sdw2001
About
- Username
- sdw2001
- Joined
- Visits
- 302
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 5,017
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 18,069
Reactions
-
The Netflix crackdown on password sharing in the US has arrived
davidw said:
The standard resolution of most TV's means nothing when it comes to a "standard". It's the standard resolution of most of the contents thats matters. Watching a VSH, DVD or BR version of a movie on a 4K TV does not mean you are watching a 4K movie. You are not watching reruns of "Seinfeld" or "The Big Bang Theory" or movies like "Star Wars" or "The Matrix", from a steaming service in 4K, just because you have a 4K TV.AppleZulu said:First, Netflix encouraged users to share accounts.
Second, if you want a 4K HDR picture - the standard resolution for most TVs currently on the market - Netflix requires you to buy a $20/month premium subscription that allows watching on 4 separate devices, simultaneously. If you just want to be able to watch 4K on your one TV in the den, there are no cheaper options.
Netflix wouldn't have to police who's watching if they simply priced their plans on a straight-up per-stream basis, with all subscriptions able to deliver the current 4K HDR standard. If I want to pay for three people, why do they need to care where those three people are? Instead, they're going to take a huge PR hit (and probably subscriber hit) as they roll this ill-considered nickel-and-dime plan out. What morons.
How much contents are recorded in 4K? Well. it's not much. Not even when Netflix is the streaming service with the most 4K contents.
https://pointerclicker.com/how-common-is-4k-content/
When 4K contents become more the norm, then one can claim 4k as the standard. But right now, HD is still the standard. One can't claim 4K as the standard when over 95% of the streaming contents are not and never will be, in 4K. Imagine how much more we would be paying for our internet service, if streaming 4K contents was the standard.
.....
I left our the second part of your post because I agree it's possible....and I'm not all that interested
.
As for this part, I disagree. Almost every TV (save the "extreme budget") sold today is 4K-capable. What AppleZulu claimed was it was the standard for most TVs on the market. That is objectively true.
Now, as for content, I think your comments are misleading. The link you shared is an opinion piece, one that relies on a fairly narrow definition of what 4K even means. It's not unreasonable, to be sure. But for the purposes of what consumers expect with "4K" content, the definition seems to miss the forest for the trees. While natively shot and edited 4K content is often going to look better than content that is shot in 4K, edited in 1080p, and upscaled...it doesn't mean the latter fails to qualify as 4K content.
In reality, Netflix offers a lot of 4K content. Here is just the listing of TV Series from A-F (source: https://www.trustedreviews.com/explainer/find-netflix-amazon-hdr-content-2942413).- #blackAF
- 800 meters
- 13 Reasons Why (series 2)
- 1899
- Abstract: Art of Design
- A Series of Unfortunate Events (series 2 and 3)
- After Life
- Aftershock: Everest and the Nepal Earthquake
- Alessandro Cattelan: One Simple Question
- Alexa & Katie
- All About the Washingtons
- All of Us Are Dead
- Altered Carbon
- American Vandal (series 2)
- Anatomy of a Scandal
- An Astrological Guide to Broken Hearts
- Ancient Apocalypse
- Animal
- Another Life
- Aranyak
- Archive 81
- Arrested Development (s5)
- Atypical (series 2)
- Aunty Donna’s Big Ol’ House of Fun
- Away
- Babies
- Baby Fever
- Bad Boy Billionaires: India
- Badhaai Do
- Barbarians
- Beast of Bangalore: Indian Predator
- Belascoarán, PI
- Bhaag Beanie Bhaag
- Bill Russell: Legend
- Biohackers
- Black Mirror (series 4 onwards)
- Black Summer
- Blasted
- Blood, Sex & Royalty
- Bombay Begums
- Bonding (series 2)
- Boo Bitch
- Break Point: Part 1
- Brews Brothers
- Bridgerton
- Byron Baes
- Canine Intervention
- Cat
- Cat People
- Catching Killers
- Chasing Coral
- Chambers
- Cheat (Quiz Show)
- Cheer
- Chef’s Table
- Chef’s Table BBQ
- Chef’s Table Pizza
- Chilling Adventures of Sabrina
- Christmas on the Square
- Clickbait
- Cobra Kai (season 4)
- Control Z
- Conversations with a Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes
- Copenhagen Cowboy
- Cowboy Bebop
- Cracow Monsters
- Crime Scene: Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel
- Criminal UK
- Criminal Spain
- Criminal Germany
- Criminal France
- Cursed
- D.B. Cooper: Where Are You?
- Dad Stop Embarrassing Me
- Dahmer: Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story
- Dance Monsters: A Dance Competition
- Dark Desire
- Dash & Lily
- Daybreak
- Dead to Me
- Dealer
- Decoupled
- Delhi Crime
- Designated Survivor
- Dirty John
- Dive Club
- Dogs
- Dolly Parton’s Heartstrings
- Dracula
- Dynasty
- Easy
- Easy-Bake Battle: The Home Cooking Competition
- El Chapo
- Elite (season 2 to 4)
- Emergency NYC
- Emily in Paris
- Eternally Confused and Eager For Love
- Everything Calls for Salvation
- Everything Sucks
- Family Reunion (4 parts)
- Fate: The Winx Saga
- Feel Good
- Fire Chases
- Firefly Lane
- First Kill
- First Love
- Flinch
- Formula 1: Drive to Survive
- Fortune Teller: A TV Scam
- Fresh, Fried and Crispy
- Friends From College
- From Me To You
- Full Swing
This doesn't include the rest of their series (G-Z), nor movies and other content. Now, many of these are likely shot in 4K or 1080p, edited in 1080p, and upscaled to be advertised as "4K." But, they still qualify as 4K content. They surely will look better than 1080p content on a 4K TV, particularly a 4K HDR TV.
In short, one can certainly make the argument that 4K isn't the "standard" per se. But in consumers' minds, it most definitely is. I wouldn't have consider a 1080p TV even 3 years ago. Now, the only reason I have one is to use as a monitor for a drone feed display. The point here is Netflix is acting like access to 4K is some kind of uncommon luxury or premium. In reality, consumers expect 4K---even if it's not "real" 4K.
-
There's a way to get a free flatscreen TV -- but with a catch
Welp, that all sounds awful. Next!
-
Stop us if you've heard this before: There's a new Apple Silicon killer in town
Even if the chip was every bit as good as they say, it doesn’t necessarily mean much in the real world. AMD doesn’t make computers. Neither does Intel. To use these chips you pretty much have to run windows, which still sucks. Apple was legitimately behind on processor performance for years and their products were still better. Now they have set a new standard and everyone is beginning to catch up. I don’t see how much has changed.
-
Skydiver's iPhone survives 14,000-foot fall from a plane
Oh stop. You know what you were doing, as so does everyone else. As for you looking at one variable in a situation while ignoring all others that occur in the real world, that's up to you. I suppose you're more interested in arguing than discussing. Did wind affect the iPhone dropping or not? That's all that matters.22july2013 said:
I specifically did not argue with him - I asked him a question and I asked him to reconsider. Then you put a huge effort into arguing with me and you asked me some questions. Hurricanes and tornados are out of scope because I was talking about "horizontal winds." So tornados and hurricanes are irrelevant. But they do have vertical components so they will affect vertical speeds of falling objects. In that sense, you win the argument, but that's because you changed the explicit parameters of the argument which was a horizontal wind. If you consider that a win, good for you.sdw2001 said:22july2013 said:
A horizontal wind would slow down a vertical drop? That's a new one. And then you say that the faster the wind the slower the velocity when it hits the ground - that's also a new one. I won't actually argue with you because I don't believe any argument is required here. I'll just let you reconsider.tshapi said:Survivability also depends on how the iPhone landed, I think it has a better chance of surviving such a fall if it hit the ground on a corner or a side. Also your not taking into account wind factor. The phone will have a better chance of surviving if there was wind to slow down velocity.
I'm a Part 107 Unmanned Aircraft pilot and commercial drone pilot. I also fly fixed wing electric ducted fan jets. Based on the above, I don't think you should be criticizing anyone. You clearly have little understanding of how the principles of airflow work.
1. Wind is not "horizontal." It comes from a cardinal and intercardinal (sometimes called "ordinal") direction, but is never "horizontal" (at least for long) due to all sorts of factors, including thermals, gusts, etc.
2. Almost any object dropped from a plane is not going to be "vertical" in its fall, either. Even if you are dealing with a high mass, high density object with minimal wind resistance, you'll have some variation in the fall.
3. Putting the above aside, yes, wind will absolutely affect a falling object, particularly an iPhone. This will happen because of the velocity of the object and the wind resistance as it gains speed and hits terminal velocity. Like any airframe, speed increase resistance. It also will generate some degree of lift as the object flips about.
4. Yes, in reality, increased wind would slow down the object's descent (assuming there wasn't a downdraft). Such slowing could be significant if there was a thermal, gusting or rotational winds, etc. It's not hard to understand why. If moved "off course" laterally by wind, the object would no longer be taking a straight path to the ground. Even if it only was blown in one direction consistently...any horizontal movement would lengthen the path to the ground. Of course the chances of that one direction "push" are not good...it would obviously move back and forth with the wind.
Let me put it this way...do you think the rate of descent would be slowed if it was dropped into a hurricane? A tornado? What about just a WNW 45Kn wind?
A falling object doesn't even know if there's a horizontal (or vertical) wind component or not. There is no physical mechanism you can carry with you (other than a GPS device) which can tell you when you are falling if there is a horizontal wind component or not. It's like Einstein's relativity - you can't tell if you are in an accelerating elevator in space or standing in a stationary elevator on a planet. If the wind is zero or perfectly steady, the falling object will have no way of knowing the wind speed. That's the only condition I was talking about. I was not talking about tornados or hurricanes or tidal waves or earthquakes or any other conditions you care to talk about. -
Skydiver's iPhone survives 14,000-foot fall from a plane
anonymouse said:
Hmmm, I think this part is wrong. If the phone reaches terminal velocity it will continue falling at x m/s until it hits the ground. The time it takes to do this is simply distance / speed — e.g. at 30 m/s from 3000 ft it will take 3000/30 seconds = 100 seconds to reach the ground. Since the vertical speed is unaffected by any perpendicular (horizontal) forces, no amount of horizontal wind (if we are ignoring lift) will change the rate at which it falls or how long it takes it to reach the ground — i.e., even if the wind were driving it horizontally at 30 m/s, it will still reach the ground in 100 seconds, ignoring outlandish factors such as the curvature of the earth. The path traveled (the hypotenuse) may become longer, but the distance traveled vertically (the side), the speed it travels that distance, and thus the time required, remains the same; it's a simple vector problem.sdw2001 said:4. Yes, in reality, increased wind would slow down the object's descent (assuming there wasn't a downdraft). [...] If moved "off course" laterally by wind, the object would no longer be taking a straight path to the ground. Even if it only was blown in one direction consistently...any horizontal movement would lengthen the path to the ground.
Meanwhile, based on the accompanying picture, did the phone really "survive" this fall?
I am not a physicist, so I'm not sure. You may be correct, at least scientifically speaking. In reality, wind (among other things) absolutely does affect a falling object. It depends on the cross section and flat surface area, as well as mass...of course. Because if what you're saying is true, then a "horizontal" wind wouldn't affect the rate of descent of a hot air balloon.
