Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #105919

Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/30/17, 10:02 AM, in article op.yziplrk2js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 23:12:16 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 4/22/17, 1:41 PM, in article op.yy36fhcajs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
>> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>>>> Most people keep their monitors brighter than that (though not all, my
>>>>>> wife
>>>>>> HATES bright monitors and keeps hers very dim).
>>>>> 
>>>>> I used to do that with CRTs, I found them rather glaring.  But a bright
>>>>> LCD
>>>>> doesn't annoy me much.
>>>> 
>>>> For me it was the flicker on the old CRTs, especially if they were set to
>>>> 60
>>>> MHz.
>>> 
>>> You mean 60Hz.
>> 
>> Yes. Of course. Sorry about that.
>> 
>> Also sorry I hit the "Send" button before I meant to with the first reply.
>> :)
> 
> I did that all the time before I found and disabled the send keystroke.
> 
> I do it more on my mobile phone when texting because the space is right next
> to send, and it's a small phone compared to the size of my fingers.  For some
> reason it claims to take a few seconds to send the text, but if I cancel
> immediately, they still get it.  Must just be the ACK that takes ages.

Mine was just a silly error: clicked "reply" and started to type, was
interrupted, and then hit "Send" thinking I was getting read to reply still.
One of those things where as your hand is going through the muscle memory
action your brain screams "no!" but it is too late. :)

>>> I always used 90Hz, but I still didn't like them bright.  If I set a CRT and
>>> an LCD side by side to both be comfortable to work with, the same photo on
>>> both displays looked completely different.  The CRTs didn't seem to have a
>>> linear output, so the darker areas of the photo were not visible on the CRT.
>>> If I made the photo look correct on the CRT by brightening it in Photoshop,
>>> it
>>> looked washed out on the LCD.
>> 
>> I do not have the color-monitor hardware and the like but always calibrate
>> my displays. When I would set up labs of computers the colors would look
>> very different from screen to screen right out of the box.
> 
> Some (or should that be all except expensive ones) displays don't have enough
> adjustments to calibrate them well.

Sure. I have a third party second screen attached to my iMac -- the quality
is pretty bad but good enough for what I do.

My wife's old iMac has dying backlight -- nothing you can do to get rid of
the stripes of darker and lighter areas. Not really noticeable when watching
a video but very clear on a single color screen. And even with videos had to
fiddle with the gamma settings to get it to be reasonably good.

>>>>> The lights are on in my room, which are fairly bright.  On a nice day with
>>>>> the lights off they probably match.  If I carry the piece of paper around
>>>>> the house and outside, the colour is completely different.  Just ask any
>>>>> woman buying clothes or curtains and getting home to find the colour isn't
>>>>> the same as in the shop.
>>>> 
>>>> 
<http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/white-gold-dress-h>>>>
e
>>>> res-science-5241292> OR <https://goo.gl/B5GoC0>
>>> 
>>> I never understood the problem.  I see exactly what photoshop sees - the
>>> lighter of the two colours is white with a blue tint.  It's about
>>> 110:110:130
>>> RGB.  So not blue, but white with a little bit of blue.  There's no eyesight
>>> problem, just a cameraphone problem.
>> 
>> I see it the same way you do.
> 
> Then our eyes both agree with photoshop and the people seeing it differently
> are fucked in the head.

Most if not all "optical" illusions are really brain illusions... and
different people are impacted by them in different ways. There are some I
cannot see "right" no matter how much I know they are illusions.

This is one of my favorites: <https://goo.gl/Wg4Ah6>. Square A looks darker
to me than square B even though I know it is not. I cannot see it as it
"really" is no matter how hard I try.

>>>>> So anyway, you can never say that a printout is the same as a backlit
>>>>> display, because it depends how much light is in the room when you look at
>>>>> the printout.  Can you calibrate a room light?
>>>>> 
>>>> I am sure there are ways... but I know nothing of them. :)
>>> 
>>> Apparently Philips (I think) make an adjustable LED one, you can change the
>>> RGB value with a remote.
>> 
>> I have a light for a fish tank that lets me change the color but not with
>> any precision... just a dozen or so pre-set options (some of them rotating
>> through colors).
> 
> Fish probably aren't fussy enough to need more than that.

Hmmm, good point. :)

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-30 18:02 +0100
  Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 11:45 -0700
    Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution Ron C <r.capik@verizon.net> - 2017-04-30 16:04 -0400
      Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 13:29 -0700

csiph-web