> That's not a problem on commodity LCDs (maybe the one you're using) because "black" is fairly bright, but on OLED especially that's almost infinite contrast.
Therefore, instead of having your browser enforce a lowered contrast for yourself, you prefer that the majority of the rest of us, with commodity LCDs, suffer too little contrast by asking for the colors to be changed on the website.
No, you should properly profile your display and set the correct LUT and contrast settings so that you may get clipping in dark scenes, but correct contrast everywhere else.
Design websites for correct display devices, and calibrate your display devices to correct for imperfections.
Asking for users with good displays to intentionally reduce the displays' quality to simulate a bad display is just ridiculous. That's what color profiles, LUTs, and tone mapping are for.
quite adverb
\ ˈkwīt How to pronounce quite (audio) \
Definition of quite
1 : wholly, completely not quite finished
2 : to an extreme : positively quite sure —often used as an intensifier with a quite a swell guyquite a beauty
3 : to a considerable extent : rather quite near
> I find it disturbing that the overwhelmingly US neo conservative liberal media companies slap the label 'far right' on just abut anything that doesn't fit their world view and agenda. Any sort of recognition there are center right or moderate conservatives appears to have been cancelled.
This is because "far right" has become a code-word for "neo-nazi" and/or "white supremacist/racist", so labeling everything that does no fit their preferred world view as "far right" automatically sets it up to be something so obscene that it should be banned in the minds of their viewership.
And of course, what you see is the beginning of the banning happening right before your eyes.
In many jurisdictions there is also a legal minimum speed stated within the statutes, often based on some value below the posted limit. They are often unknown to most drivers (and cyclists) because the minimum speeds are almost always not placed on signage on the roadway. But legally, there is often a minimum speed as well as the more well known and visible maximum speed.
No, they are "the same crime" (failure to stop for a red light), it is one and the same law that applies to both, therefore the "crime" is the same. Therefore the penalty should be the same amount as long as the same statute applies.
Now, if you prefer the penalty to differ due to the potential for injury, you need to get the politicians to change the laws so they are not the same crime, or so that the penalty scales due to some formula in the law related to the potential for injury.
While the cyclists might have very valid reasons for breaking the law, the fact is that at present, the law classifies them as "vehicles" and classifies them as subject to the same rules as the other vehicles (the cars).
Regularly watching cyclists flaunt the rules that the car driver would be cited for breaking, and never seeing a single cyclist cited for the law breaking, leaves a foul taste for cyclists in the mouths of many motorists. They don't get to run stops or red lights with impunity and without punishment.
So as long as the law says cyclists must obey the same rules car drivers are also supposed to obey, the subset of cyclists that break those rules on a regular basis do not help, in the least, the arguments to try to convince car drivers to be more respectful of cyclists.
The start should be the cyclists obeying the same rules as the cars (which would help with not pissing off numerous car drivers daily) while working the politician angle to change the rules for cyclists to something safer for cyclists (and at which point the car drivers will no longer have a way to rationalize their hatred of the cyclists as just "law breakers").
> The start should be the cyclists obeying the same rules as the cars (which would help with not pissing off numerous car drivers daily)
The problem is that as your parent commenter pointed out obeying these laws also pisses off drivers. Drivers get pissed off when cyclists take the full lane, and they get pissed off when cyclists come to a full stop in front of them at a stop sign. I don't run red lights and stop signs on my bike and it annoys me when people do, but I feel like the many violations drivers commit every day are just normalized because there are so many more drivers than cyclists.
Not to mention that safety is more important than getting a ticket. It is unsurprising that people choose the safer option over the legal option. Plenty of laws are broken and "it's the law" has never been a great excuse.
We should also consider that many people have different definitions for "running a stop sign" and it isn't equally applied to cars and bikes. A roll at a stop sign is ignored for a car but "running" for a bike. I don't blow through (that's irresponsible), but I do roll, per the given reasons above (funny enough I never roll when driving).
> Regularly watching cyclists flaunt the rules that the car driver would be cited for breaking
Yes and no. I am sorry when cyclists flaunt the rules — it does happen — but there are also those of us that strictly obey the law. (It helps keep me alive.) But I see cars break many of the same rules, quite often. For example, seeing a car run a red isn't even a rare thing. (A rare one is seeing a car driving the wrong way.) Between the two groups, I don't think I see one break the rules more often than the other. (I certainly see more violations from motorists… but I also see more motorists.)
> never seeing a single cyclist cited for the law breaking,
I've seen this, multiple times. Oddly, only while biking. Probably about as (in)frequently as I see motorists get cited.
> So as long as the law says cyclists must obey the same rules car drivers are also supposed to obey, the subset of cyclists that break those rules on a regular basis do not help, in the least, the arguments to try to convince car drivers to be more respectful of cyclists.
That there are those out there that don't obey the law should not matter to validly argue that the world would be better — that is, fewer cyclists would die — if both motorists and cyclists alike would obey the law.
If you’ve ever biked in a city, you would know that the people who get pissed more than anyone else by bikers following red light rules are the cars behind them that cannot accelerate when the light turns green, because the biker in front of them is slow to get going.
Invariably, they will simply get pissed and try and pass the bike dangerously, if not honk or hit them out of the way.
Yes, that would work, but then that does not provide the marketing department with the same level of invasive tracking and push notification as "an app" does. So guess which option gets built....
This: "college ,any" - incorrect, the correct usage is "collage, any".
This: "collage,ran" - also incorrect, the correct usage is "collage, ran" (space after the comma, comma adjacent to the previous word).
This: "coding.Freshman" - incorrect, the correct usage is "coding. Freshman" (you sometimes find two spaces after the period, that is also acceptable).
The rest of your post is riddled with errors of these kinds. That and spelling/grammar errors, all of which make you appear sloppy. And a sloppy language using programmer is often a poor programmer. So step one is to begin correcting these issues.
"Step one, learn how to use punctuation correctly:
This: "college ,any" - incorrect, the correct usage is "collage, any".
This: "collage,ran" - also incorrect, the correct usage is "collage, ran" (space after the comma, comma adjacent to the previous word).
This: "coding.Freshman" - incorrect, the correct usage is "coding. Freshman" (you sometimes find two spaces after the period, that is also acceptable).
The rest of your post is riddled with errors of these kinds. That and spelling/grammar errors, all of which make you appear sloppy. And a sloppy language using programmer is often a poor programmer. So step one is to begin correcting these issues."
rest /rest/
verb
1. cease work or movement in order to relax, refresh
oneself, or recover strength.
1. be placed or supported so as to stay in a
specified position.
rest /rest/
verb
remain or be left in a specified condition.
The author is right about one point. Apple fears the low cost Chrome books/pads encroaching on their educational sector.
But the author misses the reason why. It is not the money they might lose now that scares them. What scares them is that they lose their "in" to impressionable young minds such that they can manufacture legions of fanboi's who will forever unquestionably pay a price premium for apple hardware in the years to come.
That's what scares their 'money folks'. That lost future revenue from someone who's first real contact was in school with apple hardware, and was turned into a fanboi who will now line up hundreds deep at "the store" to buy the latest massively overpriced apple 'thing'.
Therefore, instead of having your browser enforce a lowered contrast for yourself, you prefer that the majority of the rest of us, with commodity LCDs, suffer too little contrast by asking for the colors to be changed on the website.