These types of questions could be answered by comparing micro-gravity to artifial gravity. Unfortunately, the ISS module designed to do just that was cancelled
Update: As Reggie has pointed out in the comments, Peter Schneider, Nokia's Maemo marketing guru, has put the brakes on this rumor via Twitter. "No, Nokia is not replacing Symbian with Maemo. Symbian and Maemo will continue to coexist." So much for intrigue, and romance.
Symbian has a release roadmap all the way to 2011. It's also open source now, so it will be updated for as long as there's a community interested in keeping it alive.
... and at the end of WWII the previous superpower (Europe in general terms, though mainly England and France) was devastated by war. The newly created American factories were diverted from the war effort into the rebuilding effort, and a new superpower was born. There was a time when the US produced and manufactured most of the world's goods and food. THAT is what created the after-war boom years. The new deal however, laid much of the groundwork to make this possible.
Also remember that WWII was a relatively short war, especially for the US. A short war can have some economic advantage, as long as you win of course. A protracted war will always lead to economic problems, even for the victor (see : the current Iraq war and its role in the economic crisis).
Depends on which version of primary colors you use. For computer displays, they are : red, green, and blue. For art (painting), they are : red, yellow, and blue. So you could say all are primary colors.
This is exactly why the LGPL was created. Or sometimes you will have a GPL lib with the linking or classpath exception. You will find most libs are licensed under these, or even more permissive terms.
Therefore, if the lib in question is explicitly licensed under normal GPL, it's the author's wish that any apps that use it must be GPL compatible. I think it's only fair to follow the author's wish.
To me the point is that we need to make sure things never get to that point in the first place. Because once a ruthless and totalitarian system in place, it is impossible to resist from within. See : present North Korea, Nazi occupied France, Saddam's Iraq, etc...
I agree, much of the setup is nearly identical (the journal aspect for example). You do have to give it to Orwell for 'newspeak' though. Absolutely brilliant, and completely missing from We.
The whole point of 1984 is to make you feel like shit. If you were uplifted by a hollywood type happy ending, it would lose much of its power. Why is it that many people think a movie that makes you feel bad is a bad movie ?
The two movies you mentioned are the typical hollywood stuff... entertainment and almost nothing else. Not bad for blowing a couple hours, but nothing that will change the way you look at the world like 1984 has done for many people.
I found that watching 1984 before reading the book was extremely boring and bland. However after reading the book, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. The adaptation could be considered too literal, but once put into proper context is truly a masterpiece. A little like 2001 in a way (yes, yes, I know the book was written after the movie).
Um, that's exactly the problem here : one of them is free/libre (ogg), the other is proprietary-vendor-lockin-format (h.264). Guess which has more support (hint : it's not the one you want).
It's impossible because h.264 requires royalty payments in order to use their codec. This would mean firefox would have to pay them for every download. Oh, and of course, they can change their requirements at any time ("I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further.").
That's a good point, but the bandwidth and storage requirements of images pale in comparison to video. I've had to make sites using GIF for IE6 and PNG for browsers that don't suck (to take advantage of the alpha channel). It was a PITA, but the extra storage requirements were not that big a deal. Doing the same with video would be much more of a problem, even with today's cheap storage.
It's different though, being passionate before or after starting the profession. You're much more likely to get disillusioned if you're passionate about something, and then see the reality of it.
For me as an example, I really wanted to do something artistic and got into 3D graphics and animation, as well as 2D art. But the reality of doing art on demand, of having to create something which I feel should come from the heart, and having it exploited commercially for the benefit of some corporate monster completely disgusted me.
I've been doing development for a few years now, and have gotten to be really passionate about it. I love the environment, the technology, the creative aspect of it, etc... And when I go to work I really do enjoy myself (well not all the time, but usually). I had some interest in programming, but I wouldn't say I was passionate about it before doing for real.
Yes this is probably the best (if not only) way of getting noticed. For example the Beyond The Sword addon for Civilization IV included some fan-made mods and art. And a few years back I had gotten a couple offers to do game graphics after some recruiters saw my 3D renderings online (I've been happily doing non-game programming though).
We are in complete agreement. I had mentioned that certain pictures will be impossible to take in certain situations with cheaper lenses. However in some cases you can make up for the slow lens by pushing up the ISO, but this leads to poorer quality (though this obviously doesn't give you the same picture because of DOF).
I also don't personally have any L series lens, just some higher level consumer lenses, but having borrowed some the difference is simply amazing.
The fact that you look at photography as a technology rather than an art form, and link to youtube to show off 'good pictures' shows that we approach the subject from opposite points of view.
So while I agree that the most important aspect is the photographer and not the equipment, there is no doubt that you do get much better pictures from higher priced equipment. Without getting into too much detail, there are simply some things that are impossible to do with the cheaper stuff. For example the minimum aperture of a lens makes a huge difference in the type of picture you can take at a particular luminosity, or in the kind of effect you get at a particular focal length/DOF. Then there is the design of the diaphram affecting the look of the bokeh (more blades are better). Image stabilization is also a big help.
All of these things cost money to build, compare the price of this lens and this one, the only difference is in minimum aperture (F4 vs F2.8).
Notice that all that I gave as examples are for lenses, not bodies. This is because the lens is much more important than the camera body. You can use a cheap body and still take good pictures if you have a good lens. The reverse is not true. That xti, BTW, is an excellent body for the price, here's hoping you get some good glass for it.
Slashdot Mirror
These types of questions could be answered by comparing micro-gravity to artifial gravity. Unfortunately, the ISS module designed to do just that was cancelled
From your link :
Update: As Reggie has pointed out in the comments, Peter Schneider, Nokia's Maemo marketing guru, has put the brakes on this rumor via Twitter. "No, Nokia is not replacing Symbian with Maemo. Symbian and Maemo will continue to coexist." So much for intrigue, and romance.
Symbian has a release roadmap all the way to 2011. It's also open source now, so it will be updated for as long as there's a community interested in keeping it alive.
... and at the end of WWII the previous superpower (Europe in general terms, though mainly England and France) was devastated by war. The newly created American factories were diverted from the war effort into the rebuilding effort, and a new superpower was born. There was a time when the US produced and manufactured most of the world's goods and food. THAT is what created the after-war boom years. The new deal however, laid much of the groundwork to make this possible.
Also remember that WWII was a relatively short war, especially for the US. A short war can have some economic advantage, as long as you win of course. A protracted war will always lead to economic problems, even for the victor (see : the current Iraq war and its role in the economic crisis).
Depends on which version of primary colors you use. For computer displays, they are : red, green, and blue. For art (painting), they are : red, yellow, and blue. So you could say all are primary colors.
This is exactly why the LGPL was created. Or sometimes you will have a GPL lib with the linking or classpath exception. You will find most libs are licensed under these, or even more permissive terms.
Therefore, if the lib in question is explicitly licensed under normal GPL, it's the author's wish that any apps that use it must be GPL compatible. I think it's only fair to follow the author's wish.
All this time I thought these were the right logos.
Ads, what ads ? Are you watching TV or something ?
it's easier to find a good singer who's hot than a good singer who's hot and can write and play good songs.
It's also the kind of mentality where a singer needs to be hot to sell anything which is doing a serious disservice to music in general.
Yes, what if there was some way of embedding all that info into one file ... why, it would be revolutionary : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ID3#ID3v2
There are standard frames for containing cover art, BPM, copyright and license, lyrics, and arbitrary text and URL data, as well as other things.
No, apple has stated they have no intention of supporting Ogg.
FTFA
Apple is the only vendor that will not be supporting Ogg.
MS is out of the debate because they will not be supporting <video> at all.
To me the point is that we need to make sure things never get to that point in the first place. Because once a ruthless and totalitarian system in place, it is impossible to resist from within. See : present North Korea, Nazi occupied France, Saddam's Iraq, etc ...
You know it would work just as well how? Because you created your own virtual earth and ran genetic simulations on it for a million years?
Yes, I played Spore, and came up with a wide variety of different body plans that worked just as well. So there.
I agree, much of the setup is nearly identical (the journal aspect for example). You do have to give it to Orwell for 'newspeak' though. Absolutely brilliant, and completely missing from We.
The whole point of 1984 is to make you feel like shit. If you were uplifted by a hollywood type happy ending, it would lose much of its power. Why is it that many people think a movie that makes you feel bad is a bad movie ?
The two movies you mentioned are the typical hollywood stuff ... entertainment and almost nothing else. Not bad for blowing a couple hours, but nothing that will change the way you look at the world like 1984 has done for many people.
I found that watching 1984 before reading the book was extremely boring and bland. However after reading the book, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. The adaptation could be considered too literal, but once put into proper context is truly a masterpiece. A little like 2001 in a way (yes, yes, I know the book was written after the movie).
Um, that's exactly the problem here : one of them is free/libre (ogg), the other is proprietary-vendor-lockin-format (h.264). Guess which has more support (hint : it's not the one you want).
It's impossible because h.264 requires royalty payments in order to use their codec. This would mean firefox would have to pay them for every download. Oh, and of course, they can change their requirements at any time ("I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further.").
That's a good point, but the bandwidth and storage requirements of images pale in comparison to video. I've had to make sites using GIF for IE6 and PNG for browsers that don't suck (to take advantage of the alpha channel). It was a PITA, but the extra storage requirements were not that big a deal. Doing the same with video would be much more of a problem, even with today's cheap storage.
It's different though, being passionate before or after starting the profession. You're much more likely to get disillusioned if you're passionate about something, and then see the reality of it.
For me as an example, I really wanted to do something artistic and got into 3D graphics and animation, as well as 2D art. But the reality of doing art on demand, of having to create something which I feel should come from the heart, and having it exploited commercially for the benefit of some corporate monster completely disgusted me.
I've been doing development for a few years now, and have gotten to be really passionate about it. I love the environment, the technology, the creative aspect of it, etc... And when I go to work I really do enjoy myself (well not all the time, but usually). I had some interest in programming, but I wouldn't say I was passionate about it before doing for real.
Yes this is probably the best (if not only) way of getting noticed. For example the Beyond The Sword addon for Civilization IV included some fan-made mods and art. And a few years back I had gotten a couple offers to do game graphics after some recruiters saw my 3D renderings online (I've been happily doing non-game programming though).
On a long enough timeline, survival probability always gets to 0. BUT, some species have endured, unchanged, for extremely long periods of time.
Seeing as no one outside developers will be interfacing with it, probably not even knowing it exists for that matter, I don't see the big deal.
We are in complete agreement. I had mentioned that certain pictures will be impossible to take in certain situations with cheaper lenses. However in some cases you can make up for the slow lens by pushing up the ISO, but this leads to poorer quality (though this obviously doesn't give you the same picture because of DOF).
I also don't personally have any L series lens, just some higher level consumer lenses, but having borrowed some the difference is simply amazing.
The fact that you look at photography as a technology rather than an art form, and link to youtube to show off 'good pictures' shows that we approach the subject from opposite points of view.
So while I agree that the most important aspect is the photographer and not the equipment, there is no doubt that you do get much better pictures from higher priced equipment. Without getting into too much detail, there are simply some things that are impossible to do with the cheaper stuff. For example the minimum aperture of a lens makes a huge difference in the type of picture you can take at a particular luminosity, or in the kind of effect you get at a particular focal length/DOF. Then there is the design of the diaphram affecting the look of the bokeh (more blades are better). Image stabilization is also a big help.
All of these things cost money to build, compare the price of this lens and this one, the only difference is in minimum aperture (F4 vs F2.8).
Notice that all that I gave as examples are for lenses, not bodies. This is because the lens is much more important than the camera body. You can use a cheap body and still take good pictures if you have a good lens. The reverse is not true. That xti, BTW, is an excellent body for the price, here's hoping you get some good glass for it.
... and anonymous users are dyslexic (tub onyl midly).