The MNG spec is for animated images, not entire documents (although you can use it that way...). MNG is a multi-image format extention to PNG which is not geared for all the needs of document imaging.
MNG stands for Multiple-Image Network Graphics, not Motion Network Graphics or anything of that sort. Also, MNG can do delta compression between frames, and probably other optimizations as well. Do not underestimate its power for this purpose.
For example, PNG combines RGBA per each pixel. TIFF allows for seperate planes of Red, Green, Blue, and Alpha as would be used by rasterization engines or would be produced by high-end scanners.
Why on earth do you need the RGBA channels stored as separate, grayscale images? What does that gain you? PNG lets you have up to 16 bits per channel.
The problem is that you can bet Microsoft and the *AAs will push this into law, making it illegal to have an interactive digital device that's not Palladium equipped.
If we kept the free market as it is now, Microsoft and the *AAs can push their silly Palladium all they want and I don't give a damn, because they can't force it down my throat anyway. But if this is mandated by law, we have problems. Big problems.
The censored article doesn't tell you how to derail trains. It tells you how to make the trains stop by
falsely triggering these alarms (among other things).
Why do you need to falsely trigger these alarms? The idea is to disrupt the train's movement; triggering these alarms at all would (in theory) achieve that objective.
Also, placing metallic objects on the track will not cause any circuit to complete. You'd have to place a metallic object that spans both rails. So, to derail the train, simply place a large metallic object on one rail, and another such object on the other, ensuring that they do not contact each other. One massive train wreck coming right up!
Apparently not anymore, but I remember doing a WHOIS on them earlier and getting none other than Paul Vixie (or maybe it was Vixie Enterprises).
Anyway, I don't think I would trust someone whose last name is the first word of the name of a company, where the second word is 'Enterprises'. People like that just worry me.
That brings up the whole thing about shield systems in sci-fi films/TV.
Most shield systems are AFAIK based on electromagnetic repulsion. An extremely powerful electromagnetic field is created around the ship that pushes away incoming projectiles.
What this doesn't address is the fact that those shield systems also deal with light beams. In and of itself this is perfectly fine; however, those shield systems don't interfere with light beams that aren't intense enough to damage the ship, which are passed through the shield unscathed.
A plausible explanation for this is that the shield system is assisted by a sensor system which detects the incoming light beams, so the shield system can diffuse the light coming in at that location using whatever configuration of EM radiation is needed (and so there's a big glow when an intense light beam hits the shield).
Of course, the sensor system couldn't use photons (a la radar) for detecting those incoming light beams; it would have to use some other means, such as the use of tachyons, which is not limited by the speed of light.
Re:The Force violates conservation of momentum
on
Physics in the Movies
·
· Score: 1
Actually the Star Wars galaxy is quite small; remember, Star Wars is set 'long ago'. The universe is continuously expanding, so it had not expanded as much back then.
Re:Why are space craft always the same way up?
on
Physics in the Movies
·
· Score: 1
1.People using other people as bullet shields. Unless it's a small gun or get's stopped by a particularly large piece of bone (the thickness of the actor's skull?) most jacketed bullets will go through the victim and into the guy behind him using him as a shield.
...at significantly reduced velocity.
5.The hero's ability to waste all the bad guys with his 9mm Pistol although they're firing at him with assault rifles on full auto.
Just because they're firing at him doesn't mean they're hitting anything other than air.
7.Fancy aerobatics in Space(tm)
Ever heard of lateral thrusters?
8.Drag in Space(tm)
What about reverse thrusters?
9.Aerodynamic spaceship that can't land on a planet (Alien got this right in the later movies)
How about (inter)stellar gas clouds, such as nebulae?
10.Amazingly humananoid aliens(tm)
There's a Star Trek episode in which you find out that some ancient race 'seeded' the galaxy with its own DNA, thus causing the DNA of most of the species to be similar. Even without such a thing, there's probably a reason why we evolved into what we are.
11.Slow, visible lasers.
Who said those were lasers?
12.The abundance of artificial gravity in space ships.
Just because we don't have the technology to do it doesn't mean it's impossible.
Laser beams do arc. However, photons travel very fast (a little under the speed of light, or, in a vacuum, the speed of light), and are extremely light, so the arcing is imperceptible. In the context of a planet, photons are effectively weightless; this only really matters on an interstellar scale.
And the programs usually wind up being faster anyway, because the compiler is a lot better at code optimization than most humans (short of John Carmack, of course). And you get the added bonus of your code being more portable than assembly -- C code can be portable if written with that in mind; assembly code is never portable; and, as a minor digression, it's relatively hard to make Java code that isn't portable.
Since Cg is designed specifically for vertex and pixel shader programs, DirectX versions 8 and 9 are supported as well as OpenGL 1.4. The compiler itself is cross platform; in particular programs written for Windows, Linux, Macintosh, and Xbox are supported. And if all that isn't enough, the compiler can create code for all
NVIDIA GPUs that support DirectX 8 (or above) and/or OpenGL 1.4, making it very universal. In keeping with Linux tradition, NVIDIA has open-sourced certain components of the compiler, allowing content developers to add their own customizations as well, provided their customizations only work with NVIDIA hardware and do not enable any of the components to work with non-NVIDIA hardware.
The thing is that everything that Nvidia's said sounds like they don't intend to play that game. Most of these comments are the "knee-jerk-haven't read-the-article" level.
And you actually expect a company like nVidia to stand by their words? That'd be like Bill Gates donating to the EFF. Fat chance, captain.
And we're supposed to trust Paul Vixie to manage a "public utility" that's "in the public interest"? We're supposed to trust him to not use this as a "dot-com opportunity"?
And Bill Gates just donated $10G to the EFF. Yeah, right.
I can't believe a language named "F#" got past Microsoft's marketing department. Or are they retarded enough to think it won't get expanded to "F#@%"?
I even thought this was some kind of joke or parody when I read the headline. I expanded it to "F#@%" without even thinking about it. And you don't have to be a computer scientist to be able to make fun of it this way.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Darth Ballmer hears about this one...
Yes, that's right, I'm using Fry's Electronics as an example of a company with the interests of the consumer in mind. I'm not sure how you got an impression other than that about them, but my experience with them has been relatively pleasant, particularly with their ISP department. (Tech support with brains!)
Actually, you can buy SonicBlue's PVR without buying into their service. Just buy the box and reject their service contract, and the box is yours to use as you see fit. You'll likely need to program it with some software, though, as I doubt SonicBlue's software will work if you do this.
If enough people do this, I suspect SonicBlue will make a stand-alone box product without any sort of "service", since it will have become a viable market.
It doesn't need to be non-profit, actually. Just privately held.
It's the shareholders that demand a company do anything for a profit, and it's the shareholders who control the company. The CEO doesn't control the company, because the CEO is just another powerless slave to the shareholders, who can fire him/her at a whim if they so desire.
With privately held companies, the company is controlled by those who work for it. The demand for monstrous returns on investment is removed; most people are willing to sacrifice some money to be able to behave ethically and not screw customers. The company winds up making a more modest profit, but it also is a lot nicer to customers. Last but certainly not least, such a company will pay much more attention to the long term (which is another reason to be nice to customers -- they'll keep coming back).
For a superb example of such a company, take a look at Fry's Electronics. In particular, check the technical details on the ISP they run. Would you ever expect to get that kind of service from a large, publicly held ISP? I don't think so!
You don't need a full-blown analog computer just to generate true random numbers. The Intel i8xx chipsets include a random number generator. From the firmware hub datasheet:
The Firmware Hub integrates a Random Number Generator (RNG) using thermal noise generated from inherently random quantum mechanical properties of silicon.
Knowing KaZaa and Verizon, if this plan ever did go through, then KaZaa and Verizon would have a stranglehold on the music industry, rather than the RIAA. And knowing KaZaa and Verizon, it won't mean much at all to us. They're both just as evil as the RIAA.
Memory usage and overhead are not considered acceptable tradeoffs? Hand-optimized assembly?! Are you out of your fucking mind??? We are not running games on 386/16 machines anymore, 3D rendering is not done in software anymore, and MS-DOS is not the only operating system you'll ever run games on! Portability, extensibility, and maintainability are far more important than squeezing an extra 0.25 fps out of your machine, and thanks to hardware 3D acceleration (a concept that seems completely alien to you), 0.25 fps is about all you're going to get from hand-optimized assembly.
Oh yeah, and today's optimizing compilers are not the pieces of crap you had back in the early 90s. Today's optimizing compilers often produce code that's far more efficient than most hand-optimized assembly. I imagine even John Carmack would be hard-pressed to produce assembly that's more efficient than what today's compilers can produce.
Slashdot Mirror
Life is good.
BTW, Mac OS X is a pile of putrid dog crap that's less stable than Windows 95. Don't even get me started...
If we kept the free market as it is now, Microsoft and the *AAs can push their silly Palladium all they want and I don't give a damn, because they can't force it down my throat anyway. But if this is mandated by law, we have problems. Big problems.
Also, placing metallic objects on the track will not cause any circuit to complete. You'd have to place a metallic object that spans both rails. So, to derail the train, simply place a large metallic object on one rail, and another such object on the other, ensuring that they do not contact each other. One massive train wreck coming right up!
Anyway, I don't think I would trust someone whose last name is the first word of the name of a company, where the second word is 'Enterprises'. People like that just worry me.
Most shield systems are AFAIK based on electromagnetic repulsion. An extremely powerful electromagnetic field is created around the ship that pushes away incoming projectiles.
What this doesn't address is the fact that those shield systems also deal with light beams. In and of itself this is perfectly fine; however, those shield systems don't interfere with light beams that aren't intense enough to damage the ship, which are passed through the shield unscathed.
A plausible explanation for this is that the shield system is assisted by a sensor system which detects the incoming light beams, so the shield system can diffuse the light coming in at that location using whatever configuration of EM radiation is needed (and so there's a big glow when an intense light beam hits the shield).
Of course, the sensor system couldn't use photons (a la radar) for detecting those incoming light beams; it would have to use some other means, such as the use of tachyons, which is not limited by the speed of light.
Actually the Star Wars galaxy is quite small; remember, Star Wars is set 'long ago'. The universe is continuously expanding, so it had not expanded as much back then.
How do you know they're the same way up?
Laser beams do arc. However, photons travel very fast (a little under the speed of light, or, in a vacuum, the speed of light), and are extremely light, so the arcing is imperceptible. In the context of a planet, photons are effectively weightless; this only really matters on an interstellar scale.
And the programs usually wind up being faster anyway, because the compiler is a lot better at code optimization than most humans (short of John Carmack, of course). And you get the added bonus of your code being more portable than assembly -- C code can be portable if written with that in mind; assembly code is never portable; and, as a minor digression, it's relatively hard to make Java code that isn't portable.
And Bill Gates just donated $10G to the EFF. Yeah, right.
It's going to take a lot before I forgive Emperor Vixie for that one (unless, of course, he's not to blame).
I even thought this was some kind of joke or parody when I read the headline. I expanded it to "F#@%" without even thinking about it. And you don't have to be a computer scientist to be able to make fun of it this way.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Darth Ballmer hears about this one...
Yes, that's right, I'm using Fry's Electronics as an example of a company with the interests of the consumer in mind. I'm not sure how you got an impression other than that about them, but my experience with them has been relatively pleasant, particularly with their ISP department. (Tech support with brains!)
If enough people do this, I suspect SonicBlue will make a stand-alone box product without any sort of "service", since it will have become a viable market.
It's the shareholders that demand a company do anything for a profit, and it's the shareholders who control the company. The CEO doesn't control the company, because the CEO is just another powerless slave to the shareholders, who can fire him/her at a whim if they so desire.
With privately held companies, the company is controlled by those who work for it. The demand for monstrous returns on investment is removed; most people are willing to sacrifice some money to be able to behave ethically and not screw customers. The company winds up making a more modest profit, but it also is a lot nicer to customers. Last but certainly not least, such a company will pay much more attention to the long term (which is another reason to be nice to customers -- they'll keep coming back).
For a superb example of such a company, take a look at Fry's Electronics. In particular, check the technical details on the ISP they run. Would you ever expect to get that kind of service from a large, publicly held ISP? I don't think so!
Knowing KaZaa and Verizon, if this plan ever did go through, then KaZaa and Verizon would have a stranglehold on the music industry, rather than the RIAA. And knowing KaZaa and Verizon, it won't mean much at all to us. They're both just as evil as the RIAA.
...and then I just learned the hard way that you can't post to a thread after modding it, either. Oops...
I just modded you up, but I had to use 'underrated' because 'karma whore' isn't among the allowed moderations. :(
You're not going to be running Doom III on those things anytime soon, hand-optimized assembly or no.
Oh yeah, and today's optimizing compilers are not the pieces of crap you had back in the early 90s. Today's optimizing compilers often produce code that's far more efficient than most hand-optimized assembly. I imagine even John Carmack would be hard-pressed to produce assembly that's more efficient than what today's compilers can produce.