but laptops were. It was super common to sit in a cafe/library with a laptop and a stack of printed papers to comb though.
Reading paper was more comfortable then reading on the screen, and it was easy to annotate, highlight, scribble notes in the margin, doodle diagrams, etc.
Do grad students today just use tablets with a stylus instead (iPad + pencil, Remarkable Pro, etc)?
Granted, post grad school I don't print much anymore, but that's mostly due to a change in use case. At work I generally read at most 1-5 papers a day tops, which is small enough to just do on a computer screen (and have less need to annotate, etc). Quite different then the 50-100 papers/week + deep analysis expected in academia.
>Perhaps times have changed, but when I was in grad school circa 2010 smartphones and tablets weren't yet ubiquitous but laptops were. It was super common to sit in a cafe/library with a laptop and a stack of printed papers to comb though.
I just had a really warm feeling of nostalgia reading that! I was a pretty average student, and the material was sometimes dull, but the coffee was nice, life had little stress (in comparison) and everything felt good. I forgot about those times haha. Thanks!
Yes, I spent a ton of time playing games, compiling the Linux kernel, and screwing around on the Internet back then. But outside of summer vacation (which I do miss dearly), I spend just as much or more online today as then.
I absolutely do miss the old Internet, not just that time period.
But, there's bright spots in the modern Internet too. The rise of online D&D via Discord during the pandemic was amazing. I play far more D&D thesedays then I ever did since the 90s. Discord also scratches the MUD/IRC itch. But, not sure Discord will survive the next decade either.
TBH, its not even middle/high-school era Internet I miss most either. While I have fond mid-90s memories, I think peak Internet is somewhere in 2008-2012 range.
The Internet was mostly additive up to that point. New tech, sites, services existed alongside what came before.
I can appreciate Slashdot, Reddit, HN, and even Twitter (it was huge for distributed systems/database community ~2009-15) at different points in time.
It was really the photo-first, later video-first, shift that happened mid-2010s + big tech dominance that strangled old Internet. No longer being additive, but shrinking the Internet into fewer properties, with everything just being "content".
> I'm saying the market for what TRU provided had disappeared
The market still exists, doesn't it?
Kids still exist, kids still play with toys.
People simply buy toys from Amazon now, not TRU.
Just like people buy electronics from Amazon, not Best Buy/Circuit City.
And shoes from Amazon/Zappos, not Payless.
Seems like most retail markets still exist, they've just been cornered by the giant "Everything Store".
IMO, physical toy stores should be competitive to e-commerce with the right strategy. Simply going to the store could be an exciting adventure into itself, with higher fidelity discovery than a screen provides. Esp. post-COVID where people are opting more for analog/offline options after online/lockdown burnout.
Claiming TRU's market disappeared feels similar to claiming the bookstore market disappeared, yet Barnes and Noble had a well documented and surprising comeback by shifting strategy:
meaningless statement without quantity. kids don't play outside or with each other at the same rate as they did 35 years ago. video games and smart phones are vastly replacing physical toys.
The market exists at a far lower valuation. 90% of the sales will go to Walmart/Costco/Target/Amazon/Aliexpress/Kroger/etc, 10% will go to the remaining businesses.
You might go to the local toy store every now and then and pay 2x or more for the same toy just so your kid feels the ambiance of shopping in a toy store or supporting a local business, but the majority of your purchases will not happen there, certainly not enough to supporter the huge Toys R Us stores of the past.
Is "Measure of the Universe" the book you're thinking of?
Alternatively, chapter 8 of "Realm of Numbers" touches on logarithms, and "That's about the size of it" chapter from Assimov on Numbers" includes a log-scale table of animal weights (from blue whale at 8.08 to Rotifer at -8.22)
The official French hosted instance requiring some French-specific stuff seems pretty normal. Likely specific to that instance's authentication system, not the Docs software itself.
You should be able to emulate close to CRT beam scanout + phosphor decay given high enough refresh rates.
Eg. given a 30 Hz (60i) retro signal, a 480 Hz display has 16 full screen refreshes for each input frame, while a 960 Hz display has 32. 480 Hz already exists, and 960 Hz are expected by end of the decade.
You essentially draw the frame over and over with progressive darkening of individual scan lines to emulate phosphor decay.
In practice, you'd want to emulate the full beam scanout and not even wait for full input frames in order to reduce input lag.
Mr. Blurbuster himself has been pitching this idea for awhile, as part of the software stack needed once we have 960+ Hz displays to finally get CRT level motion clarity. For example:
> Eg. given a 30 Hz (60i) retro signal, a 480 Hz display has 16 full screen refreshes for each input frame, while a 960 Hz display has 32. 480 Hz already exists, and 960 Hz are expected by end of the decade.
Many retro signals are 240p60 rather than 480i60. Nearly everything before the Playstation era.
> Modern OLED displays are superior in every way and CRT aesthetics can be replicated in software, so a more practical route would be probably to build some "pass-through" device that adds shadow mask, color bleed, and what-have-you.
OLEDs are still behind on motion clarity, but getting close. We finally have 480 Hz OLEDs, and seem to be on track to the 1000Hz needed to match CRTs.
The Retrotink 4k also exists as a standalone box to emulate CRTs and is really great. The main problem being it's HDMI 2.0 output, so you need to choose between 4k60 output with better resolution to emulate CRT masks/scan lines, or 1440p120 for better motion clarity.
Something 4k500 or 4k1000 is likely needed to really replace CRTs completely.
Really hoping by the time 1000 Hz displays are common we do end up with some pass-through box that can fully emulate everything. Emulating full rolling CRT gun scan out should be possible at that refresh rate, which would be amazing.
1000Hz is enough to match CRT quality on a sample-and-hold display, but only when you're displaying 1000fps content. A great many games are limited to 60fps, which means you'll need to either interpolate motion, which adds latency and artifacts, or insert black frames (or better, black lines for a rolling scan, which avoids the latency penalty), which reduces brightness. Adding 16 black frames between every image frame is probably going to reduce brightness to unacceptable levels.
The brightest CRTs were those used in CRT projectors. These had the advantage of using three separate monochrome tubes, which meant the whole screen could be coated in phosphor without any gaps, and they were often liquid cooled.
Direct-view color CRTs topped out at about 300 nits, which is IMO plenty for non-HDR content.
For smooth and fast motion, yes. Although I don't have such fast displays for testing, you can simulate the effect of sample-and-hold blur by applying linear motion blur in a linear color space. A static image (e.g. the sample-and-hold frame) with moving eyeballs (as in smooth pursuit eye tracking) looks identical to a moving image with static eyeballs, and the linear motion blur effect gives a good approximation of that moving image.
Now I'm kinda curious what age cohort is most likely to be Reddit memers
Do you think 30s is peak Reddit, yet you manged to be a lucky outlier? Or that peak Reddit skews older/younger and you're of a lucky age?
As an older Millennial in my 40s, I see this a lot in my 35-43 friend group. And always figured peak Reddit was younger Millennials (now in their 30s).
Might depend on what subs I suppose.