Suntan

Lives in United States Twin Cities, United States
Works as a Engineer
Joined on Aug 30, 2004

Comments

Total: 441, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Michel Aristegui: There are so many people killed while driving their cars that all this agitation about terrorism is pointless. Not to mention mass shootings.

By that logic nobody should bother brushing their teeth...

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 15:49 UTC
In reply to:

Arastoo Vaziri: Please don't overreact: I don't condone what the bloke in the van did in any way, but the photograph of the van (not the one with it being removed) is far more interesting than the rather commonplace one with the creases.
And I wonder whether the towing vehicle tracks weren't even more harmful to the ground. Couldn't they have used an helicopter to remove the van?

A bunch of people want a stretch of the least hospitable land on the face of the planet left just so, so that they can enjoy lookin at its bleakness. That's an entitled mentality, whether you want to call it a FWP or not is rather ancillary.

As for any of the responses that anyone has made here mattering... Not really. At least not beyond the premise that we all voluntarily come here to discuss mundane stuff in a collegial manor, free from name calling and other inappropriate comments...

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 14:52 UTC
In reply to:

villagranvicent: They should remove the van with a helicopter. The Caterpillar must have damage the salt flats way more than the van itself.

I think you are vastly overestimating the value of 50' worth of tire tracks in the middle of the desert.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 23:36 UTC
In reply to:

Suntan: IDK, I kinda like the juxtaposition of the ratty van in the middle of nowhere. I'd vote to keep it there.

Take it however you guys want. But between breaths of disgust and outrage, appreciate that if you were to leave it there, in 50 years your grandkids would fight to preserve it.

Take a look at all the "ghost towns" littered around that neck of the country. People actually make a point of traveling to those places to see them. Same thing really, just been there longer.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 23:28 UTC
In reply to:

Arastoo Vaziri: Please don't overreact: I don't condone what the bloke in the van did in any way, but the photograph of the van (not the one with it being removed) is far more interesting than the rather commonplace one with the creases.
And I wonder whether the towing vehicle tracks weren't even more harmful to the ground. Couldn't they have used an helicopter to remove the van?

Stay classy tlinn. That's the dpreview comradery that we all like to see. S/

Yes the van driver made a choice that the rest of us don't like. But that still doesn't change the fact it is an entitled mindset to think that we should have a barren stretch of desert preserved just the way we want it. Again, I'm not saying it's wrong, but it is entitled.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 23:23 UTC
In reply to:

Arastoo Vaziri: Please don't overreact: I don't condone what the bloke in the van did in any way, but the photograph of the van (not the one with it being removed) is far more interesting than the rather commonplace one with the creases.
And I wonder whether the towing vehicle tracks weren't even more harmful to the ground. Couldn't they have used an helicopter to remove the van?

Agree that the top photo looks nice. If a person wants a pic of a barren, salty surface, they can just turn to the side a little.

As for harmful to the ground... It's a scrap of barren land with salt crystallized on top. No harm was done to any land, only to people's sense of entitlement.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 15:56 UTC

IDK, I kinda like the juxtaposition of the ratty van in the middle of nowhere. I'd vote to keep it there.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 15:51 UTC as 43rd comment | 4 replies
On article Olympus working on 8K video for Micro Four Thirds (218 comments in total)

Exactly what is needed in the next pocketable camera...

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 20:28 UTC as 40th comment

With a vacation to Joshua Tree NP for star gazing coming this summer, this lens is appealing. That said, I've already got the Samyang 14 2.8. So this lens can't be justified.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2017 at 14:38 UTC as 13th comment
On article LG G6 comes with dual-cam and 18:9 FullVision display (69 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hellstrom: storage always remains the same. It's been 32GB or 64GB for about 3-4 years now on most Android phones. You'd think this would be the easiest for manufacturers to boost. With 4K video recording, it means you have less room for your files.

If storage increased with each model, we should be up to 512GB or 1TB by 2017, yet we're still stuck in 2013.

@Zor - So you still have 7GB free. Sounds like the ultimate first world problem to me.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 14:52 UTC
On article LG G6 comes with dual-cam and 18:9 FullVision display (69 comments in total)
In reply to:

MacM: does it have RAW

The G4 and G5 have raw support. I don't know why this one wouldn't.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 13:55 UTC
On article LG G6 comes with dual-cam and 18:9 FullVision display (69 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hellstrom: storage always remains the same. It's been 32GB or 64GB for about 3-4 years now on most Android phones. You'd think this would be the easiest for manufacturers to boost. With 4K video recording, it means you have less room for your files.

If storage increased with each model, we should be up to 512GB or 1TB by 2017, yet we're still stuck in 2013.

Meh. It supports an mSD card, no?

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 13:53 UTC
On article LG G6 comes with dual-cam and 18:9 FullVision display (69 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kivivuori: Why use 2:1 screens?
I think phones should have 16:9 (1:1,7777) screens simply because HD is 1920 x 1080, UHD-1 (2160p) is 3840 × 2160 are both 16:) and not even DCI 4K (4096 × 2160) is 2:1. Just wondering...

Too many standards :(

The theory is that having the 2:1 screen allows for more screen space without having an overly wide phone, so it can still be used with one hand.

In any case, 16:9 is hardly an ideal "one-size-fits-all" aspect ratio for a multi-use device. "HD" may be 16:9, but most contemporary movies are the much wider cinemascope 2.35:1 format (which this screen will fit better.) More importantly though, most webpages are substantially longer than they are wide, so this screen offers better web page viewing, doubly so when taking into account all the header/footer menus and action buttons that are typically present in most browsers/apps.

Personally, I think the 18:9 screen is a good option to have on the market.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 13:52 UTC
On article Archos to make Kodak-branded Android tablets (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

WillWeaverRVA: The decomposition of the Kodak name continues. Archos tablets are generally better used as very expensive shingles, because as tablets you get what you pay for (and that's pretty much garbage).

I still have my Archos 604wifi in a drawer, with a spare battery. That thing was awesome. Don't doubt for a second that other passengers were severely jelly when I'd pull that out of a pocket and proceed to watch a couple of movies during international flights!

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 01:14 UTC
On article This camera is made of 32,000 drinking straws (177 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wil Helm: This camera isnt pointless...

No, but it has the potential to really suck...

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 12:21 UTC
On article This camera is made of 32,000 drinking straws (177 comments in total)
In reply to:

MartinsB: What's the photo sensitive medium in this camera?

Yeah, for a camera gear site, it would be nice if the article talked about the camera more than the "artist's" metaphysical ramblings.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 12:20 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Permit: The company comment
"That's the power of Kickstarter: You're not just placing an order and waiting for a product to arrive; you're part of the highs and lows of bringing a new product to market. You're making products possible that wouldn't otherwise exist. You're helping entrepreneurs take insanely big risks to follow a vision for a product. They often succeed (Pebble, Form 1 printer, The Coolest), but sometimes, they fail."

I say, that's the PROBLEM with Kickstarter. The backers provide the money to bring new products to market. They let entrepreneurs take insanely big risks WITH THEIR money. If the product succeeds, the entrepreneurs get richer. When it fails, the backers get poorer. The backers take all the risk, the sponsors get all the reward.

@ Anadrol - This is how investing in startups has always happened. The only difference is that usually a traditional startup investor goes into the investment fully appreciating this.

Say it to yourself over and over again if you must, "Kickstarter is not a store selling products with a warranty. Kickstarter is not a store selling products with a warranty. Kickstarter is not..."

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 18:53 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Permit: The company comment
"That's the power of Kickstarter: You're not just placing an order and waiting for a product to arrive; you're part of the highs and lows of bringing a new product to market. You're making products possible that wouldn't otherwise exist. You're helping entrepreneurs take insanely big risks to follow a vision for a product. They often succeed (Pebble, Form 1 printer, The Coolest), but sometimes, they fail."

I say, that's the PROBLEM with Kickstarter. The backers provide the money to bring new products to market. They let entrepreneurs take insanely big risks WITH THEIR money. If the product succeeds, the entrepreneurs get richer. When it fails, the backers get poorer. The backers take all the risk, the sponsors get all the reward.

@anadrol - Why?

Counterpoint, Microsoft's first product was created by two guys in 8 weeks. HP started in a garage. Facebook was created in a couple of dorm rooms. Simon Ingersoll started what would become Ingersoll Rand with nothing more than a patent for a drill. etc. etc. The list could go on and on.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 15:29 UTC
In reply to:

DotCom Editor: The only parties profiting from Kickstarter fundraising campaigns seems to be the people at Kickstarter.

Are you telling me that a company is out there trying to make money for itself?!?

Why we can't have that now can we, Society will never be the same....

/S

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 12:18 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Permit: The company comment
"That's the power of Kickstarter: You're not just placing an order and waiting for a product to arrive; you're part of the highs and lows of bringing a new product to market. You're making products possible that wouldn't otherwise exist. You're helping entrepreneurs take insanely big risks to follow a vision for a product. They often succeed (Pebble, Form 1 printer, The Coolest), but sometimes, they fail."

I say, that's the PROBLEM with Kickstarter. The backers provide the money to bring new products to market. They let entrepreneurs take insanely big risks WITH THEIR money. If the product succeeds, the entrepreneurs get richer. When it fails, the backers get poorer. The backers take all the risk, the sponsors get all the reward.

Yeah. That's the deal. If you're a backer you're signing up for that deal. Don't like it, don't sign up. It's your money to do with as you please. No one is being forced to give money to these startups.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 12:16 UTC
Total: 441, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »