From what I understand, the laptop will reduce the refresh rate (of the entire display) to as low as 1Hz if what is being displayed effectively “allows” it.
Which would make me want the refresh rate to be user-configurable. I would not mind at all if the 1 Hz refresh rate caused parts of the page I don't care about, such as animated ads to stutter and become unwatchable. If given the choice between stuttering ads but longer battery life, or smoothly-animated ads with shorter battery life, I'd choose the unwatchable ads every time.
Ideally, I would be able to bind a keyboard shortcut to the refresh-rate switch, so that the software doesn't have to figure out that now I'm on Youtube so I actually want the higher refresh rate, but now I'm on a mostly-text page so I want the refresh rate to go back down to 1 Hz. If I can control that with a simple Fn+F11 combination or something, that would be the ideal situation.
Not that any laptop manufacturers are likely to see this comment... but you never know.
I assume this will just be using Window's dynamic refresh rate feature, which you can turn on and off in the display settings, and when it's off you can set the refresh rate manually. I guess the question is whether they will let you set it as low as 1hz manually though.
Sitting at 91% platform
uptime over the last 90 days, which is likely inflated due to the perfect uptime over December holidays. My guess is that is attributed to an internal code-freeze and generally reduced traffic.
Your claim doesn’t seem as definitive as you present it, for China and US at least.
Comparing China and the US it seems like theres a 150 billion ton difference in the cumulative emissions.
Most recent data shows China emitting ~8 billion tons more than the US annually. At that rate that’s about ~20yrs until they flip.
China’s emissions appear to increasing exponentially YoY whereas the US has seen reductions in recent years. That makes it seem like they’d flip in less than 20 years.
Obviously, the emissions on a per capita basis are still nowhere close.
One thing I see, is that people in urban environments typically opt-in to exercise (like voluntarily going on a run). Whereas those in more rural areas have more physical demanding jobs and responsibilities.
I’m an urban-based desk jockey who exercises a lot but it doesn’t really compare to my more rurally-based friends who are on their feet working blue collar jobs 5 days a week.
no, I am talking about actual urban environments where people get around by walking, cycling, or maybe using public transit. Sure, I voluntarily lift and go for a run. But if I want to see friends, buy food, go to the doctor, go to the pharmacy or the record store or the gym or generally leave my apartment I have to walk.
Suburbanites who are only active while engaging in intentional exercise because they need to get in their car to go anywhere are in the worst situation.
I get 1 mile of walking in a day at a minimum just going to and from the train in Chicago. I hit the 6K steps minimum that my watch wants by default every day by around 1-2pm if I take the bus transfer from the train to my office. I usually end around 8-10K steps just doing my commute and walking around the office. Going to the grocery store is another 2K steps roundtrip. Going out to dinner is another 1+ mile of walking minimum unless I get fast food.
When I lived in suburbs, I had to go out of my way to get even 6K steps in a whole day.
> Suburbanites who are only active while engaging in intentional exercise because they need to get in their car to go anywhere are in the worst situation.
This is true. We have nowhere to go on foot. In every direction we have roads, private property and that's it.
If we walk we risk automobile/pedestrian injury, unless we'd prefer to risk trespassing charges. This is also the full selection of kids' choices, btw.
> This is also the full selection of kids' choices, btw.
I grew up in an environment where these where my choices and it was terrible, it's a big part of why I've made "being able to go anywhere on foot" a goal.
The problem is that normal MRI math tries its damnedest to avoid actually solving the right equations. Instead, with a flat enough field, you can assume linearity and just FFT the thing. They'll physically place bits of metal and magnets at various places on the big magnet to calibrate and better adjust the field to being approximately linear. A hunk of metal bigger than a shim sounds like it would mess with that.
For example:
- reading an article with intermittent scrolling
- typing with periodic breaks
reply