Zachary White19 said:Saying something is a fact can be true or false, just like any other claim. When you call it an "undeniable fact," you're basically asserting that the fact itself is indisputable. It’s like saying it’s an undeniable fact that it's an undeniable fact. That’s just the top tier of logic right there... and that's just how it is.
There's your answer to the difference between fact and truth. Truth is simply what is true, whereas a fact isn't quite as solid. Any further debate is just an exhausting waste of mental energy.
People love to throw around the phrase 'indisputable fact.'
If a fact is inherently true, adding 'indisputable' is just redundant noise. It’s already settled. Unless, of course, we're now dealing with facts that can be debated.
Larry Ortiz5 said:Disk Cleanup frees up plenty of space, but you have to click on "clean up system files," check all those boxes that pop up, and then hit clean..
Thanks. Your method worked best. It claimed it would clear 8 GB but only cleared 5 GB. I'll take it.
John Cook72 said:First off, go grab WINDIRSTAT. It’s a tiny little tool that visualizes your disk usage by folder. You'll see exactly where the space went instantly, making it easy to hunt down the culprit. Just let it run for a few minutes so it can map everything out first.
Windows 7 has this glitch with archiving certain logs; it tries to compress them, the archive fails, so it just keeps trying indefinitely until the disk is full. Those logs are useless—just delete them and the problem disappears.
But WINDIRSTAT will show you exactly where the bloat is hiding.
I discovered that 'WindowsImageBackup' (a VHD file) is sitting there taking up 80 GB. I have no idea if it's safe to touch, since you can't just open it easily. The last activity on it was nine years ago. I can't offer much advice here. If it works, it works. When it finally dies, I'll just install a fresh version of Windows.
Matthew Young35 said:True, those files can eat up a massive amount of disk space. 🤣
I never download stuff like that. I don't even have many programs installed, and I can't recall the last time I manually downloaded anything. Most of what's clogging my drive is just junk that accumulated over the years through automatic updates or whatever else decided to settle in there.
Matthew Young35 said:You could try limiting the page file size. Clear out those restore points. Uninstall whatever junk you don't need. Empty the Recycle Bin. Delete the directory C:/windows/system/32/random_folder_name/junk_files
That's all I've got.
I checked under system32 and that folder doesn't exist. Also, what kind of nonsense path is that? Sounds like some weird virus or malware attempt.
Matthew Young35 said:I can't see any reason why that would be risky.
-Wiped it last night. It was a waste of time since I botched the math on kilobytes versus gigabytes; thought it would help, but I only cleared 0.20 GB. -To make matters worse, I booted up my PC today only to find I have 2 GB less free space than I did yesterday.
My C drive is running dangerously low on space, so I’m trying to clear some room. Standard disk cleanup isn't doing much of anything, so I went looking for solutions online and stumbled upon this method on YouTube: Navigate to Computer/C drive/Windows/SoftwareDistribution/Download The guide says you can safely wipe everything inside that 'Download' folder. Based on the file sizes I'm seeing, deleting this would free up a significant amount of space, but I'm hesitant. I have no idea if it's actually safe to touch these files. Does anyone have any insight or advice?
neonharbor10 said:The day we actually crack faster-than-light travel, 360-degree video will be obsolete anyway. Claiming that you're occasionally looking at things from a skewed perspective is just a flaw in reality. Technology should fix those flaws, not mimic them, if it wants to be worth anything more than the real world. It’s like arguing that online shopping should include a virtual waiting line just because physical stores have them.
Look, there’s no point in debating who’s right here. Maybe it's you, maybe it's me. Doesn't matter. What I'm saying is inevitable: people will eventually want to feel like they're halfway across the country without ever leaving their living rooms.
What’s technically impossible today will be standard tomorrow. It always has been, and it always will be. We haven't even scratched the surface of what technology can do; there is plenty of room left to grow.
I disagree with the idea that 360 video is useless. First off, we live in a 360-degree world, and experiencing life that way is far more interesting than staring in a single direction. If you happen to look the wrong way and miss something important, that isn't a flaw in the tech—it's just a more realistic representation of life. In reality, we spend half our time looking at the wrong things and missing details anyway.
This kind of tech is going to completely overhaul the outdated concept of video presentation as we know it.
I don't claim to be an expert on telecommunications or all this hardware, so I won't pretend to dive into the technical weeds, but I do have a specific vision for where technology is headed
For instance, I believe television will eventually adopt this tech; everything will be captured via 360-degree cameras and experienced through virtual reality
neonharbor10 said:Sure; in theory, it works. The issues are data transfer and quality. Even with 4K 360 video, the resolution looks terrible through goggles because you're only seeing a tiny fraction of those pixels. Another issue is the lack of stereo 360 capability. Unless you have cameras on a complex rig that tracks head movement, you don't even need a panorama. But then you hit latency. Any delay between moving your head and the view updating causes instant nausea. So, one has to wonder if there's any actual benefit here over a standard video call, given all these flaws.
As you noted, it works in theory. Those technical hurdles will likely be cleared in a few years.
neonharbor10 said:Can you explain that concept a bit more?
Say you're on a Skype call and the other person uses a 360-degree camera that streams directly to your smart glasses. It gives you the sensation of being physically present in their room.
The ultimate goal for VR headsets in the near future—if we haven't already hit that mark—is virtual teleportation. However, the hardware needs to shrink down until it's roughly the size of standard eyeglasses.
wiredbadger62 said:The thing is, during the winter months, migrants might only find a few specific, isolated spots where they could potentially cross into the US from Canada. I suppose I could take a bit of a gamble here, though I can't say I'd feel particularly guilty if they ended up freezing out there in the mountains.
If some smuggler leads them into the mountains and abandons them there, they could easily freeze to death.
wiredbadger62 said:I’m honestly not so sure about that perspective. The thing is, from Canada, the migrants can really only head toward America. In this specific scenario, it might actually be better for the Mexicans to try and concentrate everything within as small an area as possible, like right at the border. That way, the migrants act more like a "force of nature," giving them much more momentum and, well, a much higher chance of actually breaking through.
True, but the border with Canada is massive. If the corridor through there isn't managed perfectly, those migrants will be popping up everywhere. There's no way we could contain them all.
Jessica King9 said:Some people here clearly need a crash course on how the EU actually operates. Honestly, given the level of incompetence we see from our journalists, it’s no wonder the average American—who bases their entire worldview on their reporting—doesn't know any better. The EU is going to isolate a member state? The EU is going to slap sanctions on a member state? Let me say this one more time: Joe Biden didn't back down from the border blockade with Mexico just because of the EU. The EU didn't have any mechanism to punish him. Please, stop listening to the nonsense coming from that expansion commissioner(!!) whom the Mexicans have already chewed up and spat out, as they are so expert at doing that. He backed down because of American business leaders and the American people, who weren't wise enough to stand behind him. We are part of the EU, whether we like it or not.
And even if isolation or sanctions from the EU were actually a thing... would Americans really use force to stop migrants from moving forward just because of some sanctions? And how exactly would they even do that?
Not blocking the border with Mexico is just a necessary evil—choosing the lesser of two evils. A total blockade would just push migrants through Canada, making the situation much harder for us to manage.