hmm

sog35 said:

gatorguy said:

Get a few million folks to all commit to a few hundred a year in order to see broadcast content ad-free and you might get your wish. 

I can't be the only one right?

Average person watches about 5 hours of TV a day. That's 150 hours a month. Commercials take at least 15-20 hours of that.  That is time wasted.

Lets say you get paid $30 an hour. That's $450-$600 of time waste right there. I'd be more than willing to get rid of all commercials at an additional fee of $100 per month.

Where did you get that 5 hours a day figure? Assuming it's correct, the distribution may be a bit skewed toward those who binge watch television. I don't know whether they're really valuable to advertisers. The $30/hr figure is also a bit misleading. That translates to approximately $60k/year on an assumption of 40 hours per week. Somewhere around $50k you start to drift toward exempt salaried roles and those that disallow overtime. Those additional hours do not necessarily hold the same economic value, not to mention that you're comparing before tax income to a fee paid after tax. I think you may want to reconsider your approximation.

I'm not sure what

thewhitefalcon said:

...am I the only one who sees that box as being red? Viewing it on my iPhone 6...

I don't know why he said orange. Downloading and color sampling it shows rgb values of 255,0,0. It would be a pretty wacky gamut if that corresponded to orange rather than red. Some other parts of the article are also a bit misleading (also this is very informal). If you're modeling a color space, you have some assumed illuminant type. You can depict brightness range or contrast ratio using the minimum achievable and maximum achievable values that could be displayed simultaneously on that display. Usually when people refer to gamut, they're thinking of the ability to display highly saturated colors, which aren't really the same thing.

ireland said:

Can't say I didn't call this.

They have produced the thunderbolt display for more than 5 years at this point, and they mentioned that the thunderbolt display will still be available for a little while. If something new was coming, they would have announced it. Instead they announced that if you want a thunderbolt display, you should buy one before they run out of components, similar to what was done with the XServe. I'm curious what makes you confident that they would break with all previous patterns as opposed to postponing a couple months until the new one can be announced.

tallest skil said:

hmm said:

That's not really a treatable condition.

Of course it is. There are therapies and medicines in existence already, and it is by definition impaired operation, so of course it can be cured/treated. That it can't be now is irrelevant. 

Are you familiar with the types of treatment available? They do not  address primary symptoms. Saying it can be cured is currently science fiction and not relevant today.

tallest skil said:

Why “accept”? Why not “treat”?

That's not really a treatable condition. People diagnosed with some variant seemingly just live with it. You probably wouldn't notice it in people with less severe conditions, but it really isn't a treatable condition. It's also worth noting that that autism spectrum disorder isn't the same thing as what people usually think of as autism. It encompasses a wider range of conditions.