1080P resolution (per eye) for a virtual 100" display?
I can't work on a 1080P laptop now without swapping and resizing windows constantly. It would be frustrating to have all that screen real estate and not be able to use it.
I also wonder what "per eye" means. Are there wholly different pictures in each (yikes) or just enough to simulate 3D?
Finding and eliminating duplicates is a very common software problem that is rarely solved in a reusable, user-friendly way that preserves history while eliminating redundant data.
In fact, in 40 years of working with computers I can't think of a single UI that I'd want to emulate.
Ultimately the key is the business-modeling that captures "duplicates" as Things That Happen.
That's the precondition for any sane UI, and sometimes it's not even obvious because the "duplication" has been transformed, reified into its own concept.
I'm meticulous about tagging and backing up MP3s for different mixes in car stereos and other devices. One problem is that I have so many MP3s and different copies I don't know which are tagged and when they were ripped. I prefer to retain the file's modified date when I just update tags so I'll know how old the rip is - bit rates have increased a bit since last century.
I wrote a Powershell script that sets the date a minute newer when it updates ID3 V1 tags so I can compare files and know that one came from 2005 and has had metadata updated since then. I haven't found a bulk tagger that does this.
> so I'll know how old the rip is - bit rates have increased a bit since last century.
It's easy to see which bitrate a track/album has, you don't need to keep dates for that? What's harder to see is what encoder was used -- modern LAME at even 128kbps is a totally different game than some 90s Xing or Fraunhofer.
Better would of course be to have lossless files of the originals and mass convert to mp3 when needed, but I suppose that's a different discussion.
> I prefer to retain the file's modified date when I just update tags so I'll know how old the rip is
Mp3Tag has a timestamp preservation setting. There's also the ability to run an external script/program on all selected files (via the Tools sub-menu of the context menu) or by configuring File>Export with a script.
For those wanting to preserve original timestamps I'd suggest storing them into custom tags in the files themselves as a backup. Mp3Tag can be set up to do this automatically using an Action (its scripting syntax). That way one can always restore them back using a script.
You should consider just adding a `ripped on` tag, or if you're worried about it being a bad encoding then consider re-ripping from sources into a lossless format.
I personally will use Bookmarklets rather than Userscripts to fulfill the same purpose. Bookmarklets work even in locked-down browsers including Edge (bookmarks bar, not favorites sidebar).
The one I use most often is modelled after a similar one - after you fill out a web form you can capture your entries and restore them with a single click:
Capturing and restoring form entries is something that probably would be useful as an actual browser extension (or a built-in feature to some browser), to add a menu or a keyboard command to be able to specify file names to save and recall form data.
From Tim Ferris' 'The 4-hour Body', an even more important tool for toning and weight loss is to stay cold.
Olympic swimmers consume more calories than the average athlete even though their exertion is less. A pool is kept well below body temperature and your body uses those calories to keep itself warm.
His advice was to sleep with a sheet instead of a blanket, unless you're swimming 5 hours a day.
A study performed at the University of Florida showed slightly more calories are burned in cold water exercise than in warm. In the study, men who exercised for 45 minutes in 68 degree water burned an average of 517 calories. The men who exercised in 91.4 degree water burned 505 calories, on average.
from very cold to very warm is just twelve extra calories
But even in that case, you’d only burn a few additional calories at best, Cypess said. In studies where he’s put participants in cold rooms for entire days, they burned off an additional 150 to 200 calories. Again, that’s a full day of cold — not an hour’s worth of outdoor activity.
Which means what, in this example, exactly? A person in a 60 degree pool is losing more internal body heat than a person simply standing outside in 60 degree weather? Is it still so, if it's a 70 degree pool vs 40 degree weather, or 24 hours at room temp vs one hour in a pool?
Just a disclaimer, I’m not an expert in this area.
Yes, a person in 60° water is losing heat energy more quickly than someone in 60° air. This is because water is much more efficient at transferring this energy - something like 24x IIRC.
Determining an equivalent air temperature requires knowing a bunch of additional factors (e.g. humidity). I don’t know of a rule of thumb you could apply other than saying the equivalent air temperature of water below one’s body temperature would be much colder, and the inverse would be true for water temperatures above one’s body temperature.
I've got mixed feedback on this. I had a house fire a few years back where all my paper literature was soaked, and stayed in water for days to weeks. Books, and especially my comic book collection consisting of Sandman and other very collectible treasures, were transmuted to a soupy, unreadable mess. It was a very emotional time salvaging what little I could of these gifts from friends and family.
Interestingly the 5.25" and 3.5" floppies from 1990 and prior were in water tight containers, but I knew from previous attempts to recover data from them that I'd be wasting my time trying to get ancient BBS text files from them.
Digital media will expire, but I've got IDE hard drives from 30 years ago that have fared pretty well, and thankfully I had the foresight to duplicate the magnetic media that has a known shelf life to media that might survive a bit longer. And data grows in size and scale, so a 20MB hard drive from the 80s is pretty easy to preserve as long as you're organized, and plan, and don't procrastinate too long.
But thinking about it - like life, isn't data meant to expire? Maybe your descendants will appreciate a few pictures of you, and some journal entries or your great novel draft. But I have no interest even in my mom's or Hemingway's kindergarten buddies. And especially if there are published books on a shelf, they're almost always replaceable.
Think of who will be cleaning out your house when you die while you curate your data, and try to preserve what's of greatest worth to you and that audience.
And finally, last time I visited my father he showed me a 6" thick bible that had been in the family since the early 1800s, with beautiful fonts, colored illustrations, and the first few blank pages filled with marriage and birth records. There are some books that can't be replaced or duplicated, and should be cherished like a child.
