> Is this right? Wouldn't it be base-3 encoding? Three bits of binary can count to 8. Three trits of base three can count to 27. Color has all sorts of disadvantages but maybe a much greater payoff (unless I m mistaken).
In this case they're not directly using the color to store information, they just have three differently colored QR codes overlayed on top of each other. With that method you can use a filter to separate them back out and you've got three separate QR codes worth of data in one place. The way they're added ends up using more than just three colors in that example.
If you were truly to use colored dots to store binary information without worrying about using a standard like QR, I think you'd be going from base-2 (white and black) to base-3 (red, blue, green) or more likely base-4 (white, red, blue, green) or even base-8 (if you were willing to add multiple colors on top of each other) in which case yeah you'd have way more than just 3x the data density.
>this case they're not directly using the color to store information, they just have three differently colored QR codes overlayed on top of each other. With that method you can use a filter to separate them back out and you've got three separate QR codes worth of data in one place. The way they're added ends up using more than just three colors in that example.
That's only true if you can print and read colors in a higher resolution/don't destroy information at 3x the density with color, I'm not sure if that's generally true.
>If you were truly to use colored dots to store binary information without worrying about using a standard like QR, I think you'd be going from base-2 (white and black) to base-3 (red, blue, green) or more likely base-4 (white, red, blue, green) or even base-8 (if you were willing to add multiple colors on top of each other) in which case yeah you'd have way more than just 3x the data density.
Base 8 is exactly 3x the data density. (Log(8)/log(2))
I had the same thing happen to my Pros, with one being much louder than the other and the noise cancelling barely working, and it turns out they just needed cleaning. A couple years of gunk and dust getting in the vents and speaker grill and one of them was noticeably worse than the other. After cleaning it turns out both were quite degraded and are now much better with fully functioning noise cancellation. Worth a try if they're otherwise good and you want to keep using them.
I'm not sure why Notes needs to be bundled with the OS update, but Safari isn't. You can download Safari 17 for macOS Ventura as well! Only the features that require integration with other apps (such as auto-filling 2FA codes from Mail) require Sonoma.
I reckon it's more likely that Safari as a browser represents a more important set of security holes and therefore Apple feels greater obligation to patch patch problems (and that's easier to do by simply shipping the whole app rather than patches for old versions).
This is exactly it - as long as they support macOS for X years they need to release safari updates for that long, so they might as well decouple that one.
4 deaths per 50 million miles means it’s just under 1 death per 10 million miles. That would put riding a one wheel for 1 mile at the same risk as biking 1 mile, walking 2 miles, or driving 25 miles[1]. That is of course only looking at death and not serious injury.
Still, as other people have mentioned there are solutions Future Motion has been avoiding that would significantly lower the risk. Adding small wheels on each side in case of nosedives, or adding a loud audible warning in case of low battery or max speed being reached rather than just a subtle physical alert are two that have been suggested here and seem like they would make a big difference.
I noticed this too, but it seems to have dropped off. In the month or so after I migrated from Google to Zoho I had a ton of spam, and was considering other options. But since then I haven't really gotten any more than I did with Google, maybe one obvious spam email every few weeks.
I would mark spam as spam during that initial period when there was a lot, so maybe there's just a learning process for new accounts as to what's actually spam?
UltraTrac on my Fenix 5 is pretty useless though, you may as well not be recording at all at that point. I'm not sure if it's gotten better on the more recent watches, but the reported mileage would be off by 30%+ and the resulting map wouldn't even come close to resembling my actual path.
That said, even in normal GPS only mode (no Gallileo/GLONASS), the 5 when it was new would get 30 hours of recording. Enough for most ultras, 3 days of backpacking if you record 8 hours/day, and also enough for a week trip with an hour of running every day.
> because you're not taking money for the service there is no real liability
Just because you're not taking money doesn't mean you can break the law without liability! Even outside of GDPR/CCPA, most states require all parties to consent in recording and every state requires at least one party to consent in recording.
I do agree that this is the kind of service worth paying for if you want privacy and I'm not a lawyer so I can't say that this is actually illegal, but if you're ignoring not just "hey this is incredibly wrong" tickets but "hey this is illegal and I'm warning you before I file an official complaint" that seems like it will end poorly.
In an all-party consent state you would need everyone in the call to consent for recording to be legal, but even in one-party consent states you would still at least need OP's consent to be recording! If the user says no and they record anyway, I can't think of any state where that's legal (though the EULA probably has something covering that, unsure if that holds up in court).
I don't think they were trying to say Arizona is the alternative California people would move to. I think they were saying it's the state that's going to feel the effects of prolonged drought first, because they have less access to seawater to desalinate and fewer resources to try and buy what little water is left compared to California.
In this case they're not directly using the color to store information, they just have three differently colored QR codes overlayed on top of each other. With that method you can use a filter to separate them back out and you've got three separate QR codes worth of data in one place. The way they're added ends up using more than just three colors in that example.
If you were truly to use colored dots to store binary information without worrying about using a standard like QR, I think you'd be going from base-2 (white and black) to base-3 (red, blue, green) or more likely base-4 (white, red, blue, green) or even base-8 (if you were willing to add multiple colors on top of each other) in which case yeah you'd have way more than just 3x the data density.