It makes sense. But as a US speaker it just makes me want to stick to my guns and generalize our second syllable stress on these units. I'm team kilogram now. And centimeter.
Found a new hill!
It makes sense. But as a US speaker it just makes me want to stick to my guns and generalize our second syllable stress on these units. I'm team kilogram now. And centimeter.
Found a new hill!
It's amazing that they can measure the speed of sound at all given this. They must need to line up a bunch of eardrums.
That's my take too. Short for "this requires you to follow a steep learning curve, even if it is not easy to do so."
Ha! Well I was just having a laugh. Expecting that you would prefer "you should damp your expectations" and that my construction should mean "make your expectations wet." And it turns out dampen is ambiguous. It means both moisten and dull, deaden, make weak.
Not only that, but most every form carries both meanings, and the "weaken" sense for the word damp predates the "humid" sense. Because the noun came first and it was specific to suffocating fumes in a mine that would extinguish candles, and people.
So my take now is that dampening means both "making weak" and "humidifying, moistening." Only damping is specific to motion/energy. And I can't recall encountering anyone using damping to mean "making wet."
That's a great point. Water heaters heat hot water much more often than cold water. Maintaining the already elevated temperature.
You should probably dampen your expectations on this one.
I tasted the rainbow 🌈
Darktable is fantastic, but the learning curve is steep for great results. It took us months to get comfortable with it after using Capture One, Lightroom, Photoshop/ACR. It's different. Our first efforts looked like crap.
For someone processing just a few files I think RawTherapee is probably easier and likely to give better results with limited effort.
Nice, I'll check it out! I remember LMS and Squeezebox. Didn't know it would sync between rooms, and I didn't know it had been open sourced, that's excellent.
At the time we started in the Sonos ecosystem we wanted easy, and it provided that. Now I've got multiple servers running, self-hosting services for the family, slowly working on removing our cloud service dependencies. So this would fit right in.
Yeah, I get what you're saying. Definitely. It's not complicated for one pair of speakers in one room. For one music source. For one person controlling it.
There just haven't been any better cost-effective solutions with multi-room, control from your any phone convenience. And that's a big plus for how we listen to music. Today there are a few contenders, but many of them are also cloud dependent. Really the small number of good options in this space is proof of how good Sonos was for a long time. Well and also of Spotify causing people ditch the idea of a offline digital music library.
Edit: And to be clear, aside from the "any computer networks" part, this is what the original Sonos device did. It could work without a home network, but worked best with a shared music library on a PC. Didn't need cloud anything, internet connection, account, etc. You just hooked your normal speakers to it and it played music.
That SATA port is what you need. You can use that to connect an external eSATA drive enclosure (external jbod).
For a clean install, get a SATA to eSATA adapter - the kind with an expansion slot plate. Something like a STCESATAPLT1LP. Unscrew the eSATA end from the plate, cut a matching hole in the PC case and mount the port to the hole. This is better than going straight from the internal port in my opinion.
It looks like you have a mini-PCIe slot as well, probably intended for WiFi. That may work with an mSATA to SATA adapter to give you a second port. Or it may work with an mSATA SSD. I would test with something cheap or get confirmation it works from other users of this PC before investing in an expensive SSD.
Neat. It has a wikipedia article as well.