Buckmaster did also mention, for example, that a team of people was employed to solve the problem, which supports this claim. but that is another claim whose veracity could also be questioned. but at some point we must trust other people, unless we can be satisfied with only believing what we personally see.
(also, IMO, the coincidence of both discoveries in time is pretty suspicious. this one doesn't need you to trust many people i guess)
We have a similarly converted rotary phone at my local astronomy club's observatory, used to receive visitors. It's driven by an arduino if I remember correctly. The main issue is that the sound quality of its built-in speaker is quite poor, especially compared to modern cell phone speakers we're used to nowadays, with a narrow frequency window and frequent echoes.
In contrast, I've been messing around with some old analog phones and VOIP stuff recently, and I've been blown away with how good the quality is over what I was expecting. The audio bandwidth is low yes (it's G.711u, so 8 KHz), but the actual quality is great, with no hyper-compression artifacts or over-applied background noise filters. And yes this is on the original 60's carbon microphones.
The regular phone calls I normally make on my cell still all sound like they are underwater for some reason, except for those rare times when the better connection is actually working.
Interesting. I remember voice clarity being exceptional on old handsets and being really subpar on gsm and later. Only now we FaceTime voice and discord the quality seems to be coming back.
How can that be if the speakers in phones ubiquitously were so bad?
My understanding is that at some point the audio of phone calls ended up being compressed multiple times on its way to the receiver as it went through different voip setups and such.
Prior to that, uncompressed or compressed once calls weren't so bad on bad speakers.
This is also a problem with Google Maps navigation. It is always showing the perspective looking straight ahead of your current direction, even when you're approaching a sharp turn. Instead, the perspective should be along a vector connecting your current location with the point where the navigation's path crosses the edge of the display, pointing straight up.
So why not use 2D maps, have people lost the ability to read North up maps? I swear ever since paper maps have not been used in cars, people have gotten spatially dumber.
I love north-up maps because I find they give me way better spatial context. My truck’s nav system gives north-up as an option but my phone and my truck map both suffer from the same problem on different axes. My phone sits in its holder vertically, so I have way more north-south context than east-west. The truck screen is landscape, same problem north-south! A square map north-up would be amazing!
2D map would work the same way with my proposal. The "north is up" part is the issue for me, I'd like to have the rotation oriented in such a way that (the visible part of the path to) my destination is up.
Yes, this is how it's currently implemented. My proposal is "up is the intersection of the path with the edge of the screen". Here's a mock comparison of the current behavior with my proposal: https://i.imgur.com/AmUnzfS.jpeg (The mocked perspective is wrong because I just cut out and rotated the image, but hopefully you get the idea)
I just grabbed my laptop's BIOS packages and told Claude and now Sol to statically analyze them. By now it's at around 80% done. Some stuff needs hardware validation, but the AIs were quite capable of doing most of the grueling work on their own. I'm having them reduce the problem as much as possible so I only have to deal with the hardware verification.
I'll also ask the AI to reverse engineer the LattePanda Mu BIOS later since I want to use the Mu on my handheld cyberdeck project. Nearly out of usage for the week, sadly. Wish Tibo would push his reset button yet again.
Time is change that happens in a continuous manner. It’s still possible to conceive of change happening in an unordered unpredictable way that is not like the smooth ordered time that we experience.
In a gravitational singularity spacetime breaks down. You could argue that time stops, but it’s also valid to argue that causality breaks down and we can no longer make any predictions about the future. Just because we don’t have a theory describing what could happen, doesn’t rule out that something could happen.
Maybe it's time to stop burning food as fuel. What are the jets going to do anyway, bomb Iranian children?
Remember when George W Bush signed into law the corn ethanol bill. Corn tripled in price within 8 years. Fuel didn't get cheaper. In fact it cost more to produce the ethanol.
Not just corn. Farmers would grow more corn in place of other plants reducing the supply, and shorter supply generally means higher prices, This is happening in India right now.
Can they back up this statement somehow?
reply