What I don't understand is what is different between the headline saying that you can pay $60 for your car to go faster (true) and parent poster saying "pay an extra $60 monthly your already-expensive vehicle will not give the full outstanding performance that your particular hardware was engineered to do"?
Those two statements seem to say the same thing? What am I missing?
Umm, no.
Allow me to correct this misprint.
Unless you pay an extra $60 monthly your already-expensive vehicle will not give the full outstanding performance that your particular hardware was engineered to do.
I tried Invizible Pro and do not see option for split tunnelling. I suppose Orbot may be a better choice if authentication to one of those services is needed.
https://web.archive.org/web/20230501123146/https://shop.heat...
As a kid, I remember seeing their Hero 2000 on Mr Wizard. It ignited my imagination and I ordered a catalog. Then I saw the price. I went on to get a number of other robots, mostly from Tomy, but they paled in comparison to Hero 2000. When I got a little older, I even started reading about neural networks. Shame I never went further with that!
The feds are even less interested in investigating matters that should be handled by the State.
I say this from practical experience of trying to move the State Attorney General's office and the FBI to investigate and getting absolutely nowhere at all.
My next plan is to simply take a local friendly reporter with a video camera and perform a sit-in at the prosecutors office until they promise to do something or they have me arrested for trespass.
There are some specialist domains where 3D visualization is worth the cost and inconvenience, but it seems to me very unlikely that it will ever escape those. Meta's gigantic investment with little to show for it seems to me to support this observation.
People are confusing bulky headsets with the general concept of VR. If I showed you a working holodeck today you would think it significant.
Mark made the right choice to go balls deep on VR when he did. I don't think he should dial back. When going through hell, keep going.
The main goal of this is to explore the potential of modern CSS in building such a layout. I agree that some of the features aren't supported yet, but that will become better over time. The article shed light on things like container queries, fluid sizing.. etc.
Then we went through 25 years of dark ages where there were plenty of really great ideas for layout which were completely lost to horrible and competing and half-assed executions.
We are now finally in the golden age of layout where I can make something that looks great on all displays if I have the time and talent to do it. Sadly that is in short supply.
I think we have Chrome to thank for modern web design. Once the browser competition was completely and utterly crushed and everyone was forced to sign on to The One True Layout Engine the benevolent dictators at Google set things on the right path.
There are still edges cases (which JPEG replacement will win?!), but they are now blessedly few and far between.