Occasionally stories like this come out, and most of the "sweatshops" look very similar to this. The conditions don't look that bad. They're not working in dirty factories with dangerous equipment. They get paid what is probably a low, but livable, salary. Most of them probably come from the countryside and have no other option for work, unless they want to stay on the farm. Remember the photos from an iPhone that came with some pictures the cute factory girls took of themselves? The factory was maybe a little bit nicer, but it looked extremely similar.
Compared to us in the west, this looks bad. However, a lot of people in the west would take these jobs with no problem if the pay is adjusted to the cost of living... because the conditions are really not that bad!
It's clearly not sustainable to keep these low-paying factory/assembly jobs in China, but for now, it's working out pretty well. We can buy computer peripherals for rather low prices, and in the process pay a little bit of money to poor Chinese kids who don't have the option to keep going to school or get a better job at the moment.
Even if you double or triple the data stored per tweet to account for other metadata, assuming the parent's math is correct, it still shouldn't matter because that's still a trivial amount of storage to manage.
I've been following this closely as I have a personal connection to Thailand and was last there a couple of months ago, and checking out all the stuff that's been posted online (mainly photos and videos since my Thai is rather poor).
There's an obvious reason why they're cracking down - there really is rampant misinformation being spread. The stuff that gets published almost always includes commentary by whoever posted it which blames one side or the other based on what they say is concrete evidence that their photos or video provide... yet if you look at the stuff, it's obvious it's just wild speculation at best and purposeful stretching of the truth (misinformation) at worst. It's really, really bad. Foreigners are especially bad because they mostly don't fully understand the situation and accept "evidence" at face value.
The main thing that's being contended right now is whether or not the Thai army troops fired live rounds (rather than rubber ones) into the red-shirt protesters (who are unarmed), thus being the cause of the deaths. Most of the videos claim to prove that they are, but there is absolutely no evidence in *any* of the videos that this is the case.
The interesting thing is that there *is* evidence of a third group (labeled as terrorists by the government) who are the ones inciting violence... sniping people from both sides from up on buildings, and so on. There's even a video that shows someone's head getting shot off a few feet away - literally, the brain is lying on the sidewalk and the top half of the head is missing. It's clear they weren't shot by the army, because their assault rifles wouldn't have done that.
Crazy stuff! It will be really interesting to see what follows. Based on how the Thai government operates, this "ban" shouldn't actually stop the flow of information coming out of Thailand, especially since a lot of it is coming from foreigners.
I was greatly bothered by this too when I got a MBP last year. It made me pay closer attention to how I was typing on my other laptop, a Thinkpad, which does have a beveled edge. I realized that either way, I was placing considerable strain on my wrists, and that the tingling sensations I had been getting for a couple of years (very rarely, mind you, it's not bad) were early-stage carpal tunnel syndrome. With the beveled edge, you just don't notice.
So now, I just put a large wrist pad (filled with plastic pellets, not a hard gel one) in that 3" gap between the edge of the desk and the MBP, and I haven't gotten the tingling since. If I use the MBP (or any computer for that matter) elsewhere, I just try to be careful not to rest my wrists anywhere bad. It took a bit to get used to but now I'm much better off for it.
I'm not saying the MBP was designed to have a sharp edge to make it uncomfortable to give yourself carpal tunnel syndrome, but at least for me, it was a very positive side effect of that design choice.
I have one and I think they must be coated a little bit, because the reflections don't seem as bad as they could be. They're definitely not multi-coated like camera lenses and such, however, and reflections can definitely be a problem in the right (er... wrong) environments. To compare it to something, it's not as reflective as glass smartphone screens, at least iphone or nexus one, in my experience. And even then, reflections on smartphones aren't a problem...
I very rarely have a problem with reflections, including "on the go" in airports and such where you can't control the lighting. The only place one might have a problem is in a typical office with overhead fluorescent lighting that you can't control.
And yeah, the deep blacks are nice, and the LED backlighting is great. I was very wary about getting a glossy screen since I've seen so many awful glossy screens on other peoples' laptops (not macbooks), but I carefully inspected the screen quality in an apple store and was satisfied. It's a last-gen 13" MBP with the only option available at that time, the standard glossy screen.
It doesn't seem that far-fetched... it's basically the teenage girl version of The Wizard from Seinfeld. I remember those things being quite the fad back in the early-mid 90's... I think I may have even been given a cheap one (not a Clueless one) after the fad ended and Chinese copies flooded the market. I never quite saw the purpose, but then, in the mid nineties I was a young nerdy kid with no friends or appointments to keep track of:)
I agree that it's about time someone introduced this kind of functionality to the "multimedia phone" segment of the market - it's ridiculous how restricted and locked-down those phones are now, and the first time I saw how restricted a friend's phone was years ago I was so disgusted I was one of those "I just want something that makes phone calls" people until truly open smartphones became available (I have a Nexus One).
Thing is, though, you still don't want one of these phones even though the online sync feature exists... because you can already do that with smartphones, with much greater flexibility about where your data is synced. There's *so much* more you can do with smartphones these days, it doesn't make sense to get something like this unless you really are a teenage girl who only wants/needs to send text messages and naked photos (this is obviously the target market).
To be fair, I think the parent and many (not all) drivers probably are aware of what's going on at the intersection before they roll through a red light to make a right turn. Personally, I don't stop completely at a red light (at the actual stopping line anyway) before making a turn, in most cases. However, when I approach the turn, I'm quickly shifting my vision back and forth between what's ahead of me and what's coming from the left (i.e., pedestrians or bicycles). In most cases, at least where I normally drive, there's nothing there, so I continue past the stopping line (not at top speed, mind you), wait until it's clear to turn if necessary, and then go.
I think you'll find that most people who break the rules like this are not doing it because they're ignorant. They do it because at that time in that specific situation, the rules are pointless. They've made a conscious decision that to roll slightly into the intersection without stopping before making their right turn is safe, because there's no one there.
This can obviously still be a problem because it's not always easy to see if someone's coming, especially a bicycle which may be moving quickly. However, one hopes that these people show more caution when visibility leaves some doubt as to whether there may be someone there (for example, driving a small car in Southern California your view to the left is almost always blocked because there's a 87% chance the person who's waiting at the light next to you is in an SUV or pickup).
I know just as well as you that this isn't always the case. I, too, ride a bicycle on the street, and not only in Southern California where the drivers are terrible, but in a state university area where the drivers are even *more* terrible than usual. I see people making unsafe maneuvers all the time, ignoring the possibility of pedestrians or bicycles on the road. However, if you pay closer attention, you see that *most* people are actually driving safely, even when ignoring rules like stopping completely before turning right on red. You just don't normally notice because nothing unsafe is going on.
Traffic lights at certain large intersections in Thailand have large count down displays as well. I found it incredibly useful because the way traffic works there is quite different from in the US (although the countdown was only at one intersection I used relatively frequently, the rest of the time you just have to observe/follow everyone else;) )
I think it would be useful in the US to have those, but I think more important would be to better standardize how the traffic signaling works, and have more of it based on sensors so it can adapt to different traffic conditions. As it is, when you approach an intersection you're not familiar with, you basically have no idea how it works and what the pattern is. Even within the same city intersections behave wildly different from each other, with different timings and layouts. And at least in Southern California, most intersections completely break down during rush hour (which lasts 2-3 hours rather than one) because they haven't been designed to handle the heavy traffic. Hence the need for adaptability based on current conditions.
Thing is, though, in a 2D movie the director knows that you can look at what's going on in the background, and plans accordingly. I haven't seen Natural Born Killers, but if the background action is as interesting as you say, that's because it was intended to be. You're supposed to notice it, at least subconsciously.
With 3D movies, the director and cinematographer aren't stupid. They know you can't look at anything that they don't want you to without eyestrain. As a result, they don't put important information outside of the plane of focus.
On the other hand, 3D movies are not inherently less focused than 2D movies. The decision to, for example, put the background in or out of focus is entirely independent of it being 3D or not. I haven't seen Avatar but based on what I've heard, there are shots with a very shallow depth of field (only the actor is in focus in a medium close-up, say) as well as shots with a very deep depth of field. The latter is more immersive but doesn't pop out as much. The best 3D film I've seen was the Muppets 3D thing at Disneyland; there's a lot of things popping out of the screen as a gimmick (and Kermit actually jokes about that being stupid) but if you look more closely, the rest of the film is actually really well made. There's no shallow depth of field stuff, it's all in focus and the sets are very deep, making for very interesting viewing if you are able to ignore the stuff popping off the screen.
By the way, I'm totally with you regarding background information. My eyes usually look around the whole frame, examining it as if it were a photograph. I know as an amateur photographer the importance of every little thing in frame, even if it's not in focus, and directors and cinematographers know that too.
Public Enemy was filmed at a higher frame rate, and the resulting smooth motion caused quite a stir among those who notice that kind of thing (including me). I never ended up seeing the movie even though I was interested in it, although that's partly due to circumstances besides the fact that I was put off by the look of the film.
Uh, it has nothing to do with that - that's one reason google earth is great, yes, but that's not why scientists are increasingly using it for GIS-type work.
These scientists already had detailed maps of the areas they're working on. Believe me, they weren't carrying around big hefty atlases with them - that's a ridiculous thought.
Even scientists in heavily geographical fields (like mine, geology) aren't always familiar with computers. Xest already hit the nail on the head here, and I won't reiterate his post, but I will put forth an anecdote. As I said, I'm in the field of geology. In my department, I would estimate that less than 30-40% of people doing serious research (grad students, professors, etc. - not undergrads) use GIS *at all*, and 5-10% might be particularly proficient in its use.
I count myself among that 5-10% - my entire research revolves around GIS-based analysis. But I won't pretend that it's easy to figure out how it works - it's extraordinarily complex, even to people familiar with working with spatial data. That said, if you're not doing complex analyses that require the advanced capabilities of ArcGIS or other complex software, it *shouldn't be* particularly difficult - but it is, if you use that software.
That's where Google Earth comes in. In comparison to ArcGIS or anything else (including the free open-source GIS software), it is extremely limited in its capabilities. But, it is extremely easy to figure out and to use, and that's beside the fact that it offers you free high-resolution aerial imagery and terrain information as its basemap. GIS software typically doesn't have a basemap - you have to supply everything yourself (the latest versions of ArcGIS offer optional decent base imagery, served up by their servers like Google does, but usability and simplicity is not the same).
This analogy may seem odd, but I think it works (you have to ignore issues relating to proprietary vs. open, etc, for it to work). ArcGIS and the like are like linux in that it's fairly technical and to do complex stuff with it, you need to be a proficient technically-inclined user. Not that you can't learn it, but it takes time. In the end, for your effort put into learning you're rewarded with a much more powerful system to work with. On the other hand, Google Earth is like Windows. Anyone can pick it up and use it (more or less), but to do really cool stuff, you have to futz around a whole lot more. If you're doing complex stuff you end up spending a lot of time fighting limitations of the system, using weird workaround and such, in exchange for a relatively more simple interface for day-to-day stuff.
Seriously... all fashion concept drawings look like this. I don't understand them either, but, apparently designers and fashion-types do if they can translate that to what it will actually look like.
The thing is, this outfit will probably look great when actually constructed. In any case, it'll look better than if she was just floating around in baggy overalls, and for someone with small proportions it might even be more comfortable.
Also, Japan has some precedent here: check out Soichi Noguchi's spacesuit - it looks very Japanese and sci-fi/anime-esque, and very cool when compared against the standard NASA suits. Also, check out his photos he posts to twitter from ISS here - some really cool stuff (mostly taken with a professional Nikon DSLR).
Catcher in the Rye is a classic because most people read it as a teenager and can identify with the main character. It becomes a highly personal and emotional (yes, depressing) book. Most people who read it in their 20's or later probably won't get it, and simply take it at face value (not that it is as valueless as you seem to think).
I only read it once, at 13 or 14, and I thought it was great and loved Holden Caulfield's sentiments against the phonies and the system and all that... because at that age that's exactly how I felt about the world too. Most people go through a phase like that as a teenager, and most people read the book as a teenager, so it works out.
It's been said by some people that he pointed the camera at the Apache to take a picture, but they've got the last few pictures from his camera here and that doesn't seem to be the case. The EXIF data has been stripped, but presumably whoever leaked the shots had the original files, and you can tell through a variety of means (most simply, the sequentially numbered filenames) if any shots had been deleted.
He was obviously doing *something* with the camera behind the wall, but I see no evidence to suggest they even knew the Apache was nearby, or looking at them - they were quite a distance away.
That wasn't really the point, I think... especially if you were purposefully thrashing the car about, you should have been wearing the seat belt, for reasons which should be obvious.
I've driven in SE Asia (both cars and motorbikes) so I know how it is... it's quite lax, as you say. That's even more reason to wear the seat belt!
It's not that women can't because they're women and they're small, stupid, whatever reason anyone may argue. Teenage girls, in particular, may also be 80 pounds (though probably not, especially in the US) but they aren't experienced truck drivers, and they *don't care* about controlling the car safely. They care about getting where they want to go... the most technical thing they care about is hooking up their ipod to the stereo.
Teenage girls are the least likely of all demographics to care enough to learn to understand technical things, and driving an 18-speed transmission sounds rather technical. Even a regular five-speed manual takes quite a bit of understanding and practice to learn, and to a teenage girl that time is 100% wasted if they can just drive an automatic instead. It's not that they *can't* learn, but they don't care and they don't want to learn.
There's nothing sexist about the argument you're responding to. It has nothing to do with whether women are capable of driving with manual gearboxes or not - obviously they are. And girls aren't conforming to any stereotype when they choose an automatic over a standard... just like the majority of guys (in the US), who also choose automatics! They've just got more important things to care about, and automatic transmissions are "good enough" for most - obviously not for truckers.
Actually, come to think of it, as a young guy in the US if I think about all the people I know well enough to know this about them, I think I know more girls who can drive a manual than guys.
FYI, I have a Nexus One and they don't have root out of the box, and rooting it voids your warranty. Needless to say I rooted it anyway, but it's actually more difficult to do than rooting an iPhone (as far as I know, I haven't actually done that but there are simple GUI programs to do so).
The videos are funny, but they're having a hard time loading... not that I think slashdot is really capable of slashdotting itself, but maybe streaming videos is straining the servers a bit. It'll be interesting to see what happens when more people try to watch them.
I agree with this wholeheartedly - I'm in grad school, hopefully finishing this semester, and my job prospects are grim. I'm overqualified for most entry-level positions and I have no work experience as required by the higher-level ones.
If you go to grad school, it shouldn't be because you want to get a better job, unless that job is in academia.
Slashdot Mirror
Occasionally stories like this come out, and most of the "sweatshops" look very similar to this. The conditions don't look that bad. They're not working in dirty factories with dangerous equipment. They get paid what is probably a low, but livable, salary. Most of them probably come from the countryside and have no other option for work, unless they want to stay on the farm. Remember the photos from an iPhone that came with some pictures the cute factory girls took of themselves? The factory was maybe a little bit nicer, but it looked extremely similar.
Compared to us in the west, this looks bad. However, a lot of people in the west would take these jobs with no problem if the pay is adjusted to the cost of living... because the conditions are really not that bad!
It's clearly not sustainable to keep these low-paying factory/assembly jobs in China, but for now, it's working out pretty well. We can buy computer peripherals for rather low prices, and in the process pay a little bit of money to poor Chinese kids who don't have the option to keep going to school or get a better job at the moment.
Even if you double or triple the data stored per tweet to account for other metadata, assuming the parent's math is correct, it still shouldn't matter because that's still a trivial amount of storage to manage.
I've been following this closely as I have a personal connection to Thailand and was last there a couple of months ago, and checking out all the stuff that's been posted online (mainly photos and videos since my Thai is rather poor).
There's an obvious reason why they're cracking down - there really is rampant misinformation being spread. The stuff that gets published almost always includes commentary by whoever posted it which blames one side or the other based on what they say is concrete evidence that their photos or video provide... yet if you look at the stuff, it's obvious it's just wild speculation at best and purposeful stretching of the truth (misinformation) at worst. It's really, really bad. Foreigners are especially bad because they mostly don't fully understand the situation and accept "evidence" at face value.
The main thing that's being contended right now is whether or not the Thai army troops fired live rounds (rather than rubber ones) into the red-shirt protesters (who are unarmed), thus being the cause of the deaths. Most of the videos claim to prove that they are, but there is absolutely no evidence in *any* of the videos that this is the case.
The interesting thing is that there *is* evidence of a third group (labeled as terrorists by the government) who are the ones inciting violence... sniping people from both sides from up on buildings, and so on. There's even a video that shows someone's head getting shot off a few feet away - literally, the brain is lying on the sidewalk and the top half of the head is missing. It's clear they weren't shot by the army, because their assault rifles wouldn't have done that.
Crazy stuff! It will be really interesting to see what follows. Based on how the Thai government operates, this "ban" shouldn't actually stop the flow of information coming out of Thailand, especially since a lot of it is coming from foreigners.
I was greatly bothered by this too when I got a MBP last year. It made me pay closer attention to how I was typing on my other laptop, a Thinkpad, which does have a beveled edge. I realized that either way, I was placing considerable strain on my wrists, and that the tingling sensations I had been getting for a couple of years (very rarely, mind you, it's not bad) were early-stage carpal tunnel syndrome. With the beveled edge, you just don't notice.
So now, I just put a large wrist pad (filled with plastic pellets, not a hard gel one) in that 3" gap between the edge of the desk and the MBP, and I haven't gotten the tingling since. If I use the MBP (or any computer for that matter) elsewhere, I just try to be careful not to rest my wrists anywhere bad. It took a bit to get used to but now I'm much better off for it.
I'm not saying the MBP was designed to have a sharp edge to make it uncomfortable to give yourself carpal tunnel syndrome, but at least for me, it was a very positive side effect of that design choice.
I have one and I think they must be coated a little bit, because the reflections don't seem as bad as they could be. They're definitely not multi-coated like camera lenses and such, however, and reflections can definitely be a problem in the right (er... wrong) environments. To compare it to something, it's not as reflective as glass smartphone screens, at least iphone or nexus one, in my experience. And even then, reflections on smartphones aren't a problem...
I very rarely have a problem with reflections, including "on the go" in airports and such where you can't control the lighting. The only place one might have a problem is in a typical office with overhead fluorescent lighting that you can't control.
And yeah, the deep blacks are nice, and the LED backlighting is great. I was very wary about getting a glossy screen since I've seen so many awful glossy screens on other peoples' laptops (not macbooks), but I carefully inspected the screen quality in an apple store and was satisfied. It's a last-gen 13" MBP with the only option available at that time, the standard glossy screen.
It doesn't seem that far-fetched... it's basically the teenage girl version of The Wizard from Seinfeld. I remember those things being quite the fad back in the early-mid 90's... I think I may have even been given a cheap one (not a Clueless one) after the fad ended and Chinese copies flooded the market. I never quite saw the purpose, but then, in the mid nineties I was a young nerdy kid with no friends or appointments to keep track of :)
I agree that it's about time someone introduced this kind of functionality to the "multimedia phone" segment of the market - it's ridiculous how restricted and locked-down those phones are now, and the first time I saw how restricted a friend's phone was years ago I was so disgusted I was one of those "I just want something that makes phone calls" people until truly open smartphones became available (I have a Nexus One).
Thing is, though, you still don't want one of these phones even though the online sync feature exists... because you can already do that with smartphones, with much greater flexibility about where your data is synced. There's *so much* more you can do with smartphones these days, it doesn't make sense to get something like this unless you really are a teenage girl who only wants/needs to send text messages and naked photos (this is obviously the target market).
To be fair, I think the parent and many (not all) drivers probably are aware of what's going on at the intersection before they roll through a red light to make a right turn. Personally, I don't stop completely at a red light (at the actual stopping line anyway) before making a turn, in most cases. However, when I approach the turn, I'm quickly shifting my vision back and forth between what's ahead of me and what's coming from the left (i.e., pedestrians or bicycles). In most cases, at least where I normally drive, there's nothing there, so I continue past the stopping line (not at top speed, mind you), wait until it's clear to turn if necessary, and then go.
I think you'll find that most people who break the rules like this are not doing it because they're ignorant. They do it because at that time in that specific situation, the rules are pointless. They've made a conscious decision that to roll slightly into the intersection without stopping before making their right turn is safe, because there's no one there.
This can obviously still be a problem because it's not always easy to see if someone's coming, especially a bicycle which may be moving quickly. However, one hopes that these people show more caution when visibility leaves some doubt as to whether there may be someone there (for example, driving a small car in Southern California your view to the left is almost always blocked because there's a 87% chance the person who's waiting at the light next to you is in an SUV or pickup).
I know just as well as you that this isn't always the case. I, too, ride a bicycle on the street, and not only in Southern California where the drivers are terrible, but in a state university area where the drivers are even *more* terrible than usual. I see people making unsafe maneuvers all the time, ignoring the possibility of pedestrians or bicycles on the road. However, if you pay closer attention, you see that *most* people are actually driving safely, even when ignoring rules like stopping completely before turning right on red. You just don't normally notice because nothing unsafe is going on.
Traffic lights at certain large intersections in Thailand have large count down displays as well. I found it incredibly useful because the way traffic works there is quite different from in the US (although the countdown was only at one intersection I used relatively frequently, the rest of the time you just have to observe/follow everyone else ;) )
I think it would be useful in the US to have those, but I think more important would be to better standardize how the traffic signaling works, and have more of it based on sensors so it can adapt to different traffic conditions. As it is, when you approach an intersection you're not familiar with, you basically have no idea how it works and what the pattern is. Even within the same city intersections behave wildly different from each other, with different timings and layouts. And at least in Southern California, most intersections completely break down during rush hour (which lasts 2-3 hours rather than one) because they haven't been designed to handle the heavy traffic. Hence the need for adaptability based on current conditions.
Thing is, though, in a 2D movie the director knows that you can look at what's going on in the background, and plans accordingly. I haven't seen Natural Born Killers, but if the background action is as interesting as you say, that's because it was intended to be. You're supposed to notice it, at least subconsciously.
With 3D movies, the director and cinematographer aren't stupid. They know you can't look at anything that they don't want you to without eyestrain. As a result, they don't put important information outside of the plane of focus.
On the other hand, 3D movies are not inherently less focused than 2D movies. The decision to, for example, put the background in or out of focus is entirely independent of it being 3D or not. I haven't seen Avatar but based on what I've heard, there are shots with a very shallow depth of field (only the actor is in focus in a medium close-up, say) as well as shots with a very deep depth of field. The latter is more immersive but doesn't pop out as much. The best 3D film I've seen was the Muppets 3D thing at Disneyland; there's a lot of things popping out of the screen as a gimmick (and Kermit actually jokes about that being stupid) but if you look more closely, the rest of the film is actually really well made. There's no shallow depth of field stuff, it's all in focus and the sets are very deep, making for very interesting viewing if you are able to ignore the stuff popping off the screen.
By the way, I'm totally with you regarding background information. My eyes usually look around the whole frame, examining it as if it were a photograph. I know as an amateur photographer the importance of every little thing in frame, even if it's not in focus, and directors and cinematographers know that too.
Public Enemy was filmed at a higher frame rate, and the resulting smooth motion caused quite a stir among those who notice that kind of thing (including me). I never ended up seeing the movie even though I was interested in it, although that's partly due to circumstances besides the fact that I was put off by the look of the film.
You can watch the trailer, anyway, to see.
I'm a young guy and I got it; youth doesn't necessarily mean not seeing older movies ;)
Uh, it has nothing to do with that - that's one reason google earth is great, yes, but that's not why scientists are increasingly using it for GIS-type work.
These scientists already had detailed maps of the areas they're working on. Believe me, they weren't carrying around big hefty atlases with them - that's a ridiculous thought.
Even scientists in heavily geographical fields (like mine, geology) aren't always familiar with computers. Xest already hit the nail on the head here, and I won't reiterate his post, but I will put forth an anecdote. As I said, I'm in the field of geology. In my department, I would estimate that less than 30-40% of people doing serious research (grad students, professors, etc. - not undergrads) use GIS *at all*, and 5-10% might be particularly proficient in its use.
I count myself among that 5-10% - my entire research revolves around GIS-based analysis. But I won't pretend that it's easy to figure out how it works - it's extraordinarily complex, even to people familiar with working with spatial data. That said, if you're not doing complex analyses that require the advanced capabilities of ArcGIS or other complex software, it *shouldn't be* particularly difficult - but it is, if you use that software.
That's where Google Earth comes in. In comparison to ArcGIS or anything else (including the free open-source GIS software), it is extremely limited in its capabilities. But, it is extremely easy to figure out and to use, and that's beside the fact that it offers you free high-resolution aerial imagery and terrain information as its basemap. GIS software typically doesn't have a basemap - you have to supply everything yourself (the latest versions of ArcGIS offer optional decent base imagery, served up by their servers like Google does, but usability and simplicity is not the same).
This analogy may seem odd, but I think it works (you have to ignore issues relating to proprietary vs. open, etc, for it to work). ArcGIS and the like are like linux in that it's fairly technical and to do complex stuff with it, you need to be a proficient technically-inclined user. Not that you can't learn it, but it takes time. In the end, for your effort put into learning you're rewarded with a much more powerful system to work with. On the other hand, Google Earth is like Windows. Anyone can pick it up and use it (more or less), but to do really cool stuff, you have to futz around a whole lot more. If you're doing complex stuff you end up spending a lot of time fighting limitations of the system, using weird workaround and such, in exchange for a relatively more simple interface for day-to-day stuff.
Seriously... all fashion concept drawings look like this. I don't understand them either, but, apparently designers and fashion-types do if they can translate that to what it will actually look like.
The thing is, this outfit will probably look great when actually constructed. In any case, it'll look better than if she was just floating around in baggy overalls, and for someone with small proportions it might even be more comfortable.
Also, Japan has some precedent here: check out Soichi Noguchi's spacesuit - it looks very Japanese and sci-fi/anime-esque, and very cool when compared against the standard NASA suits. Also, check out his photos he posts to twitter from ISS here - some really cool stuff (mostly taken with a professional Nikon DSLR).
I think we've far surpassed the point where people are putting that tag on articles seriously. It's got to be a joke.
Catcher in the Rye is a classic because most people read it as a teenager and can identify with the main character. It becomes a highly personal and emotional (yes, depressing) book. Most people who read it in their 20's or later probably won't get it, and simply take it at face value (not that it is as valueless as you seem to think).
I only read it once, at 13 or 14, and I thought it was great and loved Holden Caulfield's sentiments against the phonies and the system and all that... because at that age that's exactly how I felt about the world too. Most people go through a phase like that as a teenager, and most people read the book as a teenager, so it works out.
It's been said by some people that he pointed the camera at the Apache to take a picture, but they've got the last few pictures from his camera here and that doesn't seem to be the case. The EXIF data has been stripped, but presumably whoever leaked the shots had the original files, and you can tell through a variety of means (most simply, the sequentially numbered filenames) if any shots had been deleted.
He was obviously doing *something* with the camera behind the wall, but I see no evidence to suggest they even knew the Apache was nearby, or looking at them - they were quite a distance away.
That wasn't really the point, I think... especially if you were purposefully thrashing the car about, you should have been wearing the seat belt, for reasons which should be obvious.
I've driven in SE Asia (both cars and motorbikes) so I know how it is... it's quite lax, as you say. That's even more reason to wear the seat belt!
It's not that women can't because they're women and they're small, stupid, whatever reason anyone may argue. Teenage girls, in particular, may also be 80 pounds (though probably not, especially in the US) but they aren't experienced truck drivers, and they *don't care* about controlling the car safely. They care about getting where they want to go... the most technical thing they care about is hooking up their ipod to the stereo.
Teenage girls are the least likely of all demographics to care enough to learn to understand technical things, and driving an 18-speed transmission sounds rather technical. Even a regular five-speed manual takes quite a bit of understanding and practice to learn, and to a teenage girl that time is 100% wasted if they can just drive an automatic instead. It's not that they *can't* learn, but they don't care and they don't want to learn.
There's nothing sexist about the argument you're responding to. It has nothing to do with whether women are capable of driving with manual gearboxes or not - obviously they are. And girls aren't conforming to any stereotype when they choose an automatic over a standard... just like the majority of guys (in the US), who also choose automatics! They've just got more important things to care about, and automatic transmissions are "good enough" for most - obviously not for truckers.
Actually, come to think of it, as a young guy in the US if I think about all the people I know well enough to know this about them, I think I know more girls who can drive a manual than guys.
I have to ask - was that 80,000 pounds... of bananas?
FYI, I have a Nexus One and they don't have root out of the box, and rooting it voids your warranty. Needless to say I rooted it anyway, but it's actually more difficult to do than rooting an iPhone (as far as I know, I haven't actually done that but there are simple GUI programs to do so).
The source code is available if you want to spoil all the jokes. There's a link on the bottom.
The videos are funny, but they're having a hard time loading... not that I think slashdot is really capable of slashdotting itself, but maybe streaming videos is straining the servers a bit. It'll be interesting to see what happens when more people try to watch them.
If you want to spoil the fun, all the commands are spelled out clearly in the source code (the link to which I'm sure you can find).
Try "hello joshua" :)
I agree with this wholeheartedly - I'm in grad school, hopefully finishing this semester, and my job prospects are grim. I'm overqualified for most entry-level positions and I have no work experience as required by the higher-level ones.
If you go to grad school, it shouldn't be because you want to get a better job, unless that job is in academia.