Slashdot Mirror

Yes. And compare that to a tractor from 100 years ago. There's way more difference between the two tractors and 2 cars that are as far apart in the timeline.

And you could have saved yourself that whole message if you'd read my entire post, instead of part of it, or skimming it.

And as for this:

"clearly you don't understand software development at all"

You're funny. I've been doing almost nothing but software development for the last 45 years. I'm single-handedly responsible for the vast majority of code in one of the most powerful image processing applications ever shipped -- WinImages F/x/Morph -- as well as several CAD programs, compilers, assemblers, paint programs, PCB routing systems, arcade video games, documentation processors, genetic AL software, aurorae analysis software and a whole bunch more I won't bore you with. Even now that I'm retired and enjoying the fruits of my labors, my current freeware, a real time SDR engine, is orders of magnitude more sophisticated -- and sizable in terns of lines of my code -- than anything most slashdotters will ever be involved with on a team, much less write by themselves. I take my own medicine; I don't write features that break previous features; I don't require later OS versions for new stuff I write -- instead I make sure that features that use new OS features doesn't appear under the older (or other, since I write multiplatform) OS, that's all. And I sure as hell fix bugs when they're reported well enough to be able to reproduce them.

But hey, don't let that affect your state of delusion. Keep thinking I know nothing about software development. It's the very best way to distance yourself from a true understanding of what you're reading here.

Red demon costumes vs. penguin costumes. No contest really.

http://freebsd-image-gallery.n...
http://freebsd-image-gallery.n...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/1...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/1...

Red demon costumes vs. penguin costumes. No contest really.

http://freebsd-image-gallery.n...
http://freebsd-image-gallery.n...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/1...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/1...

There is a Kinesis, and a Maltron in this photo linked from the summary:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

There is even a uTron and Datahand in there as well! Can you find the Truly Ergonomic hidden in there?

That's correct. If you pop open a Maltron, there's a gorgeous web of fine copper wire. :)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/eichin/8413586842 is a photo my friend Mark took of my Maltron and Kinesis with the bottoms off.

You didn't get beyond abstract apparently -- it boosts both growth factors, FGF-1 by 50%, FGF-2 by 100% (see Fig2, p.6 or here Fig2.jpg).

'80s What If? covers it.

... by The Thunderbird's Fireflash

Cockpit detail: https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

Has Fabien even been diving before? Fish sleeping in sponges? I've seen that on nearly every night dive I've done. Christmas tree worms spawning are science fiction? Really? I have my own pictures of that: https://www.flickr.com/photos/... - and I'm pretty sure I'm not special here.

Seems to me this guy needs to get out some more. Or at least find something useful to do with his life other than try to capitalize on his name with ridiculous stunts...

The thing about analog sound devices have always been that they sound warm and pleasant under most settings.

Nonsense. When run in their linear range, which is to say, where they are designed to normally run, analog devices, be they tubes, fets or bipolar transistors, all follow the input signal faithfully, plus or minus inherent noise -- no "warmth" or other characteristics are inherent. *NONE*. Digital also.

However, when a tube is pushed into its nonlinear range, the gain transfer curve bends over comparatively smoothly so that what would be a clipped signal in a device like a bipolar transistor, turns first into a compressed signal, and even later down the curve, begins to evidence distortion that resembles clipping, but has, because of that still-somewhat-gentle curve, an entirely different set of dominant harmonics as compared to, for instance, a bipolar transistor at or near saturation.

That characteristic is why (knowledgable) musicians who use distortion as a tonal tool typically prefer tubes; specifically because they *do* run the tubes out of the linear area of the transfer curve, and the result is interesting and often pleasing. When the distortion is the result of a transfer curve that abruptly goes from highly linear to highly nonlinear, as is the case with bipolar devices, the result is most unpleasant.

However, this choice does not *ever* hold true for a musical reproduction system based on tubes that isn't running in a range that will distort the music. You'd have to turn it up so far that one or more elements of the preamp or power amp is pushed past the linear part of its transfer curve, and then *everything* distorts -- and that's not a "warm" sound, that's a "hey, your system is sucking, turn that thing down" sound.

So, for example, if I get out my Les Paul or my Strat and plug it into a tube amp, I'm doing so because the amp's distortion is going to very significantly color the reproduction of what I play. I'm going to adjust the amp specifically so I *get* distortion. It'll sound fabulous. I'll get feedback, there will be awesome weirdnesses when I hit harmonics on my strings, pick and fretting artifacts will sound very different, etc. When I record this as accurately as possible, however, and subsequently play it back on a musical reproduction system of ANY kind, I am NOT going to adjust that system so that it distorts, because I don't want MORE distortion, I want exactly, and I mean *exactly*, what I recorded. All the more so when it's my guitar plus drums, bass and vocals. Etc. Adjusting a music reproduction system doing that task so that it distorts is the act of a madman or a masochist. Tube, transistor or digital whatever completely aside, the entire objective of an audio system is to get the music to your ears without changing it in any way that degrades the transfer. So the kind of distortion the playback system would evidence if overdriven is (had better be!) utterly irrelevant.

The fact is, a digital system, an analog bipolar system in class A or properly biased AB, and a tube system in class A or a nominal push-pull configuration with an output transformer all reproduce essentially the same signal in human perception terms, plus or minus noise. But noise is a significant factor with tube designs. Sidle up to your tweeter and listen. Hear that hiss? That's coming from the tubes themselves. Now do the same with a 24- or 32-bit prepro and an amp with a 110db noise floor, like a Marantz MA700. Viola! No audible noise at the tweeter. It's there, but it's so blinking minuscule, you can't perceive it. Entirely a good thing.

So the whole "audiophile" trip about tube amps being "better" is a complete confusion of something they do for musicians playing a specific instrument (ex guitar, horn, bass), which they do not usefully do for general sound reproduction, because, and hear me on this, music consisting of more than one instru

Conversely I've got an old lens (pentax 50mm) that some people can identify immediately just by looking at out of focus portions of any photos I take with it. (Other people's photos with that lens here: https://www.flickr.com/groups/...)
I'm sure there's other lenses that produce identifiable artifacts.

Hm, would have expected there would be more than 11 of them, considering the number of plaques on that wall...

FYI, if that link to the picture doesn't work, go read the comments on the Tesla blog post, that's where I found it.

You have to be kidding. It is nothing like Soyuz.
Tell me how that looks like Dragon.
Or this.
Or this.
The soyuz is a tight tin can with no windows and horrible controls.

The PHP Hamer:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

All this crap talk about forcing people to use more electric cars ( which in the end is what it is, since the only way to get more of the population in electric cars is some sort of coercion ) so that they drop their carbon foot print 50%. Instead they can reduce their carbon emissions closer to 99% by just not driving: by walking, bicycling, or taking public transportation.

The mechanism for this is quite simple, legislate business, malls etc ( the one exception residences ) can only supply enough parking for 10% of the maximum occupancy of their buildings. For businesses absolutely no reserved spots, however malls, stores, fast food places can limit parking to one or two hours. They can also reserve 10% of their parking for employees.

At first there would be problems yes ( actually allow the percentage to go down slowly to 10%, this will give everyone time to adjust ), but in the end businesses would adapt with the result that car usage would greatly decrease causing a significant improvement in the environment.

As for public transportation, I can attest that there is nothing more polluting then a year old bus. The solution is simple. Chicago used to have a great set of electric busses . We could just start using those again.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

Darn. Why put this on flickr. There's nothing at interest for the rest of the world. It *might* be useful for a burglar learning your patterns so he can raid your house, but probably not even that.

But then I never have felt the need to use twitter ( I'm on the #toilet!) either, so maybe I'm just to old(fashioned) to understand social media.

I can easily see how he could have these problems. His use case is ridiculous.

I can't imagine a sane human being putting on Google Glass and thinking "hey, I'll watch video or read web pages on this thing!" That's almost the opposite of a normal use case. I can't imagine looking at the screen for more than a few seconds at a time.

The value of glass:

1. Non-distracting notifications of emergent information

I don't take my phone out of my pocket every time it buzzes. I don't constantly read twitter every time I happened to pull it out to see what that buzz was. Instead, I just live my life. If I'm walking somewhere, and glass buzzes, I can, at my leisure, cock my head slightly to turn on the display and read the message. If there's a short followup, I speak it into Glass. If there's a long one, I, at my leisure, deal with it later on my phone.

2. Navigation

I'll be honest. For driving, or especially biking/touring, the turn-by-turn is worth the current price of admission even if that is the SOLE use. Trying to mount a phone on a motorcycle/bicycle, let alone pull a phone out of one's pocket while biking, is laughable. The navigation is amazing to behold the first time you use it. For a frequent biker/traveler, it's already indispensable/

3. Candid photos

I have a large collection of interesting shots of my life now. The photos are indeed at an "angle" much of the time. Who cares? If I want to take a picture, I use my phone, or a real camera. I use Glass solely to catch, again, emergent moments. Something interesting happens, and I snap a photo discretely and immediately. For that use case, I defy a regular camera or smartphone to be deployed and used quickly enough without similar "angle" or "shot framing" issues.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

Glass is primarily a notification tool coupled with a navigator and a quick-draw smartphone.

I'm not saying Glass is perfect. Far from it. It has a long way to go. But this guy appears to be trying to use it in the least imaginative and least useful ways possible. He's doing the equivalent of complaining that he cant edit 4k video on his phone, or that he can't easily make toast with his flamethrower.

Really? I think the following people aren't overweight:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

I hadn't realized how screwed up the BMI could be until it happened to me. I exercise regularly and have six-pack abs yet the BMI consistently ranks me between overweight and nearly obese, whereas my percentage of body fat is considered "lean" for my age, and my waste measurement is well within recommended normal parameters for my height.

Which brings up another point: BMI doesn't account for age. Male adults under heavily regulated regimes of diet and exercise still add about a pound of weight every two years. This seems to be part of the normal process of aging and it is not accounted for in the BMI.

Really? I think the following people aren't overweight:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

I hadn't realized how screwed up the BMI could be until it happened to me. I exercise regularly and have six-pack abs yet the BMI consistently ranks me between overweight and nearly obese, whereas my percentage of body fat is considered "lean" for my age, and my waste measurement is well within recommended normal parameters for my height.

Which brings up another point: BMI doesn't account for age. Male adults under heavily regulated regimes of diet and exercise still add about a pound of weight every two years. This seems to be part of the normal process of aging and it is not accounted for in the BMI.

Really? I think the following people aren't overweight:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

I hadn't realized how screwed up the BMI could be until it happened to me. I exercise regularly and have six-pack abs yet the BMI consistently ranks me between overweight and nearly obese, whereas my percentage of body fat is considered "lean" for my age, and my waste measurement is well within recommended normal parameters for my height.

Which brings up another point: BMI doesn't account for age. Male adults under heavily regulated regimes of diet and exercise still add about a pound of weight every two years. This seems to be part of the normal process of aging and it is not accounted for in the BMI.

Really? I think the following people aren't overweight:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

I hadn't realized how screwed up the BMI could be until it happened to me. I exercise regularly and have six-pack abs yet the BMI consistently ranks me between overweight and nearly obese, whereas my percentage of body fat is considered "lean" for my age, and my waste measurement is well within recommended normal parameters for my height.

Which brings up another point: BMI doesn't account for age. Male adults under heavily regulated regimes of diet and exercise still add about a pound of weight every two years. This seems to be part of the normal process of aging and it is not accounted for in the BMI.

However, unless you are a weightlifter or outrageously fit (not just "skinny fit", but bulging muscles) it's a pretty good indicator.

Not at the overweight scale. This is well documented. People have collected actual examples of people together with their BMI and you'll see that there are plenty of examples of "overweight" people which are perfectly fine.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

Here's another overweight person:

http://www.klikk.no/multimedia...

When (if) you look at this, note the huge mess over in North Dakota. That's largely gas burn-off from oil wells. Luckily, I"m far enough west of them that I still have actual dark skies (little green plus marker, top right) but I think we're at severe risk of suffering the same light insult as them before too much longer.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

Been shooting so as to take advantage of it while I can, examples:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/... ...and...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/... ...that's all camera work, btw, no telescopes, though I do have some moderately long lenses. ;)

When (if) you look at this, note the huge mess over in North Dakota. That's largely gas burn-off from oil wells. Luckily, I"m far enough west of them that I still have actual dark skies (little green plus marker, top right) but I think we're at severe risk of suffering the same light insult as them before too much longer.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

Been shooting so as to take advantage of it while I can, examples:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/... ...and...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/... ...that's all camera work, btw, no telescopes, though I do have some moderately long lenses. ;)

When (if) you look at this, note the huge mess over in North Dakota. That's largely gas burn-off from oil wells. Luckily, I"m far enough west of them that I still have actual dark skies (little green plus marker, top right) but I think we're at severe risk of suffering the same light insult as them before too much longer.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

Been shooting so as to take advantage of it while I can, examples:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/... ...and...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/... ...that's all camera work, btw, no telescopes, though I do have some moderately long lenses. ;)

Consider this picture of a spider dining on its prey--possibly a cricket.

What's important? the spider, the web, the meal.
What's not important? the storm drain, the foliage

It's not completely successful, but both the foliage and the storm drain are out of focus, while the spider, the meal, and the web are in focus. The aperture control on a large sensor camera lets the photographer select where the blurriness ends, and where it begins. Generally, the longer the focal length of the lens, the more dramatic the effects of opening up the aperture. Since camera phones use short focal length lenses, the blurring effect is quite subtle, and is often insufficient to draw in the viewers eye.
In this particular case, it's a macro shot, so even a very narrow aperture (f/16) involves some blurriness. Quite often, macro-photographers use very narrow apertures-- f/16-f32, in an attempt to resolve all of the interesting aspects of their subjects.

I'm sure the late John Kemeny, sbown hire watching daughter Jennifer write a BASIC program, would approve!

No, almost no cars taper in the front. There isn't a modern car that exposes the tires to the air

Here's one that does both.

Although those front semi-fenders would make awesome camera mount points.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/s...

Suburbia (The Full Horror).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/4...

This is my answer to you.

The photo used shows myself and my lady. The conversation happened exactly as depicted. ...she's smarter than me. Obviously. :o)

Yes, they changed the projection in around 2005. The new format did indeed suck - take a look at the 'this is how weather maps look now' image on this page. It was a triumph of 3D prettiness over usability and produced wonderfully unhelpful graphics like this and there was a lot of sulking over it, not so much because of nationalist fervour, but more because it was crap. The BBC themselves claim they had 16,000 complaints. So they tweaked it, significantly.

It's a shame that the BBC's obsession with shiny things produced a weather forecast that sucked, and it is indeed quite possible that they didn't recognise how much it sucked because of inner-M25 London myopia, although if so the joke's on them because a significant proportion of BBC staff were moved to Manchester fairly shortly thereafter. Since the BBC produces a lot of things that are shiny but happen to suck it doesn't seem necessary to attribute the weather forecast to a subconscious urge to portray Scotland as negligible. Occam's razor suggests that the simpler explanation might be that whoever outsourced the weather forecasting isn't half as smart as they think they are.

I dont zoom much with it, the sweet spot is macro shots which I love
http://www.flickr.com/photos/q...

Rarely use zoom, I wanted bridge camera for DSLR ability with a built in 3 in 1 lens, bridges have telephoto, wide angle, macro sweet spots. Without buying 3 separate lenses.

So for my budget I get a DSLR type camera in the bridge camera
Which I use for macro photography and local newspaper freelance

A $60 game (which is way too expensive to begin with)

Eh, not really. A game cartridge for the Atari 2600 was about $25 in 1981. Adjusting for inflation, that works out to $64.33 in 2014 dollars. Game prices have been remarkably consistent over the years. Don't make the mistake of comparing game prices you saw as a kid with modern prices. You always need to adjust for inflation.

Also the Atari games were usually made by a couple of programmers with a few months of work (stuff you can buy for $0.99 on your phone now). Your 2014 game has a production crew as big as a movie's and takes 1-2 years of development. You're getting a helluva lot more gaming value for your $60 than I got as a kid.

In London, the actual proper Daemon, I know its BSD licence but that was a bit of a shocker. Oh this is about Linux?

The BSD girls have got Linux geeks balls to the wall always has always will! Nothing sexy Linux geeks or penguins for that matter unless you are really kinky.

I have to ask; Why you need all of those windows open concurrently? I don't think even Terry Pratchett's 6-display monstrosity has the real estate to handle it.

There must be an easier way to achieve what you're trying to accomplish.

If you think this contributor won't pack up and leave when things get sucky, just hop on over to my Flickr page and note the date of my last picture.

Lotsa luck getting that ad revenue without contributors. News aggs plastered with ads are a dime a dozen. You're Digg4ing your grave.

Almost : http://www.flickr.com/photos/h...
"The bad artists imitate, the great artists steal."

czeq out my flash beast... http://www.flickr.com/photos/1...

About a year ago: http://www.flickr.com/photos/9...

Like any good geek car, it was parked near a brewpub:
http://www.elevation66.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9...

About a year ago: http://www.flickr.com/photos/9...

Like any good geek car, it was parked near a brewpub:
http://www.elevation66.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9...

The Babbage difference engine model is in the Computing section, on the 2nd floor

Definitely still there when I visited in early December last year - loads of Babbage stuff, in fact. Including his brain in a jar!

(The museum did feel kind of tired and empty compared with how I remembered it, sadly - and the Wellcome collection stuff didn't seem nearly as grisly as I thought it was as a ten-year-old. They've got some fancy new galleries at one end, but it's more of the raising-questions public-oriented kind of display rather than the dusty old real exhibits I've really come to appreciate. I did get a bit spoiled by the two branches of the Museum of Flight in Washington DC about a year ago, however. Blimey. Spaaaaaace!)

I always liked the working electromechanical telephone exchange.

If you're ever in Seattle, try the Museum of Communications. Fairly large old telephone exchange with colossal amounts of powered-up electromechanical telephone equipment - place a call on a phone and hear it rattling through the machinery until another phone next to you starts to ring. Loads of old teletypes, UNIX boxes and miscellaneous other hardware to look (and often poke) at.

Basically nerd heaven, yet surprisingly few people round here have heard of it. Makes the equivalent display at the London Science Museum look a bit silly.

All that and I didn't think to post the pic of the guitar. Derp.

I think the new ones would be more fun. Super quick way to pick up leads, etc. You can only chase a scale up and down so many times, and that's all the early ones did. But yeah. Lights. Even an extra knob. :)

And hey, it's not like I don't have a light-n-knob problem anyway (a), (b)

I think the new ones would be more fun. Super quick way to pick up leads, etc. You can only chase a scale up and down so many times, and that's all the early ones did. But yeah. Lights. Even an extra knob. :)

And hey, it's not like I don't have a light-n-knob problem anyway (a), (b)

Lots of generic cola companies use the red can white cursive text.

Like this one: http://farm4.static.flickr.com...

If the video is blocked in your country: Someone decoded it. It's not a sailboat. (Found via Google mallrats stereogram)

you got modded interesting for not knowing the difference between a short and long exposure? Sigh, what a waste of time slashdot has become.

No, I got modded interesting for knowing enough about photography and the processes involved to grasp that this is a variant of the ideas behind some long exposure work.

You can find them as well in other media. Created century ago, it's the same general idea as Magyar's work and that of the printhead scanner guy I mentioned above - capturing single moments in time and combining them into a static image, thus making the viewer think of the flow of time. I tried to catch the same ebb-and-flow in a longer than usual exposure in my picture here. The portrait will be static, the subject is currently still... but time passes regardless as can be seen by the figures moving past. Even art can be fleeting, witness the artist's moving hand...

It's not that Slashdot has become a waste of time, it's that you're clueless about the subject under discussion.