Sorry but standards compliant browsers won't cause flash to go away. DHTMl is significantly more complicated than flash, and there are a huge amount of things that flash can do that dhtml can't (and vice versa). For example, any morphing from one shape to the next, mp3 playback, 3d object rotation, the precision of the vector graphics system itself, et al.
"Yet Another FPS"
Obviously you:
a)have no idea what tribes is about, but enjoy baselessly judging it as a stereotypical fps
or b)are an anti-fps prejudiced bastard who should save himself some trouble and stick to single player puzzle and/or card games (preferably War, Slap-jack, or Tetris)
If a bicycle can fly, why constrict it to the ground? Because arrogant pricks like you only want to use things as they are intended.
It's too late to reinvent the wheel, the internet is too big, too old. Get over it man.
Regional unity does not correlate to idealogical or creative unity. In other words, there is no "monopoly": "Hollywood" movies are not produced by a single writer, director, producer, or even company.
Furthermore, the consumer has the power of the dollar to check the so-called "glitzy, no-quality crap movies year-in year-out", and the last time I checked, box-office revenues were just dandy.
Save your capatalist rants for the communists.
Changing states is entirely different from breaking atomic bonds. When water evaporates, it's still good ol' H20, just with a bit more energy. But with nuclear fission, the actual subatomic particles are being separated, causing an nuclear reaction.
I have no idea what your point about the air evacuating itself is. There is no probability, however small you think it may be, that the air from a room will somehow disappear.
Your allusion is quite faulty: a hammer is useful for an incredibly smaller number of things than a computer, whose processing power has unlimited applications. Sure, for word processing and net access a p90 might be sufficient, but as computing power and software development progress, more tasks can be made more efficient, quicker, and easier by shifting them to computers. Things like digital cameras and video cameras allow the consumer to take many more pictures than the analog variety, and are continually decreasing in price and increasing in features.
I'm sure that if building an addition onto your house cost half as much every year, you would do it, and then as the prices became even lower, you would upgrade again in a couple years, and again, and again. The fact of the matter is the Parkinson's Law of Data ("Data expands to fill
the space available for storage") is true for everything, and follows the basic economic theory of opportunity cost.
It is more efficient in all aspects for consumers to regularly upgrade their computers than it is for them to continue to use outdated models.
Sure, right now the average family might think that they only need your computer for word processing, email, and basic web surfing, but think back to ten years ago. Word processing was almost unknown, the web was unknown, yet now my teachers require all papers to be typed. Soon all non-presentation-based homework will be sent in using secure web applications.
Society will assimilate technology infinitely, and by catering to the average user, software will mandate regular upgrades for increasingly computer-based social functioning.
Yeah that's a great fucking philosophy. Who cares about innovation, progress, science? How about we just screw humanity's technological progress and use vi on 266's? And I'm glad you have such knowledge of future accomplishments that you know you'll never need to upgrade. Sure, running at 266 isn't that bad, but you're only at about 50% of the average computational power of the consumer. Next year you'll be at 25%, then 12.5%, then 6.75%, and four years later you'll be at about 3.5% of the average user's computational power. In other words, it will take you 27 times longer than the average user, whose computer will be targeted by software developers.
Not only will it be impractical not to upgrade, it makes no economic sense, unless your time is worth significantly less than the minimum wage. On one hand you will be able to purchase a pentium 5 2ghz for $100, and on the other you can spend six hours recompiling your kernel. Computers will have become increasingly relied upon in everyday use, and I'd bet that 6 hours is worth more than a hundred bucks.
Sorry, but having a transistor's atoms split would be nuclear fission. It takes a bloody large amount of heat to reach temperatures capable of such a reaction. Overclocking your pentium 3ghz to 4ghz isn't going to do it.
Intel won't be advertising the P4 because it isn't targeted for the average consumer.
So you're saying that IBM's Websphere and Microsoft's Windows 2000 are targeted for the average consumer? Somebody's advertising beliefs are skewed...
Re:There are going to be a LOT of trilogies next y
on
Review: "Unbreakable"
·
· Score: 1
And why the hell would Hollywood fall in love with trilogies? Because the consumer has always been in love with them. Don't try to pin the responsibility on "Hollywood" when the consumer is the one calling the shots.
When Dunn first meets with Price at his store, the dialog borders (deliberately, it seems) on the absurd. Half the audience was almost in chuckles as Price tried to tell Dunn he was some sort of comic book superhero.
Shyamalan expects his audience to react with the same mocking skepticism as Dunn. Slowly, however, he manipulates us into believing that Dunn is truly unbreakable. As a previous poster suggested, there is nothing remarkable about Dunn's actions that can't be explained by a good sense of intuition and some adrenaline.
Your point that the audience doesn't believe Willis is some sort of superhero is ludicrous. I don't know what kind of adrenaline you have running through your bloodstream, but mine doesn't allow me to solely survive horrendous train-wrecks without a scratch. Furthermore, we already know that the movie is called Unbreakable, we've already been prepped to the comic-emphasis during the intro., and we know Willis has never been sick in his entire life. None of the audience in my theater was laughing, and I know that I personally was yearning for Willis to accept the divergence of the reality that he has been clinging to, as I suspect most other people were also.
I've watched the first 15 minutes and so far all of the changes have been really annoying, but I'm going to stick it out for the first "installment" at least.
And then there's also a parallel between the Foundation series and Dune, hence Asimov's "Other series of the Foundation type followed, the most successful being Frank Herbert's Dune series." (Gold, pg. 258). Is there such a parallel? I have no idea and I don't intend to find out. My scientific brain doesn't enjoy literary analysis too much so I'll leave it to all you fun-loving English majors out there.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry but standards compliant browsers won't cause flash to go away. DHTMl is significantly more complicated than flash, and there are a huge amount of things that flash can do that dhtml can't (and vice versa). For example, any morphing from one shape to the next, mp3 playback, 3d object rotation, the precision of the vector graphics system itself, et al.
"Yet Another FPS"
Obviously you:
a)have no idea what tribes is about, but enjoy baselessly judging it as a stereotypical fps
or b)are an anti-fps prejudiced bastard who should save himself some trouble and stick to single player puzzle and/or card games (preferably War, Slap-jack, or Tetris)
The apps are already there, the usability and compatibility (which does turn out to be a chicken and egg driver issue) is the real problem.
Yeah I agree with you, plus they point out many of the flaws in the Net so I don't see any problem with including it.
Mother wasn't blind man, Dan Ackroid or however you spell his name was Mother.
The robots don't destroy each other smart guy, they work colloboratively to devise a strategy and score the most points.
If a bicycle can fly, why constrict it to the ground? Because arrogant pricks like you only want to use things as they are intended. It's too late to reinvent the wheel, the internet is too big, too old. Get over it man.
Regional unity does not correlate to idealogical or creative unity. In other words, there is no "monopoly": "Hollywood" movies are not produced by a single writer, director, producer, or even company. Furthermore, the consumer has the power of the dollar to check the so-called "glitzy, no-quality crap movies year-in year-out", and the last time I checked, box-office revenues were just dandy. Save your capatalist rants for the communists.
Yeah, I don't know much about physics, but that doesn't stop me from arguing =).
then imagine the graphical beauty of it.
Changing states is entirely different from breaking atomic bonds. When water evaporates, it's still good ol' H20, just with a bit more energy. But with nuclear fission, the actual subatomic particles are being separated, causing an nuclear reaction.
I have no idea what your point about the air evacuating itself is. There is no probability, however small you think it may be, that the air from a room will somehow disappear.
Your allusion is quite faulty: a hammer is useful for an incredibly smaller number of things than a computer, whose processing power has unlimited applications. Sure, for word processing and net access a p90 might be sufficient, but as computing power and software development progress, more tasks can be made more efficient, quicker, and easier by shifting them to computers. Things like digital cameras and video cameras allow the consumer to take many more pictures than the analog variety, and are continually decreasing in price and increasing in features.
I'm sure that if building an addition onto your house cost half as much every year, you would do it, and then as the prices became even lower, you would upgrade again in a couple years, and again, and again. The fact of the matter is the Parkinson's Law of Data ("Data expands to fill the space available for storage") is true for everything, and follows the basic economic theory of opportunity cost.
It is more efficient in all aspects for consumers to regularly upgrade their computers than it is for them to continue to use outdated models.
Sure, right now the average family might think that they only need your computer for word processing, email, and basic web surfing, but think back to ten years ago. Word processing was almost unknown, the web was unknown, yet now my teachers require all papers to be typed. Soon all non-presentation-based homework will be sent in using secure web applications.
Society will assimilate technology infinitely, and by catering to the average user, software will mandate regular upgrades for increasingly computer-based social functioning.
Not yet.
There are areas of innovation other than transistor size.
Yeah that's a great fucking philosophy. Who cares about innovation, progress, science? How about we just screw humanity's technological progress and use vi on 266's? And I'm glad you have such knowledge of future accomplishments that you know you'll never need to upgrade. Sure, running at 266 isn't that bad, but you're only at about 50% of the average computational power of the consumer. Next year you'll be at 25%, then 12.5%, then 6.75%, and four years later you'll be at about 3.5% of the average user's computational power. In other words, it will take you 27 times longer than the average user, whose computer will be targeted by software developers. Not only will it be impractical not to upgrade, it makes no economic sense, unless your time is worth significantly less than the minimum wage. On one hand you will be able to purchase a pentium 5 2ghz for $100, and on the other you can spend six hours recompiling your kernel. Computers will have become increasingly relied upon in everyday use, and I'd bet that 6 hours is worth more than a hundred bucks.
Sorry, but having a transistor's atoms split would be nuclear fission. It takes a bloody large amount of heat to reach temperatures capable of such a reaction. Overclocking your pentium 3ghz to 4ghz isn't going to do it.
Hey, at least you won't have to buy anymore kleenex =).
Intel won't be advertising the P4 because it isn't targeted for the average consumer.
So you're saying that IBM's Websphere and Microsoft's Windows 2000 are targeted for the average consumer? Somebody's advertising beliefs are skewed...
And why the hell would Hollywood fall in love with trilogies? Because the consumer has always been in love with them. Don't try to pin the responsibility on "Hollywood" when the consumer is the one calling the shots.
When Dunn first meets with Price at his store, the dialog borders (deliberately, it seems) on the absurd. Half the audience was almost in chuckles as Price tried to tell Dunn he was some sort of comic book superhero. Shyamalan expects his audience to react with the same mocking skepticism as Dunn. Slowly, however, he manipulates us into believing that Dunn is truly unbreakable. As a previous poster suggested, there is nothing remarkable about Dunn's actions that can't be explained by a good sense of intuition and some adrenaline.
Your point that the audience doesn't believe Willis is some sort of superhero is ludicrous. I don't know what kind of adrenaline you have running through your bloodstream, but mine doesn't allow me to solely survive horrendous train-wrecks without a scratch. Furthermore, we already know that the movie is called Unbreakable, we've already been prepped to the comic-emphasis during the intro., and we know Willis has never been sick in his entire life. None of the audience in my theater was laughing, and I know that I personally was yearning for Willis to accept the divergence of the reality that he has been clinging to, as I suspect most other people were also.
I've watched the first 15 minutes and so far all of the changes have been really annoying, but I'm going to stick it out for the first "installment" at least.
Please keep us informed of any updates/plot-twists.
Good lord man, I don't want to read a bloody dissertation. I could just read the book instead.
And then there's also a parallel between the Foundation series and Dune, hence Asimov's "Other series of the Foundation type followed, the most successful being Frank Herbert's Dune series." (Gold, pg. 258). Is there such a parallel? I have no idea and I don't intend to find out. My scientific brain doesn't enjoy literary analysis too much so I'll leave it to all you fun-loving English majors out there.
Have you figured out what "finux" is referring to yet?