Blender is a contender for the best go-to example in the history of open-source software. It's easy for any layperson to understand what it is (unlike, say, Linux), and it's genuinely better than the for-profit competition in a lot of aspects. There's nothing else like it.
It's been growing for decades, and its community is the best.
I'm really not in that space so I only get to watch from the sidelines, but I've always been in awe of Blender.
Police, this guy right here.
The post. The email in the screenshot.
I call bullshit. I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but this seems fake to me.
Edit: I initially assumed OP created the fake email deliberately for ragebait. But most other people are assuming OP thinks (or thought) this email was real, meaning it's a scam email and OP's friend might be actively falling for the scam. I now agree with this interpretation. Sorry my initial comments were a bit rude.
I assume Windows is inexplicably a typo of QI?
I totally agree. I believe they make some effort to get their facts right, but it's not their highest priority by any stretch. I also suspect they might sometimes leave crucial details on the cutting room floor.
In this instance I get the impression that Sandi actually meant the arms are still swung but just kept straight, like a Minecraft run. But then Bill interpreted it as the arms kept straight and motionless, like that one Seinfeld episode, and Sandi didn't correct him.
once you’re up to a steady speed it doesn’t make so much difference.
[Citation needed]. You're still fighting gravity so being lighter makes each step easier. There is also less air drag (but I don't know how much difference this makes).
I have seen claims that this isn't actually true, swinging our arms to counterbalance the legs is less efficient than just keeping them in place.
Where did I see this claim? Why, it was in this peer-reviewed scientific paper: https://youtu.be/-QW25fJ34nA , where by "peer-reviewed" I mean filmed with a live studio audience, and by "scientific paper" I mean segment of a TV panel show.
So uhhh yeah I'm not buying it but I can't be bothered to check their sources.
What, you think this isn't real experience? It absolutely is. She's a true master!
A quick glance at the summary table can answer that. Planck units seem to do the trick.
Come on, you are able to analize words!
No, you can't. Believe me, I've tried. I did everything I could to analyze this topic. There are many things that are possible to analize. Many household items. But not words.
There are various systems of units where select physical constants are set to 1. A handy comparison chart is on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_units?wprov=sfla1
It turns out you can't harmonize all the physical constants. Some will necessarily end up as some non-round number.
Most of them have speed of light = 1, but some have it as 1/α where α is the fine-structure constant (α = e² / 4πε₀ħc ≈ 0.007297)
I'm going to have to say OpenStreetMap, it's always going to have a place in my heart.