Mildly Interesting

25721 readers

143 users here now

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don't spam.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

marcar@lemmy.world

Jimbabwe@lemmy.ml

WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world

Zerlyna@lemmy.world

144

What Happens When You Put a LaserDisc Under a Microscope? | It turns out you can quite literally see an analog signal if the conditions are right—and you look closely enough. (gizmodo.com)

submitted 2 days ago by IcedRaktajino@startrek.website to c/mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] M137@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Why post shitty gizmodo instead of the actual video? You're just linking to a middleman who is widely known as being shit.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 39 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I appreciate the copy. Video is so over used and so YouTube / google centric. Text can be more succinct, easier to navigate, and uses less bandwidth. Beneficial use cases for video certainly exist, but the format is severely overused.

Speaking of video, I have great nostalgia for the minds eye series. Great clips and soundtracks.

Edit: for a video version of this comment check out my YouTube stream, you won't believe what happens next! L/S!!

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yes, I don’t like the trend. “We put a laserdisc under a microscope and you won’t believe what happened”

20 min video

100% chance I’m not clicking.

But I might click it now after seeing some pictures and write up.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 13 points 2 days ago

Because video sucks 99% of the time it's used.

It feels like video is used only to enable illiterates.

[–] sartalon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Huh. I grew up with laserdiscs and never knew it was an analogue recording and not a digital one.

That explains some things for me.

[–] IcedRaktajino@startrek.website 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I never had one but they had them at school. Thought they were the coolest thing ever and also assumed digital because CDs were starting to become popular.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago

Later Laserdiscs (and VHSs) had digital audio embedded in the analog audio stream the same way the GameCube and the Wii (and some N64 games) did it with Dolby Pro-Logic. But the video was always analog. IIRC the first widely available digital video format was Video-CD but that never took off in the west.

[–] deacon@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Man, a family I babysat for as a young teen had a Laserdisc player and a much bigger tv than our home set. I will never forget seeing The Abyss for the first time that way. Also Raising Arizona.

[–] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 2 days ago

So basically a Laserdisc is kinda a giant non-stereo Viewmaster?

[–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So a laserdisc player is a glorified microscope looking through it.

[–] HowAbt2day@futurology.today 1 points 2 days ago

A Glory Scope. Hot.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe -1 points 2 days ago

Well, yea, it's an analog recording no different than an LP, just at a smaller scale.