Slashdot Mirror

How about this?

Ah, so that's where this picture came from.

Any practical untethered system would only be usable for a very short time, or it would be designed around the need to carry a massive power source. I can imagine specialized uses for a suit that worked for ten or fifteen minutes though, although higher endurance ROVs could perform many of the same functions.

That's why the Japanese are working on a combination tethered/untethered system for city defense. As long as the unit remains attached to the tether it can operate effectively indefinitely, but if the tether is lost (either because it isn't long enough, or because the tether is severed) then the machine can still operate for five minutes at full capacity (which may not seems like long but is fairly impressive considering the size of these weapons).

Here's an artist's rendition of the prototype and test type systems.

The cable was damaged because of jerks and force of the ship, the official said.

JERKS!!!!

It meant that SOMEONE can get into space and push the species forward, who cares what language they speak when they get there.

Here's an example: http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y247/LCARS24user/scan.png

Did anyone else find it uncomfortably odd that there was a big magenta T-Mobil ad right in the middle of Engadget's page as they "stuck it to them."

You know, refusing to host their magenta ads might be a better way to stick it to them ... or perhaps they were asking you not to use magenta so that users wouldn't confuse the ad with the site?

If they didn't have a very annoyinging advert, I wouldn't do this. They interupt your browsing with a page of adverts (that was blank here due to adblock), but as I block cookies unless necessary the advert page kept coming back. Annoying use of adverts like that can be solved, so here's the whole thing, and the comments off their site:
-----------------

Todd Spangler
What Comcast's Crunched HD Looks Like
March 29, 2008

In the black art of video compression, the trick is to fool the human visual system into seeing things that aren't there.

All digital video is compressed. The technology that does this removes a lot of data, stripping out visual information in clever ways so it can be packed down, sent over a wire or satellite, then unpacked on the viewing end to a TV set.

Without squeezing HD signals down, a distributor couldn't feasibly distribute them -- uncompressed 1080i video simply takes up too much room (around 1.5 Gbps). Even the HD DVD formats use compression.

The question is: How tightly do you twist the screws? The more you squeeze, the more video impairments you get. A rule of thumb for MPEG-2 broadcasts has been about 19 Mbps is needed to ensure good quality. That means two HDs will comfortably fit in a 6-MHz carrier on 256-QAM cable networks.

Cable needs to add more HD channels (i.e., to keep up with marketing from DirecTV and Dish). But the challenge is doing that in capacity-constrained cable systems.

There's switched digital video, which sends down a channel only when someone tunes to it. Cablevision, for instance, will be offering the 15 Voom HD channels this way.

There is also "3-in-1" compression: Comcast is distributing some of its HD channels using a variable bit-rate encoding technique that fits three HDs into one QAM. One of Comcast's technology suppliers for this project, startup Imagine Communications, has touted the ability of its system to deliver lower bit rates without harming quality.

But as Ken Fowler, an A/V buff in Virginia, claims to have found in an analysis he posted to AVSForum.com, the differences between some of Comcast's more highly compressed channels and Verizon's FiOS TV are indeed noticeable (see "Test Shows Comcast's HD Squeeze In Virginia").

Dramatic, you might even say.

Below are cropped sections of images Fowler grabbed of MTV Networks' MHD high-definition music channel, airing a Red Hot Chili Peppers concert, which he extracted using two TiVos with CableCards connected to both providers.

I cut out 480 x 270 sections showing the band's bassist, Flea, because the full images won't fit on this page. I used Microsoft's Digital Image 2006 editor to crop the images and convert them to JPG from PNG format.

In addition to his screen captures, Fowler uploaded 11-second MPEG clips of MHD's Chili Peppers program (click to download his FiOS and Comcast clips).

Now, it's important to note that -- to my eye, anyway -- the differences in picture quality in the actual video aren't as striking as in the still images. Furthermore, the images I've posted here are one-sixteenth screensize cutouts to show detail.

For example, the blockiness and blurriness evident in the Comcast detail below don't jump out as much in the full-screen video. Then again, I was watching this on a PC screen rather than a 50-inch flat-panel display.

Click on the links below to see the full-screen (1920 x 1080) versions Fowler originally posted.

FiOS TV: MHD Red Hot Chili Peppers
Average bit rate = 17.73 Mbps
http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm314/ilovehdtv/MHD/Red%20Hot%20Chili%20Peppers%20Live%20in%20Milan/1080/FiOS-MHD-RedHotChiliPeppersLiveinMi.png
FiOS

Comcast: MHD Red Hot Chili Peppers
Average bit rate = 13.21 Mbps

Right, because deregulation has worked so well for the current economy.

How do you respond to allegations that you plan to switch to the Pirate Party after your hostile take over of the senate?

two-ton truck? So it's something like this?

Suit yourself...

(not my work, by the way - actually the first result on Google, but hilariously bad)

ENJOY!

No, it'll be the shit! Web 3.0 will pipe directly into you brain with Information Dust! Woot!

No, wait, that was the PlayStation 9.

There is, however, a short chapter near the end of the book where he warns that the elements FPS games are functionally equivalent to the training methods the Army used,teaching players to go across that barrier, too.

That's David Grossman, a first-rate demogogue of the post-Columbine era. Essentially all of Grossman's points are refuted by simply looking at a graph of violent crime rates plotted against the release of major "violent" (sic) video games. My favorite illustration is this one (89 KB .jpg). Exactly what problem are we trying to solve, here?

It's as if I were arguing for action against global warming by showing graphs of reduced greenhouse-gas concentrations and a 100-year-trend of falling global temperatures.

Grossman was quite vocal when On Killing came out, but he's been almost silent since Jack Thompson stole the media spotlight from him. Just another fearmongering hack trying to get rich from Columbine, basically. Nothing to see here.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y66/Firehed/ronpaul.jpg

It's Edward's goggles! How cool is that, I totally want a pair :)

Don't put too much ink on me, I might overheat

360? More like three shitsty!

Bullshit. Look at the old case and the new one. You can tell through simple visual comparison (not super detective work necessary) that they did not return him the same case. Look at the "clean" case and compare it to the signed case.

Notice anything there? The smudge on the clean case does not correspond to an ink space on the signed one. Not even fucking close. So, this isn't some idle smudge from cleaning off the case. Not to mention the fact that the case was so perfectly cleaned for everything except this spot. He is foolish to think he would/could get back the same case with a fast turn-around and short of his circumstantial proof he has no evidence they actually cleaned his case.

Even if he says the serial #s match this is not necessarily proof. How hard do you think it would be for them to provide a case with matching serials? Not too hard. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a method for doing this if it made tracking systems easier. This whole story stinks and not because something bad happened to him. Instead it stinks because the people who started "reporting" it (if reporting is what we call blogs these days), are friends (or friends of friends). So, he obviously is coming from some unbiased source.

Sorry, I call bullshit on this. I would like someone to show me a case where they return the exact system to you. Even Nintendo made a point to tell me to make sure all data I wanted was off my original, faulty Wii when I shipped it back. So I did and guess what I got back a different system. Of course, this one has worked perfectly since they sent it. Guess what else? It was someone elses refurb and surely someone has my refurb.

It is so easy to rag on MS, but seriously this is not the cause or the set of people to get behind. They are ignoring relatively clear visual proof and then crapping on anyone who shows where they are obviously wrong. (One post even shows apparently missing physical damage on the "clean" case. Seriously, this guy is blowing shit out of his ass and was stupid for believing a face-less rep and sending something so valuable to strangers for repair. (Future note for people with cases like this. Protect your shit. I don't think a clear coat would cause any dmg to the system and it would help seal the permanent marker to the case. Go whine to people who care.)

Bullshit. Look at the old case and the new one. You can tell through simple visual comparison (not super detective work necessary) that they did not return him the same case. Look at the "clean" case and compare it to the signed case.

Notice anything there? The smudge on the clean case does not correspond to an ink space on the signed one. Not even fucking close. So, this isn't some idle smudge from cleaning off the case. Not to mention the fact that the case was so perfectly cleaned for everything except this spot. He is foolish to think he would/could get back the same case with a fast turn-around and short of his circumstantial proof he has no evidence they actually cleaned his case.

Even if he says the serial #s match this is not necessarily proof. How hard do you think it would be for them to provide a case with matching serials? Not too hard. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a method for doing this if it made tracking systems easier. This whole story stinks and not because something bad happened to him. Instead it stinks because the people who started "reporting" it (if reporting is what we call blogs these days), are friends (or friends of friends). So, he obviously is coming from some unbiased source.

Sorry, I call bullshit on this. I would like someone to show me a case where they return the exact system to you. Even Nintendo made a point to tell me to make sure all data I wanted was off my original, faulty Wii when I shipped it back. So I did and guess what I got back a different system. Of course, this one has worked perfectly since they sent it. Guess what else? It was someone elses refurb and surely someone has my refurb.

It is so easy to rag on MS, but seriously this is not the cause or the set of people to get behind. They are ignoring relatively clear visual proof and then crapping on anyone who shows where they are obviously wrong. (One post even shows apparently missing physical damage on the "clean" case. Seriously, this guy is blowing shit out of his ass and was stupid for believing a face-less rep and sending something so valuable to strangers for repair. (Future note for people with cases like this. Protect your shit. I don't think a clear coat would cause any dmg to the system and it would help seal the permanent marker to the case. Go whine to people who care.)

Not only is it larger, but it also has a different color: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v78/jt_lynn/milkyway.jpg

A few years ago I got the idea to write code that fed massive scene files into POV-Ray. There are probably better tools nowadays but POV-Ray had the virtue of a simple scene description language that I was already familiar with. It's easy to create code to generate it.

I made a heart out of the sextic (huhhuhhuhhuh) polynomial

(2xx+2yy+zz-1)^3 - xxzzz/10 - yyzzz = 0

and had POV-Ray create a bunch of scene files by rotating this thing through 180 degrees to create an animated heart GIF. (This was back in the Dark Ages when the web was full of animated GIFs.) There were probably a thousand other animated hearts out there but this one was mine.

I got the idea to do space filling of the unit sphere with thousands and thousands of small boxes or smaller spheres, playing around with the lighting to see if I could create something vaguely moonlike with inside-out craters. I tried doing this with thousands of hearts but got bitten in the ass by a bug in POV-Ray's polynomial rendering code where it trips over a planar singularity in the heart equation, so every little heart ends up with an unromantic slit running across its equator. There were just too many to fix by hand.

The most interesting image from this technique came from a routine that recursively generated spheres, invoking itself six times per sphere to create smaller spheres on the top, bottom, left, right, front, and back, each of which then does the same thing, to a depth of 5 or 6. You end up with a Sierpinski octahedron.

All this stuff has been done to death by others. I wish I were good at drawing comics.

A few years ago I got the idea to write code that fed massive scene files into POV-Ray. There are probably better tools nowadays but POV-Ray had the virtue of a simple scene description language that I was already familiar with. It's easy to create code to generate it.

I made a heart out of the sextic (huhhuhhuhhuh) polynomial

(2xx+2yy+zz-1)^3 - xxzzz/10 - yyzzz = 0

and had POV-Ray create a bunch of scene files by rotating this thing through 180 degrees to create an animated heart GIF. (This was back in the Dark Ages when the web was full of animated GIFs.) There were probably a thousand other animated hearts out there but this one was mine.

I got the idea to do space filling of the unit sphere with thousands and thousands of small boxes or smaller spheres, playing around with the lighting to see if I could create something vaguely moonlike with inside-out craters. I tried doing this with thousands of hearts but got bitten in the ass by a bug in POV-Ray's polynomial rendering code where it trips over a planar singularity in the heart equation, so every little heart ends up with an unromantic slit running across its equator. There were just too many to fix by hand.

The most interesting image from this technique came from a routine that recursively generated spheres, invoking itself six times per sphere to create smaller spheres on the top, bottom, left, right, front, and back, each of which then does the same thing, to a depth of 5 or 6. You end up with a Sierpinski octahedron.

All this stuff has been done to death by others. I wish I were good at drawing comics.

A few years ago I got the idea to write code that fed massive scene files into POV-Ray. There are probably better tools nowadays but POV-Ray had the virtue of a simple scene description language that I was already familiar with. It's easy to create code to generate it.

I made a heart out of the sextic (huhhuhhuhhuh) polynomial

(2xx+2yy+zz-1)^3 - xxzzz/10 - yyzzz = 0

and had POV-Ray create a bunch of scene files by rotating this thing through 180 degrees to create an animated heart GIF. (This was back in the Dark Ages when the web was full of animated GIFs.) There were probably a thousand other animated hearts out there but this one was mine.

I got the idea to do space filling of the unit sphere with thousands and thousands of small boxes or smaller spheres, playing around with the lighting to see if I could create something vaguely moonlike with inside-out craters. I tried doing this with thousands of hearts but got bitten in the ass by a bug in POV-Ray's polynomial rendering code where it trips over a planar singularity in the heart equation, so every little heart ends up with an unromantic slit running across its equator. There were just too many to fix by hand.

The most interesting image from this technique came from a routine that recursively generated spheres, invoking itself six times per sphere to create smaller spheres on the top, bottom, left, right, front, and back, each of which then does the same thing, to a depth of 5 or 6. You end up with a Sierpinski octahedron.

All this stuff has been done to death by others. I wish I were good at drawing comics.

A few years ago I got the idea to write code that fed massive scene files into POV-Ray. There are probably better tools nowadays but POV-Ray had the virtue of a simple scene description language that I was already familiar with. It's easy to create code to generate it.

I made a heart out of the sextic (huhhuhhuhhuh) polynomial

(2xx+2yy+zz-1)^3 - xxzzz/10 - yyzzz = 0

and had POV-Ray create a bunch of scene files by rotating this thing through 180 degrees to create an animated heart GIF. (This was back in the Dark Ages when the web was full of animated GIFs.) There were probably a thousand other animated hearts out there but this one was mine.

I got the idea to do space filling of the unit sphere with thousands and thousands of small boxes or smaller spheres, playing around with the lighting to see if I could create something vaguely moonlike with inside-out craters. I tried doing this with thousands of hearts but got bitten in the ass by a bug in POV-Ray's polynomial rendering code where it trips over a planar singularity in the heart equation, so every little heart ends up with an unromantic slit running across its equator. There were just too many to fix by hand.

The most interesting image from this technique came from a routine that recursively generated spheres, invoking itself six times per sphere to create smaller spheres on the top, bottom, left, right, front, and back, each of which then does the same thing, to a depth of 5 or 6. You end up with a Sierpinski octahedron.

All this stuff has been done to death by others. I wish I were good at drawing comics.

A few years ago I got the idea to write code that fed massive scene files into POV-Ray. There are probably better tools nowadays but POV-Ray had the virtue of a simple scene description language that I was already familiar with. It's easy to create code to generate it.

I made a heart out of the sextic (huhhuhhuhhuh) polynomial

(2xx+2yy+zz-1)^3 - xxzzz/10 - yyzzz = 0

and had POV-Ray create a bunch of scene files by rotating this thing through 180 degrees to create an animated heart GIF. (This was back in the Dark Ages when the web was full of animated GIFs.) There were probably a thousand other animated hearts out there but this one was mine.

I got the idea to do space filling of the unit sphere with thousands and thousands of small boxes or smaller spheres, playing around with the lighting to see if I could create something vaguely moonlike with inside-out craters. I tried doing this with thousands of hearts but got bitten in the ass by a bug in POV-Ray's polynomial rendering code where it trips over a planar singularity in the heart equation, so every little heart ends up with an unromantic slit running across its equator. There were just too many to fix by hand.

The most interesting image from this technique came from a routine that recursively generated spheres, invoking itself six times per sphere to create smaller spheres on the top, bottom, left, right, front, and back, each of which then does the same thing, to a depth of 5 or 6. You end up with a Sierpinski octahedron.

All this stuff has been done to death by others. I wish I were good at drawing comics.

A few years ago I got the idea to write code that fed massive scene files into POV-Ray. There are probably better tools nowadays but POV-Ray had the virtue of a simple scene description language that I was already familiar with. It's easy to create code to generate it.

I made a heart out of the sextic (huhhuhhuhhuh) polynomial

(2xx+2yy+zz-1)^3 - xxzzz/10 - yyzzz = 0

and had POV-Ray create a bunch of scene files by rotating this thing through 180 degrees to create an animated heart GIF. (This was back in the Dark Ages when the web was full of animated GIFs.) There were probably a thousand other animated hearts out there but this one was mine.

I got the idea to do space filling of the unit sphere with thousands and thousands of small boxes or smaller spheres, playing around with the lighting to see if I could create something vaguely moonlike with inside-out craters. I tried doing this with thousands of hearts but got bitten in the ass by a bug in POV-Ray's polynomial rendering code where it trips over a planar singularity in the heart equation, so every little heart ends up with an unromantic slit running across its equator. There were just too many to fix by hand.

The most interesting image from this technique came from a routine that recursively generated spheres, invoking itself six times per sphere to create smaller spheres on the top, bottom, left, right, front, and back, each of which then does the same thing, to a depth of 5 or 6. You end up with a Sierpinski octahedron.

All this stuff has been done to death by others. I wish I were good at drawing comics.

It so happens that Windows Vista isn't fully compatible with the game -- .net SP3 borks the authentication system. Its dev promptly looked for the problem, and of course the problem was found in the third-party obfuscation tool. He submitted a ticket and the community is waiting for a fix.

It's been 40+ days since this issue has been found, targeted and reported, but Nothing Happens(TM). We're still waiting for the fix. The admins do not obviously want to release a non-obfuscated version of the .net authentication tool, nor they want to switch over another obfuscation company (and pay for another license). So people using Vista are currently forced to work around the problem by blocking updates and using .net uninstallers.

Even Microsoft Research has contacted us with details regarding the trouble, but again there is nothing we can do to address it.

Our community is having a 40+ days [partial] downtime, and there's nothing we can do, but wait and publish workarounds for a problem we didn't create.

Not the kind of stuff that makes you all warm and fuzzy on relying on third parties, huh?

http://www.afunnystuff.com/pictures/Forum-pics/Aw-jeez-not-this-shit-again.html

I also think this one is appropriate:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/unclespellbinder/Animated/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

I guarantee that there is no logic to insurrection when these sorts of weapon can be made quite cheaply: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc3vcXp_7O8 - SuperSoaker Flamethrower http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j187/hsvzclubbie/?action=view&current=Attack_Chopperwmv.flv - RC Helicopter with Machine Gun Basically we have to watchout for Botnets of RC Helicopters with Guns and Supersoaker Flamethrowers controlled by some wireless ethernet protocol we can affectionately refer to as skynet.

Please note first of all that I am not the submitter of this article- I just saw it now. But something like this happened to me a few months ago with an order that I placed on Amazon. I did get an email within a few days alerting me of the cancellation although my attempt to get further information was unsuccessful.

Where's the screenshot of the item being offered for $31? Where's the printout of the placed order?

Since I am not in the habit of taking product page screenshots whenever I order things from Amazon, I can't provide a screenshot of the item being offered at the price I saw when I ordered it. However I can give you screenshots of my email exchanges with Amazon:

The original order confirmation dated November 29.
The cancellation email that arrived two days later. I sent them an email in an attempt to follow up on this, which probably went in the bit bucket.
The order history for my account. Notice that no trace of the canceled order remains in my account history. I bought my mother a sweater in October, and myself an LCD monitor in January, and nothing appears in between. I don't really know whether cancellations are actually retained in one's account history, and I'm not inclined to order something and cancel it just to find out, but it struck me as a little weird.

You are aware that companies don't have to honor prices that are obvious misprints, right? (And that a 75-CD limited edition import CD set being sold for $31 is an obivous misprint, right?)

I don't know for sure whether the article submitter is in the United States or not, or if this was a U.S. based transaction at all, and I am not a lawyer. But I did consult one in a nonofficial capacity who told me that regardless of misprints, in the United States what Amazon did in my case was a violation of federal law. I didn't pursue the matter since the price really was a steal and I'd be too embarrassed to make a fuss about it.

Man, next time I have a beef with some company, remind me to completely make some shit up about them and post it as an article here on Slashdot. I'm usually not one to gripe about the job the editorial staff does here, but you guys really drop the ball in a major way on this one. Whether you like Amazon.com or not, with nothing to back it up, this borders on outright libel.

Say what you want about the correctness of Amazon's cancellation policy, but I see no reason to doubt this story.

Please note first of all that I am not the submitter of this article- I just saw it now. But something like this happened to me a few months ago with an order that I placed on Amazon. I did get an email within a few days alerting me of the cancellation although my attempt to get further information was unsuccessful.

Where's the screenshot of the item being offered for $31? Where's the printout of the placed order?

Since I am not in the habit of taking product page screenshots whenever I order things from Amazon, I can't provide a screenshot of the item being offered at the price I saw when I ordered it. However I can give you screenshots of my email exchanges with Amazon:

The original order confirmation dated November 29.
The cancellation email that arrived two days later. I sent them an email in an attempt to follow up on this, which probably went in the bit bucket.
The order history for my account. Notice that no trace of the canceled order remains in my account history. I bought my mother a sweater in October, and myself an LCD monitor in January, and nothing appears in between. I don't really know whether cancellations are actually retained in one's account history, and I'm not inclined to order something and cancel it just to find out, but it struck me as a little weird.

You are aware that companies don't have to honor prices that are obvious misprints, right? (And that a 75-CD limited edition import CD set being sold for $31 is an obivous misprint, right?)

I don't know for sure whether the article submitter is in the United States or not, or if this was a U.S. based transaction at all, and I am not a lawyer. But I did consult one in a nonofficial capacity who told me that regardless of misprints, in the United States what Amazon did in my case was a violation of federal law. I didn't pursue the matter since the price really was a steal and I'd be too embarrassed to make a fuss about it.

Man, next time I have a beef with some company, remind me to completely make some shit up about them and post it as an article here on Slashdot. I'm usually not one to gripe about the job the editorial staff does here, but you guys really drop the ball in a major way on this one. Whether you like Amazon.com or not, with nothing to back it up, this borders on outright libel.

Say what you want about the correctness of Amazon's cancellation policy, but I see no reason to doubt this story.

Please note first of all that I am not the submitter of this article- I just saw it now. But something like this happened to me a few months ago with an order that I placed on Amazon. I did get an email within a few days alerting me of the cancellation although my attempt to get further information was unsuccessful.

Where's the screenshot of the item being offered for $31? Where's the printout of the placed order?

Since I am not in the habit of taking product page screenshots whenever I order things from Amazon, I can't provide a screenshot of the item being offered at the price I saw when I ordered it. However I can give you screenshots of my email exchanges with Amazon:

The original order confirmation dated November 29.
The cancellation email that arrived two days later. I sent them an email in an attempt to follow up on this, which probably went in the bit bucket.
The order history for my account. Notice that no trace of the canceled order remains in my account history. I bought my mother a sweater in October, and myself an LCD monitor in January, and nothing appears in between. I don't really know whether cancellations are actually retained in one's account history, and I'm not inclined to order something and cancel it just to find out, but it struck me as a little weird.

You are aware that companies don't have to honor prices that are obvious misprints, right? (And that a 75-CD limited edition import CD set being sold for $31 is an obivous misprint, right?)

I don't know for sure whether the article submitter is in the United States or not, or if this was a U.S. based transaction at all, and I am not a lawyer. But I did consult one in a nonofficial capacity who told me that regardless of misprints, in the United States what Amazon did in my case was a violation of federal law. I didn't pursue the matter since the price really was a steal and I'd be too embarrassed to make a fuss about it.

Man, next time I have a beef with some company, remind me to completely make some shit up about them and post it as an article here on Slashdot. I'm usually not one to gripe about the job the editorial staff does here, but you guys really drop the ball in a major way on this one. Whether you like Amazon.com or not, with nothing to back it up, this borders on outright libel.

Say what you want about the correctness of Amazon's cancellation policy, but I see no reason to doubt this story.

XP Display Model
Longhorn Display Model

It is my understanding the rewriting of the graphics subsystem was primarily to move the GUI onto the GPU and its local memory. I don't think the kernel updates necessary to facilitate DX10 on XP for gaming would be troublesome nor completely reshape XP. As using DX10 to facilitate the graphics for gaming could easily co-exist with the current audio subsystem in XP. Sure it probably wouldn't be as elegant solution for DX10 as it is Vista, but without the overhead of Vista anyways, would anyone notice? As for the other major changes to Vista, who the hell wants that tainting XP anyhow.

I'm by no means an expert on this, but it's fun to keep the thread going!

XP Display Model
Longhorn Display Model

It is my understanding the rewriting of the graphics subsystem was primarily to move the GUI onto the GPU and its local memory. I don't think the kernel updates necessary to facilitate DX10 on XP for gaming would be troublesome nor completely reshape XP. As using DX10 to facilitate the graphics for gaming could easily co-exist with the current audio subsystem in XP. Sure it probably wouldn't be as elegant solution for DX10 as it is Vista, but without the overhead of Vista anyways, would anyone notice? As for the other major changes to Vista, who the hell wants that tainting XP anyhow.

I'm by no means an expert on this, but it's fun to keep the thread going!

In fact, let's just put this whole story to bed now.

Darwinia on Vista x64.
Soldat on Vista x64.
Civilization 4 on Vista x64.
Blackthorne on Vista x64 in DOSBox.

TFA is verifiably false, and the title is misleading.

In fact, let's just put this whole story to bed now.

Darwinia on Vista x64.
Soldat on Vista x64.
Civilization 4 on Vista x64.
Blackthorne on Vista x64 in DOSBox.

TFA is verifiably false, and the title is misleading.

In fact, let's just put this whole story to bed now.

Darwinia on Vista x64.
Soldat on Vista x64.
Civilization 4 on Vista x64.
Blackthorne on Vista x64 in DOSBox.

TFA is verifiably false, and the title is misleading.

In fact, let's just put this whole story to bed now.

Darwinia on Vista x64.
Soldat on Vista x64.
Civilization 4 on Vista x64.
Blackthorne on Vista x64 in DOSBox.

TFA is verifiably false, and the title is misleading.

I only want an Apocalypse Pony :)

The "iKnife" can actually be used for other things. So now they want you to use something less versatile, such as the "iSpoon" which means you must change your arm service or else you won't be as trendy.

The RIAA attack was more of an exploding van than truck. These guys don't really give a damn.

The "iKnife" can actually be used for other things. So now they want you to use something less versatile, such as the "iSpoon" which means you must change your arm service or else you won't be as trendy.

The RIAA attack was more of an exploding van than truck. These guys don't really give a damn.

You don't really need to 'hack' it. The Terminal "Activity" is in there with the rest of the activities (you'd probably call them applications). It's easier to get a shell on the XO than on the default configuration of Gnome or KDE. And there is no root password. Just 'su root' and you control the box. (While sshd is running, it's configured to not accept root logins.)

I need to look more at the educational activities, but I got caught up first in seeing how far I could go with the Unix. I was able to run BOINC on it (no graphics). The Einstein@Home application seems to fail regularly due to floating point problems, but I think it's because that app is tweaked to try to use different hardware features if it can (and doesn't know what to do with this thing). SETI@home is running (slow but steady) without such problems.

My favorite is xeyes (someone else added the text, not me).

I don't really agree with the statement in the article "Not quite what the foundation had in mind when they made the XO". I think the Give One/Get One program was intended, at least in part, to get it out into the hands of people who will "play" with it to see what it can do. And some of us will develop apps for it (I have ideas for two already).

More notes on my "playing" with the XO are here.

since you called it the Airbook here is a pic I made for you. It should probably be the real logo. I would think about possibly thinking about buying one if that was on the back of the screen. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v161/thetick82/MacbookAir.jpg

1. If it does, where are the screenshots to prove it? Your Mac has a built-in tool to take screenshots and I have told you how to do it. There are free sites like Photobucket or Flickr to host them for you.
2. You found fault with 3 items inside of Mac OS X. If you could actually prove two of them with screenshots, it would demonstrate that Mac OS X's interface is not perfect, which I never claimed that it was (and as far as I'm aware, neither has Apple). I will concede that you cannot do #2 with only one click (OMG, it takes two), but that does not translate as "Mac OS X's interface sucks". If three claimed flaws meant that an interface sucked, then there is no interface that doesn't suck. You aren't even using the interface "NOW", you're using the interface that has since been replaced by Leopard.
3. Again, where is the screenshot showing this window? See #1.

Me: I have demonstrated that you are wrong.
You: But I *say* it does this, therefore it does, because I can whine like an emo-kid on YouTube while shooting a badly angled video that is too unclear to show anything.

But I'm sure that the only way you can further your trolling argument is to duck the points I made, refuse to answer questions (bug reports, screenshots), and whine that it's all Apple's fault that you can't do [insert feature here].

People like me are found by trolls like you who post something that is absolutely false to my experience. I read the "boohoo, iPhoto won't show a picture in Finder" and immediately thought "but yes, it will." I then proceeded to prove you wrong, and you're still whining about it. Next time, hone your arguments to include some facts and screen captures which provide corroboration.

Because honestly, for what that arm was, it could have fired alot further than they had it going. I built a floating arm trebuchet 2 years back for my high school senior project and it had a least twice the range of that arm.( It could fire a half gallon of water about 250 feet. )I admit, that may have been less weight than their arm was firing, but that was because I only had about 300 pounds of counterweight. Their problem is in the release time, and the sling could stand to be a bit longer. Its still pretty cool that they got ahold of it, but for about $150 worth of wood, screws and some rope and you could build yourself something just as good or better.Oh, and here's a link to a pic of my treb slightly before it was finished (i dont have the arm up on the tracks yet here.) http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r284/risknc/Treb/DSCN0138.jpg I'll upload a video later

4. ???

You mean
4. Multi-track Drifting!!

Here are some comics on the most hilarious thing going today, the real estate bubble (it's tragic, laugh)

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r165/hiredgoonadl/optimus_subprime.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r165/hiredgoonadl/missed_the_boat.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r165/hiredgoonadl/pantry_equity.jpg

Slide show: http://s144.photobucket.com/albums/r165/hiredgoonadl/?action=view&current=32bcf9a9.pbw