I have found Qt Creator much easier to work with than Visual Studio. It requires some more explicit management in its project files (as they are just QMake projects), but I've found that I prefer this to the endless point-and-click mazes that VS subjects me to.
It's handy enough on its own for C/C++ projects, independent of whether you are using Qt or not, but it's extremely helpful for developing applications that use Qt as it integrates very well with Qt Designer.
Norton Disk Doctor recovered things more times than I could count, back when I'd use already-used diskettes over and over and over again and not make backups...
I'm told they do it by examining the TTL of the packets, as in most cases packets through a tethered device will have a lower TTL than any traffic coming from the device itself.
I used a Newton eMate for awhile and its handwriting recognition was actually the best on anything I'd ever used. However, other things - such as the device being mind-bogglingly slow (though I suppose the Newton MessagePads were fine) and any sort of good syncing with a modern computer being at best a convoluted mess - made it less than useful for me.
Assuming for the moment that they've found a real connection...
Why does this article single out E-readers? Doesn't everything there apply just the same to LCDs, CRTs, printed material, and anything else that is capable of rendering those same easily-read fonts?
This might be impossible, but film has a number of things over even the best digital cameras. From color gradients (256 levels of RGB versus infinite), to the fact that it is quite difficult to doctor film without that being detected (at least easier than firing up Photoshop.)
Well, to be fair, film also has its limitations with the levels it can store. It's not exactly an even comparison, but it has a measure called film density which (if memory serves me) is a logarithm of the ratio of the amount of silver exposed in the most developed areas, to the amount of silver exposed in the least developed areas. This measure is around 2.8 for negatives and 3.2 for slides, and each step of 0.1 means an extra 1/3 of a stop of available range. As a change of 1 stop means a doubling of range, corresponding roughly to one bit of dynamic range, this gives equivalent bit depths between about 9 and 11. But like I said, it's not an even comparison... but it's not anywhere near infinite either.
Also, most digital cameras nowadays have ADCs that quantize to somewhere between 10 and 16 bits, not 8.
One of the biggest determining factors of quality still is the physical size of the sensor. I think you'll find the images will differ in quality quite a bit if you compare side-by-side.
Well, on basically all Apple notebooks the glowing Apple logo is simply a transparent section that the already-lit backlight illuminates. Are there other glowing Apple logos I missed?
It might be possible to run Blood in a source port of the BUILD engine. I know that Duke Nukem 3D can be run this way (and indeed my friend ran the icculus.org version on his Powerbook this way), but I don't know how well it works for the other BUILD-based games like Duke3D and Shadow Warrior.
I am one such programmer. Yet I also coded for an Nvidia Tesla C1060 board and found it much more straightforward to handle several thousand threads at once.
Not all types of threads are created equal. I usually explain CUDA to people as the "Zerg Rush" model of computing - instead of a couple, well-behaved, intelligent threads that try to be polite to each other and clean up their own messes, you throw a horde of a thousand little vicious, stupid threads at the problem all at once, and rely on some overlord to keep them in line.
Most of the guides explained it as, "Flops are free, bandwidth is expensive." This board had a 384 or 512-bit wide memory bus with a very high latency, and the reason you throw that many threads at it is to let the hardware cover up the latency - it can merge a huge number of memory reads/writes into one operation, and as soon as a thread is waiting on memory I/O it can swap another thread into that same SP and let it compute. If memory serves me, the board was divided into blocks of 8 scalar processors (each block had some scratchpad memory that could be accessed almost as fast as a register) and you wrote groups of 16 threads which ran in lock-step on that processor (no recursion was allowed, and if one branched, the others would just wait around until it reached the same point) in two rounds.
Sure, that's a bit complex to optimize for, but it beats the hell out of conventional threading while trying to optimize for x86 SIMD. And if you manage to write it so it runs well on CUDA, it generally will scale effortlessly to whatever card you throw it at.
It's looking like OpenCL won't be much different, but I have yet to try it. I'm kind of eager, since apparently AMD/ATI's current cards, for the money, have a bit more raw power than Nvidia's.
Both groups "got off their ass" and "went outside". The comparison was between walking in a city area, and walking in a forest. Did you even open the article?
Stunts is one of my favorite games too. I remember seeing my brother play it first on our 386, and then I finally found it something like a decade later from an abandonware site. The track editor makes for a lot of replay value. Sure, it's still grid-based and sometimes it's picky, but it is still remarkably versatile.
For being able to run on something that slow, the engine was quite respectable - it was true 3D, wasn't it? Even if everything was very low polygon count...
The physics in Stunts also has some amusing issues. If you hit a building just right, your car flies straight up in the air to a ridiculous height before falling down again. I think it's also possible to make your car spontaneously explode if you enter a long tube and turn suddenly so your car moves in a circle.
Well... V dt = L di (V dt)/dt = (L di)/dt V = L di/dt...which is the standard formula they give for inductors, isn't it? Or did I totally miss your point?
i = current q = charge V = voltage phi = magnetic flux
dq = i dt (current) dphi = V dt (voltage) dV = r di (resistance) dq = C dv (capacitance) dphi = L di (inductance) (see http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6207) It was hypothesized that some device should exist that connects charge and flux, and follows the relationship: dphi = M dq. This is "memristance." It was predicted in 1971 as the "fourth basic circuit element"; see: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1083337 They were fundamentally theoretically new then. They just had not been physically realized and connected with that theory until recently. Please don't dismiss them as "pure marketing hype" without some research.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing is inherent in negatives that makes them unprovable. Please quit repeating this.
I have found Qt Creator much easier to work with than Visual Studio. It requires some more explicit management in its project files (as they are just QMake projects), but I've found that I prefer this to the endless point-and-click mazes that VS subjects me to.
It's handy enough on its own for C/C++ projects, independent of whether you are using Qt or not, but it's extremely helpful for developing applications that use Qt as it integrates very well with Qt Designer.
(Megapixels do matter if you plan to make prints beyond 8x10s.)
[citation needed]
Bible actually teaches that God and Jesus are two totally separate entities and that it is blasphemy to call Jesus a God.
Citation on this?
I second this.
Norton Disk Doctor recovered things more times than I could count, back when I'd use already-used diskettes over and over and over again and not make backups...
I'm told they do it by examining the TTL of the packets, as in most cases packets through a tethered device will have a lower TTL than any traffic coming from the device itself.
Using Facebook (or any other online social network) and living a real life are not mutually exclusive.
I used a Newton eMate for awhile and its handwriting recognition was actually the best on anything I'd ever used. However, other things - such as the device being mind-bogglingly slow (though I suppose the Newton MessagePads were fine) and any sort of good syncing with a modern computer being at best a convoluted mess - made it less than useful for me.
Assuming for the moment that they've found a real connection...
Why does this article single out E-readers? Doesn't everything there apply just the same to LCDs, CRTs, printed material, and anything else that is capable of rendering those same easily-read fonts?
In some sense, it does. What they're talking about, I believe, is watching it propagate through gates at each clock cycle.
This might be impossible, but film has a number of things over even the best digital cameras. From color gradients (256 levels of RGB versus infinite), to the fact that it is quite difficult to doctor film without that being detected (at least easier than firing up Photoshop.)
Well, to be fair, film also has its limitations with the levels it can store. It's not exactly an even comparison, but it has a measure called film density which (if memory serves me) is a logarithm of the ratio of the amount of silver exposed in the most developed areas, to the amount of silver exposed in the least developed areas. This measure is around 2.8 for negatives and 3.2 for slides, and each step of 0.1 means an extra 1/3 of a stop of available range. As a change of 1 stop means a doubling of range, corresponding roughly to one bit of dynamic range, this gives equivalent bit depths between about 9 and 11. But like I said, it's not an even comparison... but it's not anywhere near infinite either.
Also, most digital cameras nowadays have ADCs that quantize to somewhere between 10 and 16 bits, not 8.
Shows that I know about as much about photography as the original poster...
Thanks for the enlightenment.
Development in this case is the process which produces a negative from the exposed film.
However, once you have a negative, what you describe is indeed a viable process.
One of the biggest determining factors of quality still is the physical size of the sensor. I think you'll find the images will differ in quality quite a bit if you compare side-by-side.
Well, on basically all Apple notebooks the glowing Apple logo is simply a transparent section that the already-lit backlight illuminates. Are there other glowing Apple logos I missed?
It might be possible to run Blood in a source port of the BUILD engine. I know that Duke Nukem 3D can be run this way (and indeed my friend ran the icculus.org version on his Powerbook this way), but I don't know how well it works for the other BUILD-based games like Duke3D and Shadow Warrior.
A casual perusal of any open forum on the Internet will readily show that zealotry just as intense is plenty rampant. See: Politics, sports, cars.
I am one such programmer. Yet I also coded for an Nvidia Tesla C1060 board and found it much more straightforward to handle several thousand threads at once.
Not all types of threads are created equal. I usually explain CUDA to people as the "Zerg Rush" model of computing - instead of a couple, well-behaved, intelligent threads that try to be polite to each other and clean up their own messes, you throw a horde of a thousand little vicious, stupid threads at the problem all at once, and rely on some overlord to keep them in line.
Most of the guides explained it as, "Flops are free, bandwidth is expensive." This board had a 384 or 512-bit wide memory bus with a very high latency, and the reason you throw that many threads at it is to let the hardware cover up the latency - it can merge a huge number of memory reads/writes into one operation, and as soon as a thread is waiting on memory I/O it can swap another thread into that same SP and let it compute. If memory serves me, the board was divided into blocks of 8 scalar processors (each block had some scratchpad memory that could be accessed almost as fast as a register) and you wrote groups of 16 threads which ran in lock-step on that processor (no recursion was allowed, and if one branched, the others would just wait around until it reached the same point) in two rounds.
Sure, that's a bit complex to optimize for, but it beats the hell out of conventional threading while trying to optimize for x86 SIMD. And if you manage to write it so it runs well on CUDA, it generally will scale effortlessly to whatever card you throw it at.
It's looking like OpenCL won't be much different, but I have yet to try it. I'm kind of eager, since apparently AMD/ATI's current cards, for the money, have a bit more raw power than Nvidia's.
Whoa, that's weird, I just read it 10-15 minutes ago, but it's pay-walled now for me too.
Both groups "got off their ass" and "went outside". The comparison was between walking in a city area, and walking in a forest.
Did you even open the article?
No. I even re-read the summary about 10 times in a row, trying to figure out what exactly was harmful about forest bathing.
Stunts is one of my favorite games too. I remember seeing my brother play it first on our 386, and then I finally found it something like a decade later from an abandonware site. The track editor makes for a lot of replay value. Sure, it's still grid-based and sometimes it's picky, but it is still remarkably versatile.
For being able to run on something that slow, the engine was quite respectable - it was true 3D, wasn't it? Even if everything was very low polygon count...
The physics in Stunts also has some amusing issues. If you hit a building just right, your car flies straight up in the air to a ridiculous height before falling down again. I think it's also possible to make your car spontaneously explode if you enter a long tube and turn suddenly so your car moves in a circle.
So according to you,
V dt = dphi = L di?
Or is this wrong? And if yes, why?
Well... ...which is the standard formula they give for inductors, isn't it?
V dt = L di
(V dt)/dt = (L di)/dt
V = L di/dt
Or did I totally miss your point?
i = current
q = charge
V = voltage
phi = magnetic flux
dq = i dt (current)
dphi = V dt (voltage)
dV = r di (resistance)
dq = C dv (capacitance)
dphi = L di (inductance)
(see http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6207)
It was hypothesized that some device should exist that connects charge and flux, and follows the relationship: dphi = M dq. This is "memristance." It was predicted in 1971 as the "fourth basic circuit element"; see: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1083337
They were fundamentally theoretically new then. They just had not been physically realized and connected with that theory until recently.
Please don't dismiss them as "pure marketing hype" without some research.