Upmouse
If being half Black means you cannot be Black, then Obama was a White man.
Burn-in is a misnomer.
OLEDs don't burn their image into anything. CRTs used to burn in right onto the screen making it impossible to fix without physically changing the "glass" (really the phosphor screen).
What happens is the OLED burns out unevenly, causing some areas to be weaker than others. That clearly shows when you try to show all the colors (white) because some areas can no longer get as bright as their neighboring areas. It is reminiscent of CRT burn-in. LCDs just have one big backlight (or multiple if they have zones) so unevenness from burnout in LCDs is rarely seen, though still a thing.
So, OLED manufacturers do things to avoid areas from burning out from staying on for too long like pixel shifting, reducing refresh rate, or dimming areas that don't change for a long time (like logos).
There is a secondary issue that looks like burn-in which is the panel's ability to detect how long a pixel has been lit. If it can't detect properly, then it will not give an even image. This is corrected every once in a while with "compensation cycles" but some panels are notorious for not doing them (Samsung), but once you do, it removes most commonly seen "burn-in".
You'd have to really, really leave the same image on your screen for months for it to have any noticeable in real world usage, at least with modern OLED TVs. You would normally worry more about the panel dimming too much over a long period of time, but I don't believe lifetime is any worse than standard LCD.
TL;DR: Watch RTings explain it
VSCode will add a yellow box around the character and tell you it's an uncommon glyph.
https://code.visualstudio.com/updates/v1_63#_unicode-highlighting
To note, this came about because it could be valid code and it's a security risk from copy/pasting malicious code. See:
Judkins said that after the finger test, a lead cybertruck engineer at Tesla said he did the video wrong.
I'm enjoying my Plex one and Nexus Mods. The latter one was in 2013 and cost me $40. Today the yearly subscription is $70.
I still code with the mindset of "I need my software to be good or my clients will leave."
Google no longer operates like this. None of what you listed has any financial benefit to Google. You're not going anywhere. All they stand to do is make more money off of you. If they can simplify the software, from being handcrafted by humans perfectly for you, to, instead, generated by an unsalaried AI, they'll do that. They stand to lose mostly nothing and gain by reducing their workforce.
The competition for quality doesn't exist because the money they save by moving to AI is apparent across the industry. Everyone is looking to use it meaning the only competition is who can provide better cheap AI, not who can make a better product for their users.
I'm mostly enjoying it, but that's after I spent a lot of hours modding the game to look great. I don't mean installing mods I mean modding. (I'm on the Luma mod team). That means fixing the horrible compressed range that is terrible for OLED. Completely replacing the Hable tone mapper after multiple attempts allowing contrast to get properly ramped up. Finally properly fixing the ridiculous fog in shadows from the color grading. Last, I replaced the film grain when theirs just raises blacks and is more digital camera noise than film-like. That only took 3 months. I've enjoyed the technical challenge from doing it, but if this were a game that couldn't be modded, I wouldn't have given it a week.
I also just realized the best part of the game are the story missions. Not the side quests, not the activities or exploration.
The worst part of the game is it's both all fast-travel: where you have to jump from planet to planet in a fetch quest; and it's no fast travel where the game expects you to run on foot 2000km to complete a survey.
The story and characters have charm and personality and that's time better spent. I think there's some good elements there, but overall I don't recommend the game. It's a solid 7/10 game, but completely hit-or-miss if you connect with it.
Translation: If we can't track you, you're of no interest to us.
The TL;DR is now pixels get tracked for how long they've been lit. Then the device can evenly burn out the other pixels so the usage is uniform. The trade off is you are going to lose max brightness in the name of screen uniformity.
The other point is a shifting of the TFT layer that people think is burn-in, but it's actually image retention. But, it is solved by these TV maintenance cycles. Just hope that this compensation cycle actually runs since some panels just fail to run them.
Checkout this RTings video for a good overview of lots of different TV brands and how they perform.
PS: Burn-in is actually a misnomer from the CRT era. There's nothing burning in; the pixels are burning (wearing) out.
view more: next ›
ShortFuse
joined 1 year ago
Windows 10 and it's not a good idea