"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:
"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:
"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:
"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:
"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:18:35 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:
"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 02:55:55 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:
"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news
why does google have 4.5 million results for the car light
flicker?
Just a few mindlessly ranting freaks, like you.
I must have asked about 30 people I know about it, and about
half
agreed
it was irritating.
The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'
I've done statistics at uni,
And clearly the whole lot went right over your head, as always.
I know what an adequate sample is.
You clearly don't with that steaming turd above.
Well I understand this,
No you do not.
How can you possibly know if I don't?
From that stupid claim of yours above.
It's your end that's stupid.
Everyone can see for themselves who the stupid is, you.
do you?
Corse I do.
Don't believe you.
You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not claim to believe in spades.
Stop backpedalling
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic
fantasys.
and discuss your shortfall properly.
There is no shortfall of mine.
You always give up and quote the same "insults" when you don't have an
answer.
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasys.
I have you backed into a corner
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasys.
because you haven't a ****ing clue what you're talking about. You're so
predictable.
You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample...pothesis_tests
To make it easier for you:
https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/calculating-sample-size/
For example, with the world population of 7.5 billion, to be 90%
sure
you
only have an error margin of 10%, you only need 63 people in your
sample.
So yours is clearly a pathetically inadequate sample.
It's half of what's required for the above accuracy. I don't need
that
much accuracy. Even if I was 20% out, then saying that 50% of people
can
see flicker means that 40% can. 40% is a big enough part of the
population to cater for.
Thanks for that completely superfluous
proof that you don't in fact have a ****ing
clue about even the most basic statistics.
If you did, you'd tell me what I did wrong.
Already did.
No, you gave no information,
Just another of your bare faced lies.
you just said "bull****" etc.
Everyone can see for themselves what I actually said.
If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.
Economy.
Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.
I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.
You're wrong with the rates involved.
Funny how they don't all do it.
Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.
A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself
They aint doing anything even remotely like that.
is an idiot.
Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.
Funny how it's only recently we've had them fast enough to make switch
mode power supplies and smaller coils possible.
Those operate at much higher rates again.
There must be a reason they don't just make them switch very fast,
The ones that you can see flicker dont switch very fast,
just a bit faster than those that you can see flicker.
perhaps it wears the LED out?
No it does not. The reason is as I stated, the designer didnt
bother to research what freaks can still see flicker wise.
In spades with movies in movie theaters. That frame
rate was chosen because most couldn't see that flicker.
Not the same thing.
Corse its still flicker for freaks.
It's less visible.
Still visible for freaks.
Why do you persist in calling half the population freaks,
It isnt anything even remotely like half the population.
Yes it is, by simple observation of those around you.
No one else I know sees flicker with car lights.
Don't you ever talk to anyone?
Corse I do and you can see me doing that, ****wit.
who can all see something you can't?
Because thats what they are, freaks.
Is a dog a freak because it can smell better than we can?
No, because its only the freaks of dogs that can't.
Ah, so you just accept the majority as being correct.
It isnt about being correct.
So Einstein was a freak
Corse he was, mentally.
because he was one of very few people who was that clever.
Duh.
You would have had him burned at the stake wouldn't you?
If you can't do any better than this mindless
**** I will be flushing your **** where it belongs.
I mean it's not normal to be that clever,
Duh.
there must be something wrong with him, best we get rid of him?
There you go, off in your pathetic little drug
crazed drunken psychotic fantasyland, as always.
Or does it perhaps have the ability to detect what we miss?
Yes they do with sound unless they have gone deaf.
My parents believed that dogs had ESP because they
can work out when one of them is coming home long
before any human can. The answer is trivial, the dog
can hear the family vehicle long before a human can.
Which makes them useful, they can do something we can't.
Which might just be why we use them to sniff out stupid
druggys like you at airports and other places, stupid.
A human who could do the same would be equally useful,
Nothing useful about seeing car lights flickering, ****wit.
yet you'd call them a freak.
I call a freak a freak and drug crazed drunken
psychotics drug crazed drunken psychotics, freak.
LED lights on cars are deliberately pulsed to get more effective
brightness (as far as the human eye is concerned, peak brightness is
what enables you to see better) from the same LEDs with less heat.
But LEDs go completely off between pulses.
And so doubling the pulse rate doesn't cost anymore.
Movie theatres (you mean cinemas,
No I do not.
theatres are for plays, they have a stage,
Movie theaters arent for plays and they don't have stages.
you're talking American)
Wrong, as always.
Cinema = big screen and projector.
Theatre = stage with live actors.
Wrong, as always.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre
"Theatre or theater[1] is a collaborative form of fine art that uses
live
performers, typically actors or actresses, to present the experience of
a
real or imagined event before a live audience in a specific place, often
a
stage. The performers may communicate this experience to the audience
through combinations of gesture, speech, song, music, and dance.
Elements
of art, such as painted scenery and stagecraft such as lighting are used
to enhance the physicality, presence and immediacy of the experience.[2]
The specific place of the performance is also named by the word
"theatre"
as derived from the Ancient Greek θ*ατρον (théatron, "a place for
viewing"), itself from θεάομαι (theáomai, "to see", "to watch", "to
observe")."
Thats just one type of theater, stupid. Even you
must be aware of operating theaters which have
no stage and no play being performed.
They also have live people in them.
So do plenty of non theaters.
A cinema just plays a film, no people are present.
No one watching the movie at all eh ?
Completely off with the ****ing fairys, as always.
Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_(disambiguation)
don't illuminate the screen with LEDs.
Duh. And irrelevant to whether the frame rate was
chosen because most don't see any flicker with it.
Flicker didn't only happen with LEDs, stupid.
They happen more so as they switch on and off instantly.
Wrong, as always.
LEDs switch on ad off faster than any other form of light, that is an
indisputable fact.
Irrelevant to the fact that it isnt how quickly
they switch that matters, its the pulse RATE
that determines how visible the flicker is.
Bull****. Consider a variable duty cycle.
That isnt the reason some car lights
flicker for you and others dont.
As that approaches 1, there's no flicker. Clearly LEDs have a much lower
duty cycle than that.
LCD screens dont.
A decent phosphor coating on a CRT will have a duty cycle of say 0.8 to
0.9,
CRTs dont have a duty cycle.
which will be much harder to see flickering.
Wrong, as always.
Why do you think Panasonic made a 100Hz TV?
Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and are free to pay more
for
something faster.
Being able to detect something you can't makes them better than you.
Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying
something. Much worse in fact when car lights flicker.
Perhaps you should ditch your sense of smell, because smelling things
you
don't like is annoying.
There is nothing that I find annoying about any
smell except a big rotting animal corpse in hot
weather and that's so rare that it just isnt a problem.
Being able to detect (and being annoyed about) something that smells bad
is a good thing.
Wrong, as always, particularly with stuff like paint etc.
Paint doesn't smell bad.
Wrong, as always.
Bad smells mean something is harmful, like ****.
**** isnt harmful when you are just smelling it.
And durians smell awful but are fine to eat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durian
It makes you want to get rid of it.
No need to get rid of an animal corpse.
Disease.
Just another of your pathetic little drug
crazed drunken pig ignorant fantasys.
And a damned nuisance with fresh paint etc.
I poison mice because its more convenient to
do that than to fart around with traps and never
have a problem with any smell from dead ones.
More fun to trap them and watch them slowly die.
Only for psychopaths.
Mice are vermin,
Some have them as pets.
why would you care about them?
I dont, I poison them. But I'm not a psychopath so I dont
catch them and get off on watching them die slowly.
Anyway you have no problem killing them, yet you won't torture them first?
Because I am not a psychopath.
Death is 1 billion times worse than torture.
Irrelevant to whether only a psychopath gets off
on catching mice and watching them die slowly.
I'd much rather you tortured me then let me live, than kill me instantly.
Doesnt matter what some psychopath would rather.
Nevermind the advantage of smell....
Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?
Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.
High frequency monitors were very popular.
Not because many ever saw any flicker.
There would be no other reason.
Wrong, as always.
State the other reason then.
Already did.
[FFS this is like getting blood out of a stone]
And it was proven that low frequency ones cause headaches and eye
damage
for people using them all day in offices.
Bull****.
No it isn't.
Corse it is.
Go do some research
Did that before you were even born thanks. NO ONE
ever got any eye damage from lower frequency monitors.
https://www.webmd.com/eye-health/com...ision-syndrome
Just because some ****wit claims something...
and stop yourself being so utterly clueless.
You're the one with that problem, as always.
At my first place of work it was actually one of the regulations that
anyone could request a higher frequency monitor if they believed it was
annoying or giving them headaches.
That operation actually was that stupid ? Irrelevant
to your stupid pig ignorant claim about eye damage.
Funny how the better monitors took the headaches away.
Funny how no one ever got any eye damage with the standard ones.