The fact that we've detected a 10m wide object once, a couple of days before it hits (or doesn't hit), doesn't mean anything. It might be that we can detect every such object or one in a million.
Having actually run projectors, both ones 2 decades old, and 5 years old, I have to say, you're full of shit. Film projectors in movie theatres do NOT show each frame twice.
I'm no projector operator but I've heard, like the OP stated, that the shutter is operating at 48 Hz in movie theaters to reduce flicker (ie. "show each frame twice", since the film is captured at 24 fps).
Turns out they do this and more since some even run their shutters at 72Hz ("show each image three times").
Add a notice in the manual that some parts of the product use GPL licensed code. If a customer to whom you've distributed a binary version of a program containing GPL licensed code asks for the source code, give it to him/her.
Cards are lazily called "DX11" or "DX10", but the features are not DirectX-specific. The term shader model, or pixel shader version can be used to describe GPU hardware generations correctly and/or in an API neutral fashion.
Since these are hardware features they are available to any API that implements them, and OpenGL usually is implemented by the graphics driver, which is written by (or under contract of) the graphics card manufacturers, they usually expose any new hardware features to an OpenGL-application through extensions.
It's a shame that the Khronos Group isn't faster when it comes to including the extensions in the standard and upping the version number of OpenGL. I'd love to see an OpenGL release schedule synced with the shader models.
If someone was taking Linux and illegally distributing proprietary, commercial Linux apps with it, they'd get a cease and desist.
Well, yes, that's exactly what just happened.
Given that what's being distributed is not GNU/Linux, but Android/Linux (I'm sure they put some GNU in there somewhere though, everyone does;) Still Linux though.
Not quite. Even if an API is cross platform in its nature, it still only provides the functionality it was designed for. OpenGL for instance doesn't offer any way to open up a window, initialize a rendering context, etc. For that you would have to use something like GLX for X11, WGL for windows or CGL for Mac OS X, and so on for every platform.
There are of course libraries to remedy this situation, such as SDL, GLFW and GLUT, which work on many platforms, but certainly not all platforms that have some level of OpenGL support.
Your phone probably has OpenGL ES support rather than vanilla OpenGL support. ES is a fixed point version of OpenGL for embedded systems and any OpenGL application would need to be modified extensively to run on an ES platform. There are OpenGL -> OpenGL ES wrappers, but that solution is usually less than optimal.
Your average OpenGL-based windows game is certainly easier to port to Linux (or any other OpenGL capable platform) than a DirectX game, but it's by no means "automatically portable". It's using tons of windows API calls, maybe even DirectX, to handle windows, input, sound etc.
Most graphically advanced OpenGL games are probably also using OpenGL extensions. Functionality that is not guaranteed to work by the OpenGL API itself, but the hardware might support. OpenGL doesn't even offer a way to probe for what extensions the current implementation / hardware supports. For that you need yet another library, such as GLEW or GLEE.
The point I'm trying to make here is that making a cross platform video game is a lot more work than simply going with OpenGL for graphics hardware acceleration. Even if the platforms you're working with implement the OpenGL 3 specification to the letter.
I've worked on a similar project, but we avoided GPS, since it doesn't work very well indoors. What I want to know is if TFA is wrong, or if they're really using GPS. If it works fairly well, that would have made our lives a lot easier during my project.
I thought you meant that you wanted to destroy, as in erase from the drive, the files.
Something similar to what you're suggesting is implemented in TrueCrypt. Ie. two passwords, one will get you one set of data and the other will give you a another.
What you're describing is even sneakier though, with one password giving you one subset of the data and the other password giving you another subset (or the whole shebang).
That sounds like a great plan for plausible deniability, especially if you encrypt the whole drive.
This bug was found by a google security team, and this was possible since they (and everyone else) has full access to the Linux source code. Windows on the other hand is a closed source operating system. It might have (and has) tons of undiscovered bugs that would be easier to spot and remedy if people like google, IBM, you or me had the source code for it. Microsoft's stance is that their operating system is safer if no one has the source code for it. That is the very definition of security through obscurity.
The third password works just like the first one, with one small exception: it destroys all the files on the "specials" list, or manipulates them in such a way as to make them look innocuous.
This will never work. Any computer forensics expert worth her name would ever try and decrypt the files using your computer or binaries. She would:
1. Mirror your drive for a working copy 2. Mount the mirror read only 3. Run her own binaries which never destroy data 4. Decrypt the data to her own drive, not to yours
You can never, through cryptography, make other (competent) people's computers do tasks (such as deleting files) for you.
Using self-organizing neural networks, they classified players as either Veterans, Solvers, Pacifists or Runners... but almost everyone falls into one of these categories
I didn't RTFA but wouldn't everyone fall into one of the categories? I mean, it sounds like the system does just that: puts the player in one of the categories.
Spacing: The spacing on OS X is obviously tighter than on the Ubuntu machine. I think that the Ubuntu font is too wide, but I also think that the OS X font is too narrow.
Kerning: Both fonts seem evenly spaced and do a pretty good job in this area.
Subpixel smoothing: Here I think that the default ubuntu settings outperform the OS X settings. The OS X renders the font way to blurry for my taste. Ubuntu utilizes the subpixels heavily to create really crisp-looking text.
As a side note I must say that OS X has a lot more of the "durp, fuzz some gray in there!"-tendencies you mentioned in your previous post.
I can also mention that I think Ubuntu usually does a better job with serif fonts than sans serif. I haven't tried this on OS X.
Both KDE and Gnome use the FreeType library for font rendering (through other libs, eg. pango).
FreeType has full support for subpixel rendering and renders fonts beautifully on my LCD monitor.
Subpixel smoothing is in most distributions, just like on windows, turned off by default since the technique requires an LCD screen to function properly.
To turn on subpixel smoothing of fonts in Ubuntu (9.04) Go to System > Preferences > Appearance > Fonts and select "Subpixel smoothing (LCDs)".
You can also tweak the subpixel hinting settings for your display and to your liking by clicking the "Details..." button.
It's an improvement over Vista, but it's not as intuitive as XP was.
Seriously. Windows XP is not intuitive. You're confusing the fact that you know where stuff is because you've used Windows XP since 2001, with the OS being intuitive.
People always hate new windows versions, because stuff isn't "where it's supposed to be" (ie. where it always has been, even if it makes no sense).
What makes the switch from XP to Vista more painful than other version switches is because of the big release gap between XP and Vista (XP - 2001, Vista - 2007). People have simply gotten too used (more so than before) to the XP interface.
Bottom line: Windows Vista is not an exceptionally bad version of windows, and Windows 7/XP is not an exceptionally good version of windows. They're all pretty much a bit better than the previous version in most areas. It's all about marketing.
Wait, are you saying that when you turn your cable box off, and the TV shows a black picture (but still is very much on), your girlfriend considers it off? If so, your TV is on pretty much 24/7 (ie. when you're not reading a book). I hope it isn't so. That would be a terrible waste of energy.
Or do you mean that you turn it "hard" off, instead of just stand by on the remote? If your TV is making noises when it's in stand by you should probably throw it out. Sounds like something that could start a fire.
Bring on the genetically improved übermensch, the smarter-than-us AIs, the better-than-normal-limbs prosthetics, the longevity research, the clones. Everything. I want a metallic right arm, a camera for an eye, a CPU in my head, augmented reality vision, live to see my 200:th birthday and go to freaking space!
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, but how does one know if a person is "centuries ahead of our time" or just crazy? It's always easy in hindsight.
I know what ????? is. It's "Pray that your often accessed data ends up on the RAID1-part of your JBOD"
The fact that we've detected a 10m wide object once, a couple of days before it hits (or doesn't hit), doesn't mean anything. It might be that we can detect every such object or one in a million.
Having actually run projectors, both ones 2 decades old, and 5 years old, I have to say, you're full of shit. Film projectors in movie theatres do NOT show each frame twice.
I'm no projector operator but I've heard, like the OP stated, that the shutter is operating at 48 Hz in movie theaters to reduce flicker (ie. "show each frame twice", since the film is captured at 24 fps).
Turns out they do this and more since some even run their shutters at 72Hz ("show each image three times").
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_projector#Shutter
Add a notice in the manual that some parts of the product use GPL licensed code.
If a customer to whom you've distributed a binary version of a program containing GPL licensed code asks for the source code, give it to him/her.
Cards are lazily called "DX11" or "DX10", but the features are not DirectX-specific. The term shader model, or pixel shader version can be used to describe GPU hardware generations correctly and/or in an API neutral fashion.
Since these are hardware features they are available to any API that implements them, and OpenGL usually is implemented by the graphics driver, which is written by (or under contract of) the graphics card manufacturers, they usually expose any new hardware features to an OpenGL-application through extensions.
It's a shame that the Khronos Group isn't faster when it comes to including the extensions in the standard and upping the version number of OpenGL. I'd love to see an OpenGL release schedule synced with the shader models.
DX8 -> PS1.0 / PS1.1
DX11 -> PS5.0
For more information see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_shader#Hardware
I'd mod you up, but I'm fresh out of mod points
If someone was taking Linux and illegally distributing proprietary, commercial Linux apps with it, they'd get a cease and desist.
Well, yes, that's exactly what just happened.
Given that what's being distributed is not GNU/Linux, but Android/Linux (I'm sure they put some GNU in there somewhere though, everyone does ;)
Still Linux though.
Not quite. Even if an API is cross platform in its nature, it still only provides the functionality it was designed for. OpenGL for instance doesn't offer any way to open up a window, initialize a rendering context, etc. For that you would have to use something like GLX for X11, WGL for windows or CGL for Mac OS X, and so on for every platform.
There are of course libraries to remedy this situation, such as SDL, GLFW and GLUT, which work on many platforms, but certainly not all platforms that have some level of OpenGL support.
Your phone probably has OpenGL ES support rather than vanilla OpenGL support. ES is a fixed point version of OpenGL for embedded systems and any OpenGL application would need to be modified extensively to run on an ES platform. There are OpenGL -> OpenGL ES wrappers, but that solution is usually less than optimal.
Your average OpenGL-based windows game is certainly easier to port to Linux (or any other OpenGL capable platform) than a DirectX game, but it's by no means "automatically portable". It's using tons of windows API calls, maybe even DirectX, to handle windows, input, sound etc.
Most graphically advanced OpenGL games are probably also using OpenGL extensions. Functionality that is not guaranteed to work by the OpenGL API itself, but the hardware might support. OpenGL doesn't even offer a way to probe for what extensions the current implementation / hardware supports. For that you need yet another library, such as GLEW or GLEE.
The point I'm trying to make here is that making a cross platform video game is a lot more work than simply going with OpenGL for graphics hardware acceleration. Even if the platforms you're working with implement the OpenGL 3 specification to the letter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opengl#Higher_level_functionality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenGL#Extensions
Not quite yet. The mouse actually grew back a new mouse tooth, not a human one. So you're stuck with the whale for now.
I've worked on a similar project, but we avoided GPS, since it doesn't work very well indoors.
What I want to know is if TFA is wrong, or if they're really using GPS. If it works fairly well, that would have made our lives a lot easier during my project.
I thought you meant that you wanted to destroy, as in erase from the drive, the files.
Something similar to what you're suggesting is implemented in TrueCrypt. Ie. two passwords, one will get you one set of data and the other will give you a another.
What you're describing is even sneakier though, with one password giving you one subset of the data and the other password giving you another subset (or the whole shebang).
That sounds like a great plan for plausible deniability, especially if you encrypt the whole drive.
Obscure?
This bug was found by a google security team, and this was possible since they (and everyone else) has full access to the Linux source code.
Windows on the other hand is a closed source operating system. It might have (and has) tons of undiscovered bugs that would be easier to spot and remedy if people like google, IBM, you or me had the source code for it. Microsoft's stance is that their operating system is safer if no one has the source code for it. That is the very definition of security through obscurity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity
You can argue all day which one is more secure, windows or Linux, but saying that Linux uses security though obscurity is simply uneducated.
The third password works just like the first one, with one small exception: it destroys all the files on the "specials" list, or manipulates them in such a way as to make them look innocuous.
This will never work. Any computer forensics expert worth her name would ever try and decrypt the files using your computer or binaries. She would:
1. Mirror your drive for a working copy
2. Mount the mirror read only
3. Run her own binaries which never destroy data
4. Decrypt the data to her own drive, not to yours
You can never, through cryptography, make other (competent) people's computers do tasks (such as deleting files) for you.
But what if you encrypt the USB stick! ...wait
Using self-organizing neural networks, they classified players as either Veterans, Solvers, Pacifists or Runners ... but almost everyone falls into one of these categories
I didn't RTFA but wouldn't everyone fall into one of the categories? I mean, it sounds like the system does just that: puts the player in one of the categories.
Sorry, wrong link.
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/7183/fontu.png
I did a little comparison between Mac OS X and Ubuntu.
Both machines have the default settings for fonts. I have just enabled subpixel smoothing in Ubuntu, no tweaking whatsoever.
http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/7023/fontx.png
My thoughts about the results:
Spacing: The spacing on OS X is obviously tighter than on the Ubuntu machine. I think that the Ubuntu font is too wide, but I also think that the OS X font is too narrow.
Kerning: Both fonts seem evenly spaced and do a pretty good job in this area.
Subpixel smoothing: Here I think that the default ubuntu settings outperform the OS X settings. The OS X renders the font way to blurry for my taste. Ubuntu utilizes the subpixels heavily to create really crisp-looking text.
As a side note I must say that OS X has a lot more of the "durp, fuzz some gray in there!"-tendencies you mentioned in your previous post.
I can also mention that I think Ubuntu usually does a better job with serif fonts than sans serif. I haven't tried this on OS X.
All this is of course highly subjective.
Both KDE and Gnome use the FreeType library for font rendering (through other libs, eg. pango).
FreeType has full support for subpixel rendering and renders fonts beautifully on my LCD monitor.
Subpixel smoothing is in most distributions, just like on windows, turned off by default since the technique requires an LCD screen to function properly.
To turn on subpixel smoothing of fonts in Ubuntu (9.04)
Go to System > Preferences > Appearance > Fonts
and select "Subpixel smoothing (LCDs)".
You can also tweak the subpixel hinting settings for your display and to your liking by clicking the "Details..." button.
Put it to sleep yes
I've put my windows computer to sleep too.
It's an improvement over Vista, but it's not as intuitive as XP was.
Seriously. Windows XP is not intuitive. You're confusing the fact that you know where stuff is because you've used Windows XP since 2001, with the OS being intuitive.
People always hate new windows versions, because stuff isn't "where it's supposed to be" (ie. where it always has been, even if it makes no sense).
What makes the switch from XP to Vista more painful than other version switches is because of the big release gap between XP and Vista (XP - 2001, Vista - 2007). People have simply gotten too used (more so than before) to the XP interface.
Bottom line: Windows Vista is not an exceptionally bad version of windows, and Windows 7/XP is not an exceptionally good version of windows. They're all pretty much a bit better than the previous version in most areas. It's all about marketing.
For the record, it works in Jaunty ;)
Worms has been "rebooted" and released for the Xbox Live Arcade, Playstation Network and iPhone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worms_(2007_video_game)
Wait, are you saying that when you turn your cable box off, and the TV shows a black picture (but still is very much on), your girlfriend considers it off? If so, your TV is on pretty much 24/7 (ie. when you're not reading a book). I hope it isn't so. That would be a terrible waste of energy.
Or do you mean that you turn it "hard" off, instead of just stand by on the remote? If your TV is making noises when it's in stand by you should probably throw it out. Sounds like something that could start a fire.
Bring on the genetically improved übermensch, the smarter-than-us AIs, the better-than-normal-limbs prosthetics, the longevity research, the clones. Everything.
I want a metallic right arm, a camera for an eye, a CPU in my head, augmented reality vision, live to see my 200:th birthday and go to freaking space!