Every single frame of every film or TV show ever made (for just one example)? That would be far more impossible than the current content ID system at YouTube.
In the US, we have something called fair use. That means that a bite-sized spreading idea (a meme) can make a reference to pop culture as social commentary.
It doesn't need to improve. We have enough flashy graphics now to last is indefinitely. The problem is that content and licensing aren't lucrative enough as one time purchases. So without a hardware sales boom coming, they want to just milk the games forever.
Skilled people can't find good enough jobs to have a place to live and still pay off student loans. Unskilled people don't just not learn, they also don't always try very hard. There is still a lot of underemployment, though.
This. It actually made things more expensive for the middle class, but brought the lower class up. That's not really a good compromise, because now it's cheaper relative to income for the poor to be insured.
Single payer works elsewhere, but partly only because the US pays disproportionately for all the R&D of new drugs. We would have to be willing to fund more medical research, not just collectively pay the hospital bills.
Of course that's true. But the point was, the narrative given assumed that the job market could only go up from where it was 30 years ago. Instead, it's much harder to find a job with qualifications because now everyone has a degree.
If by entitled, you mean entitled to a job after paying a fortune for college, then you're probably right. That's how most if not all of them were raised, because it actually worked for their parents.
That's dissociative identity disorder. Schizophrenics will hear voices or see hallucinations - it's an issue with properly processing signal vs. noise.
Nothing I see so far says that each window on one side is the same camera. And I don't think anyone says that it will look like a real window - that doesn't seem to be a goal. But worrying about slightly changing views by leaning would easily be solved by just having a wider view. Or looking at another screen since the viewing angle would be different than a real window. Or maybe an additional in-flight entertainment screen that has pan/tilt/zoom controls. Or a 360 degree VR headset that puts you floating in the sky with no plane. The goal isn't to perfectly replicate a window, it's to make them irrelevant enough that you can drastically redesign the structure of the fuselage and drastically reduce weight.
and most importantly: their images are not actually 3-dimensional!
Stereoscopic vision pretty much ends at 200m. That's nothing compared to being several miles above what you're looking at - you don't have a 3D view of the ground at 30,000 ft.
At a distance of several inches, 4K comes close enough for the resolution. The dynamic range is going to be hurt far more by miles of water vapor than by being on a screen.
if I change my viewing angle slightly, the picture should change
There's not a lot of parallax when moving your head at 6 miles away from whatever you're looking at. It's all just framing - and better camera positioning will do more than craning your head could ever do.
If they made the window able to switch views, it might even be an improvement. Usually you can't see much - but what if the windows could show the thunderstorm raging below the aircraft or the view from the cockpit?
The target is provided as an argument to the software (or graphically in the GUI). An absolute path appended to a relative path is just deeper down.
However, this appears to just use a few "../" in the filenames, which is something that I absolutely would have assumed to be accounted for. What's more worthy of an article is that major software packages don't sanitize this or check the resulting destination against the base path.
Slashdot Mirror
It's getting the boot because Office 2019 comes out this year. But it's weird that they did this first.
They have 6rd, but not native.
Maybe try a patent for a concept or method. Copyright doesn't work that way, although stupid does.
Every single frame of every film or TV show ever made (for just one example)? That would be far more impossible than the current content ID system at YouTube.
Upgrading your system is always more expensive than the electricity.
None of us were talking about Youtube.
In the US, we have something called fair use. That means that a bite-sized spreading idea (a meme) can make a reference to pop culture as social commentary.
It doesn't need to improve. We have enough flashy graphics now to last is indefinitely. The problem is that content and licensing aren't lucrative enough as one time purchases. So without a hardware sales boom coming, they want to just milk the games forever.
Tick, Tock. Thin Client, Fat Client. Now with games.
You'd have fast food places offering $20/hr to flip burgers
Would you settle for chicken?
Skilled people can't find good enough jobs to have a place to live and still pay off student loans. Unskilled people don't just not learn, they also don't always try very hard. There is still a lot of underemployment, though.
This. It actually made things more expensive for the middle class, but brought the lower class up. That's not really a good compromise, because now it's cheaper relative to income for the poor to be insured.
Single payer works elsewhere, but partly only because the US pays disproportionately for all the R&D of new drugs. We would have to be willing to fund more medical research, not just collectively pay the hospital bills.
the study showed that people who owned cassette decks bought 80% more albums than people who didn't.
During a time where the majority of "albums" purchased were cassette tapes. Why would you buy something you couldn't play?
Of course that's true. But the point was, the narrative given assumed that the job market could only go up from where it was 30 years ago. Instead, it's much harder to find a job with qualifications because now everyone has a degree.
if they don't get anyone to fill those seats they will up their offers.
No, they won't.
Without imported labor those jobs will go un-filled and economic opportunity will be lost.
No. It enables the above increased offers.
If by entitled, you mean entitled to a job after paying a fortune for college, then you're probably right. That's how most if not all of them were raised, because it actually worked for their parents.
That's dissociative identity disorder. Schizophrenics will hear voices or see hallucinations - it's an issue with properly processing signal vs. noise.
Nothing I see so far says that each window on one side is the same camera. And I don't think anyone says that it will look like a real window - that doesn't seem to be a goal. But worrying about slightly changing views by leaning would easily be solved by just having a wider view. Or looking at another screen since the viewing angle would be different than a real window. Or maybe an additional in-flight entertainment screen that has pan/tilt/zoom controls. Or a 360 degree VR headset that puts you floating in the sky with no plane. The goal isn't to perfectly replicate a window, it's to make them irrelevant enough that you can drastically redesign the structure of the fuselage and drastically reduce weight.
and most importantly: their images are not actually 3-dimensional!
Stereoscopic vision pretty much ends at 200m. That's nothing compared to being several miles above what you're looking at - you don't have a 3D view of the ground at 30,000 ft.
At a distance of several inches, 4K comes close enough for the resolution. The dynamic range is going to be hurt far more by miles of water vapor than by being on a screen.
if I change my viewing angle slightly, the picture should change
There's not a lot of parallax when moving your head at 6 miles away from whatever you're looking at. It's all just framing - and better camera positioning will do more than craning your head could ever do.
If they made the window able to switch views, it might even be an improvement. Usually you can't see much - but what if the windows could show the thunderstorm raging below the aircraft or the view from the cockpit?
I thought YouTube was a subsidiary of Alphabet, Inc.
The target is provided as an argument to the software (or graphically in the GUI). An absolute path appended to a relative path is just deeper down.
However, this appears to just use a few "../" in the filenames, which is something that I absolutely would have assumed to be accounted for. What's more worthy of an article is that major software packages don't sanitize this or check the resulting destination against the base path.
That doesn't protect your name.
And buying the domain without registering a trademark just makes you a squatter if you can't afford fancy lawyers.
I don't expect to own my username unless I copyright it, nor should you.
That would be a trademark you'd want. There's not much content there to copyright.