Did you tap the text “Battery Information”?

Pixel models <=5 have Qualcomm SoCs in them, while model >=6 has Tensor SoCs developed by Google (but fabricated by Samsung IIRC). No Samsung Exynos SoCs in them.

Same here.

The tree wonders whether the bench is made of its chopped down neighbour.

Postal service PostNL uses them, so I happen too see them from time to time.

Sorry, when crossposting I should have edited the title to be better one than the title used in the OP and in the article itself.

He’s uncircumcised

Which is the norm outside, say, the Middle East and some parts of the US.

The Guardian cannot spell “Mastodon”, it seems from this “article”.

Just make sure it’s not addicted to crack.

I am running mostly Firefox or Librewolf on Linux these days, but I do not remember having to enable it. Not all of my systems support accelerating AV1 in their hardware, but they do play at 1080p (but with framedrops once above 30fps on the unaccelerated computer). But yeah, I do hope YT keeps VP9 around because of the acceleration.

Fair point.

I mean, given that many devices do not support accelerating it, it is in practice “hard to accelerate” unless you add a new gfx card or buy a new device.

I may not have worded it optimally (2L speaker), but I am sure it was fairly clear what I meant. 🙂

For AV1 that could still be okay, lol. It would be kind of meh for e.g. H264 but YT does not even use that anymore AFAIK.

I can only imagine that they (OP) set quality settings on [auto]. That way they might have YT constantly lowering bitrates/resolution. I do not have any issues either, but I use fixed quality settings.

Youtube pushes the AV1 “format” heavily these days which is hard to decode using hardware acceleration, given that a lot of devices still out there do not support that.

It simply says “condoms” upside down, lol.

For Pete’s sake that is not what Dremor is stating.

This should be a gifted article.

What do you mean? I Could read it, albeit with difficulty because of the subject matter (I use an ad blocker so the article was accessible).

Is he wrong?

Because everyone under 25 is a millennial

Nope.

(I advise to check e.g. Wikipedia on this matter)