Isoprenoid

it was just one group of rich greedy people turning on another group of rich greedy people. Nothing to get excited about.

Sounds better than what we currently have:

Groups of poor desperate people turning on other groups of poor desperate people.

If you're wanting to practice soldering, and build a small, cheap project at the same time, I'd recommend cheap project kits from Aliexpress (there are probably equivalents on Amazon). Do projects that are through hole soldering first, before attempting SMD components.

There are plenty to choose from and they're cheap, so if it doesn't work then it doesn't matter much.

• LED Christmas Trees
• Digital Clocks
• Bluetooth speaker - the SMD components are done for you.
• FM Radio Kits
• LED Sound Spectrum Display - Lots of practice with this one

There will be plenty of Youtube videos of people putting these things together if you want to know more.

Have fun!

Hate the player, and the game.

Well then, they don't sound very nice over there.

I understand where you're coming from: If natural dialogue is preferred for a creative work, then having laughter audio is inappropriate.

I disagree that canned laughter and live audience laughter are equivalent.

With live audience reactions it's like watching a theatre presentation, you get to be part of the crowd. We get a chance to laugh at the jokes at a natural pace (allowing for pauses so we don't miss the next joke) that the audience would set, and their reactions are modulated organically.

Canned laughter doesn't do this, it doesn't set a natural pace. It is calculated by an audio engineer, and the laughter will be an unnatural reaction to the joke presented.

It's the difference between a genuine and forced smile. We can naturally sense something is off. A live audience reaction is superior to canned laughter in most cases.

That being said, some shows don't need laughter audio to be enjoyable.

The IT Crowd didn't use canned laugh tracks, They recorded audio of audience responses.

https://youtu.be/sIQNXH8yHsk?t=156

They pay out of initial capital investment and leveraging.

I like the imagery of the last post because it was tapping into the idea of waves and how sub-atomic particles behave like waves.

However, erm actually 🤓 ...

you pet your dog and the electron-orbitals of your skin overlap with the electron-orbitals of his fur

No, they don't overlap. Electrons are negatively charged, and like repels like. The orbitals will repel each other. This repulsion is the reason why you can feel the fur.

Edit: I'm getting nay-sayers that reckon they do. Please provide a reference that explains inter-molecular orbitals that cause bonding for a hand touching fur. The only thing I can think of this happening is for transition states. This would require a chemical reaction. I don't think we categorise "touch" under "requiring a chemical reaction".

Because the structure of the transition state is a first-order saddle point along a potential energy surface, the population of species in a reaction that are at the transition state is negligible. Since being at a saddle point along the potential energy surface means that a force is acting along the bonds to the molecule, there will always be a lower energy structure that the transition state can decompose into. This is sometimes expressed by stating that the transition state has a fleeting existence, with species only maintaining the transition state structure for the time-scale of vibrations of chemical bonds (femtoseconds).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transition_state

To add to this: take notice of how much they are sharing back. If all they are saying are acknowledgements (e.g "Yeah", "of course", "I hear that", "wow, that's crazy") then they aren't really with you in the conversation. The dialogue has become a monologue.

How does pirating make a corporation broke? Making a copy doesn't steal money.

Edit: We can't pirate a company into bankruptcy.

Up and down votes are not a "agree / disagree" button. They are for dis/encouraging posts. You can upvote a post you disagree with but can see that it is useful for the discussion.

What year is it? This has been true for over a decade.