I mean that makes sense because that's kind of how it is in english too. "Star" makes you think of a star, but "bucks" at the end of the word doesn't make you think of anything specific, it's just a sound
If you're talking about ads that look like ads, it's happened maybe twice since the mid 90s. But who knows how many ads disguised as content that any of us has ever clicked on?
There's a map that shows where every file on your disk is. Doing a regular trash just erases the map pointer for that file, but the 1s and 0s that the file is made of are still sitting there on your disk. Secure erase writes 0s into that area on the disk, so even if you knew where that file used to be located on the disk, now you'll just find 0s there, instead of finding the 1s and 0s of the old file.
Yay, glad I could help! Yeah essentially if they're asking something that might have an emotional aspect to it then they want to hear more than just k.
Your friend is at least partially misinforming you. It's fine to write k instead of ok in almost all situations. But either of them can be rude if the other person would expect more emotive words. For example here's when k is fine:
Them: Bring my pen when you come into the other room
You: k
And here's where k is not fine:
Them: Wanna go grab some drinks tonight at 8?
You: k
That's rude. They would want to hear you actually be interested in their invitation. Like saying "great" or "I'm in" or whatever.
Yup this is the answer. In the past people had put on black makeup and did horribly awful racist caricatures of black people. As a result putting on black makeup itself came to mean you're doing racist stuff. IMO i think that far in the future if racism is eliminated then people will be able to put on dark makeup and it'll be seen as fine. But none of us reading this sentence are gonna be alive to see that point
Bitrate per pixel is what we're talking about. Bitrate alone tells you nothing. If you're actually receiving a full as-advertised bitrate stream with a well-implemented compression algorithm then obviously if all else is held equal then higher resolution = higher quality. But in reality many streams are overly compressed to save on their bandwidth and server costs, and often due to tech inefficiencies you won't actually receive the full bit rate, resulting in even more additional compression losses.
Again, a perfectly-implemented, perfectly-transported stream in 720p will always look better than a 480p dvd file. But in reality there are many situations where a stream is imperfectly-implemented and imperfectly-transported, sometimes to the point where visual quality worsens to below what you would get from an upscaled 480p dvd.
But anyway, neither of us are true experts on this topic. If you're always 100% happy with the quality of the streams you see, then that's great! But many of us sometimes encounter streams where the compression causes obvious visual degradations to the point of being distracting. Personally i prefer lower resolution with no obvious compression artifacts, rather than higher resolution with obvious color banding and visual noise in motion sequences.
I would bet that a 720-upscaled dvd will look better than a low bitrate 720 stream. Hell, a 720-upscaled dvd probably looks better than a low bitrate 1080 or 4k stream. In many aspects a lower resolution video with a high bitrate will always look better than a video at higher resolution with a bitrate that's too low. Excess compression makes visual quality turn to ugly garbage. Even just a little bit of additional compression quickly starts to cause color banding, blocky artifacts, and visual noise in motion sequences.
I mean that makes sense because that's kind of how it is in english too. "Star" makes you think of a star, but "bucks" at the end of the word doesn't make you think of anything specific, it's just a sound