They are way better, faster without sacrificing precision/security. With an ultrasonic sensor I can simply tap the screen and it's unlocked, where with the optical ones I'd need to press for a second before unlocking, sometimes having to shuffle my finger around.
Because they are different devices serving different purposes. The r36s is a portable emulator that'll run games from different consoles; the playdate is a portable console that runs games made specifically for the playdate.
How is atomic less confusing? Immutable means that something doesn't change, atomic means that it's the size of an atom or has nuclear energy
EDIT: I've learned that some people are overly pedantic about the meaning and practical use of the word "immutable", so much so that they decided to create a bigger confusion by giving another word a completely different and exclusive meaning
Spotify actually pays 70% of the streams to the label, which trickles down to a bunch of nothing for the artist. Tidal wanted to change that and pay directly to the artist
His videos used to be pretty good, but his RE4 "comparison" one was pretty much 40 minutes of strawman arguments from someone that hates change. I'm not hopeful at all for this video here considering DRDR turned out really good as well.
It is "efficient" because they just dump everything on swap. If I cold boot my M1 air, it'll be using 7GB of RAM and 4GB of swap without anything running in the background.
I have this ongoing bug as well where some background apps will stop responding and the system can't stop the process, so it starts a new one and it keeps doing this until I either stop the app manually, or my storage is completely full because swap is taking 80GB of my internal storage.
People vastly misinterpreted this EU ruling. Having pull tabs, or the new thing Apple is doing, is already enough to be in line with the requirements. Since the phones have water resistance, they are technically designed to work under water, thus they aren't required to have an easily accessible battery cover.
I'm not really trying to disprove or disagree with anything, I just think that knowing the sample is important. For instance, earlier in Hungary, we've had a lot of billboards and other media claiming that 99% of Hungarians were against things like sending aid to Ukraine and gender affirming politics. In a purely statistical sense, this was correct and could dissuade the common folk into thinking that's representative of the country. However when you investigate further, their research was done on just a couple thousand citizens that were all either affiliated someway to Fidesz (the rulling party) or historically voted for them, which overwhelmingly skews the results towards one end.
According to both websites, the research was conducted on just 2000 USA citizens. In my opinion, that's a lot of weight being pulled by claiming they represent the entire country. I am unable to download the research papers here, but what does it say about the sample? If they are researching solely on more tech savvy people, then I think the results are very likely to be skewed to one side
There are at least 3.45 billion Chrome users (not chromium, chrome).
Out of those ~900 million adblocker users, how many are using those adblockers that let paid advertiser's to get on a whitelist? How many are willing to make an effort to change browsers? Firefox's 180 million users is the indicative of this, and not all of them user adblockers, so the numbers keep getting thinner.
It wouldn't make a single dent in Chrome's dominance.
As usual, we are treated like third class citizens, but the community always comes to help: https://github.com/Martichou/rquickshare