I dl. the video of the launch... hell, it could have been made of plastic for all I know... Even so, the rocket was not all cement anyway. Is this trula an amazing feat? I fail to see in what way, maybe someone could explain this to me. oh actually, maybe it's just a slow news day maybe that's why tremendous bit of info arrived a year late. I think they could be keeping the "metal boat" info for an even slower day.
I don't know much about this technology but the sysadmin at my work got his hands on some kind of "box" (dunno what it's called) that communicates with pda's with a wifi card (we have a couple of ipaqs with that). So you can just walk around the pretty big office while conected to the net with a very fast access. According to him, you could set something like this up (in a larger scale) in a neighboorhood, in which all pda's portables that are equipped can have a speedy net access....
It sounded pretty cool. I don't know if it's legal on the other hand.
I'm not sure about this one. I'm usually pretty skeptical when it comes to series/mini-series/movies based on books I've read and liked. I'm not saying thy are all worthless of course and some very decent adaptations have been made, yet I'm allways a little disappointed. I read a lot and love the way imagination is used when reading, something that is totally devoid in videos/TV etc... Because of this, I'm dissapointed when I see a movie after reading the book and at the same time I'm usually not as enthralled when reading the book after seeing a movie (as it was the cas for Jurassic Park for example). What I'm trying to get at is that these series are cool, yes but who are they targeted to? The readers who may be dissapointed? or the people who hav'nt read the books (lots of them running about) and that may be dissapointed if tey decide to do so after? Or probably your average viewer who hs'nt read the book, will like the series and will not read the book? Who's a winner in this situation?
Last week I saw such a 3d display at an IS conference in Paris. I was in a bit of a rush so I did'nt have time get any details but here are my impressions: - You do have a "real" depth feel. - you have to stand at a set distance from the screen (not too far, not too close) - Don't move your head around too much, it gets blurry.
So yes, I was definatly stumped, but don't go spending your dollars yet is my advice. It's definatly cool but I don't feel it's all that ready either.
oooooh whatch out spammers, the Feds are out to get you! You'd better just pack your laptops and find something else to do. Look at what they did to pirate software sites: brought them ALL DOWN, and threw millions of webmasters behind bars! Haha, now the web is free of warez/filmz/crackz/mp3z/gamez sites, and soon our mail will be free of spam... oh actually wait a sec.... never mind.
is it just me or do some others feel that game/movie conversions (whichever way) are most of the time pretty lame. Get a good game (Street Fighter II was an arcade hit, that's one of tons of examples), make a crap movie out of it. Movie to game conversions are a lot more common yet suffer from the same problem IMHO. Rarely have I seen a good Movie/Game combo. Thoughts?
I gotta agree with you on that one. Yes I'm a programmer, and I know a lot IT related people read/. too, I (as some others here surely), have also played computer games for 12+ hours straight. Maybe even 12h/day for an entire week, but after that, I'm just washed out: head-aches, sleep-deprivation, undernourishment, aven after a week I can physically feel these symptoms... I usually stop playing such a game when vision of said game appear in my sleep... that's just too freaky for me.
Then of course reality slowly kicks back in and urges me to spend the next week in a bar with friends (whom I actually call, Mark, Eric and Fred and not Kueller, Vodobass and toString) thus leading to more hadaches, sleep deprivation and undernourishment I guess. Then I usually find a job.
...when computers were not hooked up to one another, let alone to a wall socket? Back in those days, 'snooping' was limited to a select half doen people around the globe and necessitated the keys to get to the actual computer. Nowadays, creating software (napster, IE, Kazaa, Blizzard games...), let alone using it, is an issue that often ends up in the courts... Technology sure is'nt the fun it used to be.
the thought has probably crossed their minds.... (MS probably has more lawyers than developpers) they're going through with it anyway... maybe they can afford to get sued.
good work guys! Salmon it is... right, so now we know its size, mass, expansion rate, age, density, constituents (most), and now color.... could we maybe figure out its smell?
I like ads (no pop ups please)
on
AdCritic To Return
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I liked adCritic because living in France, just makes it that much harder to see some good US ads. Of course we also do have a specialised weekly "advertisement" show (that is excellent IMO) that shows the world's best adds or just concentrates on a theme (more of a marketing show)...well to make a long story short, yes, people like watching adds. Why? Because a lot of time and money are put in to produce 30 seconds that are going to keep you riveted to the ad, you have humour, eye-candy, series... I don't know if I'd actually pay to see ads (who would have thought)... but I'd be real pleased if adcritic were open again to the bigger public.
You mean people don't like pop-ups anymore? What is this? Have the New York Times checked their facts?? Oh, forget it, people don't know have to have fun anymore.... back in the days, my friends and I would spend endless hours closing pop-ups, seeing who could close the most! What was GREAT was when closing one opened up another twenty! oh the laughs we had....
I don't know much about US law makers (although I read a lot about them on/.) but from what I've gathered in the past, they are NOT going to be happy about this. It seems the US have placed themselves as superCop of the Internet, and if they say it's not OK, then you better beleive it is'nt, be that in Russia, Holland or Nigeria... can't wait to see what kind of loophole some highly placed american lawmakers are gonna come up with to counter this news...
I think that I was to spurt out 1000 "random" numbers they would'nt be as random as a computers.. for example I have a special liking for the digit '7' and the number 49. Unconciously I think there would be a lot of occurences of this in my list of "random" numbers. That does'nt mean that you could devise a sure way to predict my next random number but you could probably make an educated guess based on the past list. For exmaple if I give out three numbers over 10000, I xould probably be thinking "hey that's not very random, I'd better give a low one next." and I'd say somthing ridiculously small such as 7. Yes when I'm asked to give out random numbers I "think" about it, even for a fraction of a second, come to the conclusion that "yeah" that number sounds random enough and then say it.
I don't think anyone could have the necessary consious abstraction to give out random numbers.... unless of course you're a total moron...maybe
Wow, that's the second/. story concerning scientology in a few weeks. They seem very present on the Internet going to some lengths being even more present. I don't have the impression that other 'religions' are as technologically orientated as this. Thoughts?
Slashdot Mirror
a penguin chanting on about open source softw...
oh never mind...
I dl. the video of the launch... hell, it could have been made of plastic for all I know... Even so, the rocket was not all cement anyway. Is this trula an amazing feat? I fail to see in what way, maybe someone could explain this to me.
oh actually, maybe it's just a slow news day maybe that's why tremendous bit of info arrived a year late. I think they could be keeping the "metal boat" info for an even slower day.
hey, they say, it's a non-narcotic drug, they did'nt say anything about it being non-lethal...
I don't know much about this technology but the sysadmin at my work got his hands on some kind of "box" (dunno what it's called) that communicates with pda's with a wifi card (we have a couple of ipaqs with that). So you can just walk around the pretty big office while conected to the net with a very fast access.
According to him, you could set something like this up (in a larger scale) in a neighboorhood, in which all pda's portables that are equipped can have a speedy net access....
It sounded pretty cool. I don't know if it's legal on the other hand.
I'm not sure about this one. I'm usually pretty skeptical when it comes to series/mini-series/movies based on books I've read and liked. I'm not saying thy are all worthless of course and some very decent adaptations have been made, yet I'm allways a little disappointed. I read a lot and love the way imagination is used when reading, something that is totally devoid in videos/TV etc...
Because of this, I'm dissapointed when I see a movie after reading the book and at the same time I'm usually not as enthralled when reading the book after seeing a movie (as it was the cas for Jurassic Park for example).
What I'm trying to get at is that these series are cool, yes but who are they targeted to? The readers who may be dissapointed? or the people who hav'nt read the books (lots of them running about) and that may be dissapointed if tey decide to do so after? Or probably your average viewer who hs'nt read the book, will like the series and will not read the book?
Who's a winner in this situation?
Last week I saw such a 3d display at an IS conference in Paris. I was in a bit of a rush so I did'nt have time get any details but here are my impressions:
- You do have a "real" depth feel.
- you have to stand at a set distance from the screen (not too far, not too close)
- Don't move your head around too much, it gets blurry.
So yes, I was definatly stumped, but don't go spending your dollars yet is my advice. It's definatly cool but I don't feel it's all that ready either.
oooooh whatch out spammers, the Feds are out to get you! You'd better just pack your laptops and find something else to do. Look at what they did to pirate software sites: brought them ALL DOWN, and threw millions of webmasters behind bars! Haha, now the web is free of warez/filmz/crackz/mp3z/gamez sites, and soon our mail will be free of spam...
oh actually wait a sec.... never mind.
is it just me or do some others feel that game/movie conversions (whichever way) are most of the time pretty lame. Get a good game (Street Fighter II was an arcade hit, that's one of tons of examples), make a crap movie out of it. Movie to game conversions are a lot more common yet suffer from the same problem IMHO. Rarely have I seen a good Movie/Game combo. Thoughts?
I gotta agree with you on that one. Yes I'm a programmer, and I know a lot IT related people read /. too, I (as some others here surely), have also played computer games for 12+ hours straight. Maybe even 12h/day for an entire week, but after that, I'm just washed out: head-aches, sleep-deprivation, undernourishment, aven after a week I can physically feel these symptoms... I usually stop playing such a game when vision of said game appear in my sleep... that's just too freaky for me.
Then of course reality slowly kicks back in and urges me to spend the next week in a bar with friends (whom I actually call, Mark, Eric and Fred and not Kueller, Vodobass and toString) thus leading to more hadaches, sleep deprivation and undernourishment I guess.
Then I usually find a job.
...when computers were not hooked up to one another, let alone to a wall socket? Back in those days, 'snooping' was limited to a select half doen people around the globe and necessitated the keys to get to the actual computer.
Nowadays, creating software (napster, IE, Kazaa, Blizzard games...), let alone using it, is an issue that often ends up in the courts...
Technology sure is'nt the fun it used to be.
the thought has probably crossed their minds.... (MS probably has more lawyers than developpers) they're going through with it anyway...
maybe they can afford to get sued.
good work guys! Salmon it is... right, so now we know its size, mass, expansion rate, age, density, constituents (most), and now color .... could we maybe figure out its smell?
I liked adCritic because living in France, just makes it that much harder to see some good US ads. Of course we also do have a specialised weekly "advertisement" show (that is excellent IMO) that shows the world's best adds or just concentrates on a theme (more of a marketing show)...well to make a long story short, yes, people like watching adds. Why? Because a lot of time and money are put in to produce 30 seconds that are going to keep you riveted to the ad, you have humour, eye-candy, series...
I don't know if I'd actually pay to see ads (who would have thought)... but I'd be real pleased if adcritic were open again to the bigger public.
Yeah!! First Post!
With a 14.4K modem too!!
You mean people don't like pop-ups anymore?
What is this? Have the New York Times checked their facts?? Oh, forget it, people don't know have to have fun anymore.... back in the days, my friends and I would spend endless hours closing pop-ups, seeing who could close the most! What was GREAT was when closing one opened up another twenty! oh the laughs we had....
I don't know much about US law makers (although I read a lot about them on /.) but from what I've gathered in the past, they are NOT going to be happy about this. It seems the US have placed themselves as superCop of the Internet, and if they say it's not OK, then you better beleive it is'nt, be that in Russia, Holland or Nigeria... can't wait to see what kind of loophole some highly placed american lawmakers are gonna come up with to counter this news...
I think that I was to spurt out 1000 "random" numbers they would'nt be as random as a computers.. for example I have a special liking for the digit '7' and the number 49. Unconciously I think there would be a lot of occurences of this in my list of "random" numbers. That does'nt mean that you could devise a sure way to predict my next random number but you could probably make an educated guess based on the past list. For exmaple if I give out three numbers over 10000, I xould probably be thinking "hey that's not very random, I'd better give a low one next." and I'd say somthing ridiculously small such as 7. Yes when I'm asked to give out random numbers I "think" about it, even for a fraction of a second, come to the conclusion that "yeah" that number sounds random enough and then say it.
I don't think anyone could have the necessary consious abstraction to give out random numbers.... unless of course you're a total moron...maybe
is this a major breakthrough in astro physics or just a slight modifictaion in semantics?
Wow, that's the second /. story concerning scientology in a few weeks. They seem very present on the Internet going to some lengths being even more present. I don't have the impression that other 'religions' are as technologically orientated as this. Thoughts?