Was this in reference to literal audio archives? If so, I don't see any cons beside possible copyright infringement.
If you're talking about the codecs themselves, then I can do that.
<span>Pros:
</span>- Widespread acceptance. Supported in nearly all hardware devices, and continually adopted by newer ones.
- Faster decoding. Much more so than FLAC, Vorbis, etc.
- Relaxed licensing schedule.
<span>Cons:
</span><span>
</span>- Lower quality and efficiency than most modern codecs. (To be fair, never really noticed this one).
- Sometimes the maximum bitrate isn't enough.
- Pretty much void/unusable for high definition audio (higher than <span>48kHz).</span>
There are several things you can look for on a website to help you figure out if the information is reliable. The first thing you should evaluate is the audience that the website is intended for. Is it intended for academics? School children? The general public?
The next thing you should look at is the author of the website. Is the author identified? Is the author an expert in their field? Can you establish the author's credibility? Is the author affiliated to an academic institution or credible organisation?
Look at the accuracy of the website. Check for spelling errors, proper grammar, and well-written text. Are there any sources cited? Are those sources credible?
You should also check to see when the information was published. Is the information up to date? Are all of the links up to date and functioning?
There is one last thing you can look at, and this is the domain of the website. Domains like .edu and .gov are more credible than .com or .net domains.
Answer:
A
Explanation:
HTML is a coding language.
Answer:
. According to the Department of Commerce, 34.0% percent of single moms in the US qualified as poor.
Explanation: