This happened to me around christmas time when I bought windows 8 (download from Microsoft) to upgrade Windows 7 Home edition (premium, not OEM). Ended up chatting to a guy in India who said that it couldn't be fixed until after the new year, because everyone was currently on holiday. The only thing he could do for me was to refund my money, and so I'm back on windows 7.
Well, about a year ago I was working in a games company (~120 employees) that had no female developers, artists, or producers. In total there were three female employees: the office manager, the HR manager, and the cleaner. Over the seven years I worked there, we hired 3 women, but they'd all leave after about six months... possibly as a result of having 50+ horny games devs constantly trying to hit on them (in fairness, they may have left due to other reasons, but I doubt it helped much). It's sad to say, but in the games industry there are a large number of immature men (boys is a more accurate decsription), who think that women are nothing more than boobs on legs. They often act creepily around them, sending them unwanted valentines cards, hanging around their desks like bad smells, etc, etc. In short, these people just don't know how to interact properly in civilised society, especially around women.
I'm now working in a film VFX company, and the difference is night and day. On the software teams, about 20% of the employees are female, and on the art teams, it's about 50%. The female software devs aren't for show either, they are more than capable of holding their own when it comes to C++/SIMD/GPU/Graphics coding, and it's actually been a really refreshing change from the games industry! Really though, the difference between the two comes down to one thing only. In VFX, women are treated with the respect. In Games, they're often treated as the office oddity.
I'm actually inclined to agree. I'd rather NK launch an attack now, at a point in time when their previous yields have been in 1 and 7 kilotonnes, rather than later when they may in a position to deliver a 20Kt Nagasaki sized yield (which presumably, would require further R&D on their ICBMs, not to mention the bombs themselves). It's worth remembering that the first bombs tested by the US, UK, and russia were all static tests (by neccsesity), and that it was only after the first few tests that dropping a bomb from a plane was possible, and much later still that mounting them on warheads was possible.
Due to the 'work' of Dr A. Q. Khan, we have a pretty good idea of what nuclear technology they have at their disposal, as well as the exact capabilities of the missile designs he borrowed from china & the USSR. Short of some large unknown uranium deposits in North Korea itself, we also have a pretty good idea of how much fissile material they have available (One would assume we'd notice the huge scars on the landscape caused by uranium mining, so I'm assuming that they don't have significant deposits). It should therefore be possible to determine the maximum theoretical yield of a bomb in the future, and give us a pretty good idea of what they may be capable of now. I'm guessing that a nuclear attack on SK is the only realistic chance the NK has of being able to do any serious damage, since one would assume that the longer the distance the missiles travel, the more chance there is that it would be knocked out by an anti-missile missile.
This does of course raise a few questions. Firstly, what is the success rate of the ABM missiles? Have they improved since the fairly dismal (estimated) 10% success rate in the first gulf war? Would they actually be good enough to prevent an attack on SK? What would be the required density of deployment around NK to be able to provide complete safety to all surrounding countries? Secondly, if NK were going to launch a missile, is the intelligence gathering good enough to be able to identify a long range missile with enough time to make a pre-emptive strike? Going by some of the build up to NK's longer range tests, it would appear that there should be enough time. Going by there shorter range tests, the answer would appear to be no. Thirdly, if the intelligence services have been watching NK for some time, do they know where those nuclear device(s) are currently located, and is there anything they can do to knock them out now?
I was against the 'pre-emptive' rhetoric that led to the invasions of afghanistan and iraq, but frankly, if you're going to declare war, and then threaten the use of nuclear weapons, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned. If the US, china, or russia find themselves in a position to launch an effective pre-emptive strike against NK, I actually find myself leaning towards the notion that they should probably do so. It would seem to be the safer option than trying to knock a missile out of the sky.....
So, I'll answer the question with "Nah! They're doing fine!" just to be Troll.
Everytime I read any connectivity spec regarding apple products, these days it always bangs on about thunderbolts and lightning. I find that very very frightening.
No. He developed the equation E=mc^2. He was also persuaded by Leó Szilárd to help write a letter to Roosevelt that warned that the Nazi's could be close to developing the atomic bomb, and that the USA should invest money to develop their own, but he himself played no part in the actual development (because he was a pacifist). At the time of writing the letter, he thought he was doing something that would help to bring peace, because if the Nazi's had the bomb, the USA and it's allies would have no response. After the fall of Nazi Germany, he saw no need for the bomb anymore, and was aghast that development continued. He actively campaigned to stop the bomb being dropped on Japan, and was later to say that writing the letter was the biggest mistake of his life (because had he not written the letter, the USA would not have had it available at the end of WW2).
Well, I live in the UK and in the last year we've had http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20415689>this and this as the two biggest church news stories of the year. Whilst the majority think that the church *should* move with the times, and should allow women bishops, and should allow gay people into the church. The church (of england) as an organisation, still [b]actively discriminates[/b] against women and gay people. They have finally allowed gay clergy, it comes with the caveat that they must remain celibate (which is not equality in any sense of the word). When I see women bishops in the Church of England, a female pope in the vatican, and gay people openly welcomed into the church, will be the day that I stop pointing out the bigotry that exists within Christianity.
No, the rendered images will consume the most storage. The textures will all be procedural, and geometry data doesn't actually consume as much as you might think (since most of it will be static, and a large amount will be procedural). Version control repositories (to put it in programmer friendly terms) for the asset revisions may be quite a bit resource hog. 20Gb is extremely optimistic for uncompressed open exr's.
The images will be OpenEXR, with 16bit floats per colour channel, uncompressed. RGB is a bit optimistic, it's more likely to be RGBA+depth. Typical film footage is a 2k image, or slightly above 1080p.
Exactly. The response to a tragic incident in NASCAR, from those involved with NASCAR, is unlikely to be: "To make NASCAR safer, we must add more cars on track".
If you paint a 2D picture, it's much easier to use 3 dimensions (because it allows you to take your pen off the page, angle your brush, paint on both sides, etc). Etch-a-sketch is a system for drawing 2D images using 2D dimensional mathematics, and it sucks. By moving a dimension higher, the act of drawing the image is simplified, but the maths becomes more complicated. What is true for 2D, is also true for 3D. So using 4D mathematics to draw 3D images gives you much more control than doing everything with 3D mathematics only. Time isn't really considered a 'dimension' as such (because you may have multiple time values), but if it was, then it would be the 5th dimension. Although I've been modded funny above, it's actually a pretty accurate description of the process of developing 3D apps.
We all start out designing nice tools for 3D modelling, with sane interfaces, and straight forward paradigms. After a while, we realise that all 3D surfaces need to be manipulated in 4 spatial dimensions (5 if you include time), before being projected back through 3D, and then once more into 2D. A while later, we also find out that you need 720 degrees to do a full rotation, and that 360 degrees is merely a reflection through the imaginary plane. A while later still, we all meet up in a basement in Siggraph to see how every else did it, and realise that everyone else has simply given up trying to do anything better. After all of that, we normally decide that the best thing to do is to provide the users with an experience not unlike regedit, before we all sod off down the pub.
PhysX did take off, and it's still in use all over the place today (It's a very nice SDK to work with). The ageia cards failed as a concept, not because the hardware was bad, but because people wanted better quality simulations, rather than a million boxes in simulation. Arguably, the failure of the ageia cards helped to drive the development of OpenCL & Cuda, and that in my opinion is a very good thing.
Slashdot Mirror
This happened to me around christmas time when I bought windows 8 (download from Microsoft) to upgrade Windows 7 Home edition (premium, not OEM). Ended up chatting to a guy in India who said that it couldn't be fixed until after the new year, because everyone was currently on holiday. The only thing he could do for me was to refund my money, and so I'm back on windows 7.
Is AOL one of them?
All gone a bit mad for Sylvester McCoy's Doctor Who?
Well, about a year ago I was working in a games company (~120 employees) that had no female developers, artists, or producers. In total there were three female employees: the office manager, the HR manager, and the cleaner. Over the seven years I worked there, we hired 3 women, but they'd all leave after about six months... possibly as a result of having 50+ horny games devs constantly trying to hit on them (in fairness, they may have left due to other reasons, but I doubt it helped much). It's sad to say, but in the games industry there are a large number of immature men (boys is a more accurate decsription), who think that women are nothing more than boobs on legs. They often act creepily around them, sending them unwanted valentines cards, hanging around their desks like bad smells, etc, etc. In short, these people just don't know how to interact properly in civilised society, especially around women.
I'm now working in a film VFX company, and the difference is night and day. On the software teams, about 20% of the employees are female, and on the art teams, it's about 50%. The female software devs aren't for show either, they are more than capable of holding their own when it comes to C++/SIMD/GPU/Graphics coding, and it's actually been a really refreshing change from the games industry! Really though, the difference between the two comes down to one thing only. In VFX, women are treated with the respect. In Games, they're often treated as the office oddity.
+ Ireland, + Malta.
I'm actually inclined to agree. I'd rather NK launch an attack now, at a point in time when their previous yields have been in 1 and 7 kilotonnes, rather than later when they may in a position to deliver a 20Kt Nagasaki sized yield (which presumably, would require further R&D on their ICBMs, not to mention the bombs themselves). It's worth remembering that the first bombs tested by the US, UK, and russia were all static tests (by neccsesity), and that it was only after the first few tests that dropping a bomb from a plane was possible, and much later still that mounting them on warheads was possible.
Due to the 'work' of Dr A. Q. Khan, we have a pretty good idea of what nuclear technology they have at their disposal, as well as the exact capabilities of the missile designs he borrowed from china & the USSR. Short of some large unknown uranium deposits in North Korea itself, we also have a pretty good idea of how much fissile material they have available (One would assume we'd notice the huge scars on the landscape caused by uranium mining, so I'm assuming that they don't have significant deposits). It should therefore be possible to determine the maximum theoretical yield of a bomb in the future, and give us a pretty good idea of what they may be capable of now. I'm guessing that a nuclear attack on SK is the only realistic chance the NK has of being able to do any serious damage, since one would assume that the longer the distance the missiles travel, the more chance there is that it would be knocked out by an anti-missile missile.
This does of course raise a few questions. Firstly, what is the success rate of the ABM missiles? Have they improved since the fairly dismal (estimated) 10% success rate in the first gulf war? Would they actually be good enough to prevent an attack on SK? What would be the required density of deployment around NK to be able to provide complete safety to all surrounding countries? Secondly, if NK were going to launch a missile, is the intelligence gathering good enough to be able to identify a long range missile with enough time to make a pre-emptive strike? Going by some of the build up to NK's longer range tests, it would appear that there should be enough time. Going by there shorter range tests, the answer would appear to be no. Thirdly, if the intelligence services have been watching NK for some time, do they know where those nuclear device(s) are currently located, and is there anything they can do to knock them out now?
I was against the 'pre-emptive' rhetoric that led to the invasions of afghanistan and iraq, but frankly, if you're going to declare war, and then threaten the use of nuclear weapons, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned. If the US, china, or russia find themselves in a position to launch an effective pre-emptive strike against NK, I actually find myself leaning towards the notion that they should probably do so. It would seem to be the safer option than trying to knock a missile out of the sky.....
Of course, reading the article may have helped..... (Thought it sounded familiar)
A is for Jeri Ellsworth?
Buy a pay-as-you-go phone with cash, they can still track you, but they won't know who they are tracking.
So, I'll answer the question with "Nah! They're doing fine!" just to be Troll.
Everytime I read any connectivity spec regarding apple products, these days it always bangs on about thunderbolts and lightning. I find that very very frightening.
No. He developed the equation E=mc^2. He was also persuaded by Leó Szilárd to help write a letter to Roosevelt that warned that the Nazi's could be close to developing the atomic bomb, and that the USA should invest money to develop their own, but he himself played no part in the actual development (because he was a pacifist). At the time of writing the letter, he thought he was doing something that would help to bring peace, because if the Nazi's had the bomb, the USA and it's allies would have no response. After the fall of Nazi Germany, he saw no need for the bomb anymore, and was aghast that development continued. He actively campaigned to stop the bomb being dropped on Japan, and was later to say that writing the letter was the biggest mistake of his life (because had he not written the letter, the USA would not have had it available at the end of WW2).
Links screwed up: link1 link2
Well, I live in the UK and in the last year we've had http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20415689>this and this as the two biggest church news stories of the year. Whilst the majority think that the church *should* move with the times, and should allow women bishops, and should allow gay people into the church. The church (of england) as an organisation, still [b]actively discriminates[/b] against women and gay people. They have finally allowed gay clergy, it comes with the caveat that they must remain celibate (which is not equality in any sense of the word). When I see women bishops in the Church of England, a female pope in the vatican, and gay people openly welcomed into the church, will be the day that I stop pointing out the bigotry that exists within Christianity.
No, the rendered images will consume the most storage. The textures will all be procedural, and geometry data doesn't actually consume as much as you might think (since most of it will be static, and a large amount will be procedural). Version control repositories (to put it in programmer friendly terms) for the asset revisions may be quite a bit resource hog. 20Gb is extremely optimistic for uncompressed open exr's.
The images will be OpenEXR, with 16bit floats per colour channel, uncompressed. RGB is a bit optimistic, it's more likely to be RGBA+depth. Typical film footage is a 2k image, or slightly above 1080p.
The other one is called BZ flag.
Exactly. The response to a tragic incident in NASCAR, from those involved with NASCAR, is unlikely to be: "To make NASCAR safer, we must add more cars on track".
I'd argue that many of the new features of C++ are there to work around flaws in the design of STL, rather than flaws in the actual language itself.
If you paint a 2D picture, it's much easier to use 3 dimensions (because it allows you to take your pen off the page, angle your brush, paint on both sides, etc). Etch-a-sketch is a system for drawing 2D images using 2D dimensional mathematics, and it sucks. By moving a dimension higher, the act of drawing the image is simplified, but the maths becomes more complicated. What is true for 2D, is also true for 3D. So using 4D mathematics to draw 3D images gives you much more control than doing everything with 3D mathematics only. Time isn't really considered a 'dimension' as such (because you may have multiple time values), but if it was, then it would be the 5th dimension. Although I've been modded funny above, it's actually a pretty accurate description of the process of developing 3D apps.
We all start out designing nice tools for 3D modelling, with sane interfaces, and straight forward paradigms. After a while, we realise that all 3D surfaces need to be manipulated in 4 spatial dimensions (5 if you include time), before being projected back through 3D, and then once more into 2D. A while later, we also find out that you need 720 degrees to do a full rotation, and that 360 degrees is merely a reflection through the imaginary plane. A while later still, we all meet up in a basement in Siggraph to see how every else did it, and realise that everyone else has simply given up trying to do anything better. After all of that, we normally decide that the best thing to do is to provide the users with an experience not unlike regedit, before we all sod off down the pub.
This might be solved if we move everything to the cloud
Just make sure Zynga isn't in charge of the servers.
So which app replaced his rice cooker?
Like most IT professionals, he's replaced food preparation, with coffee and take away pizza.
As electronic dogs get older, they generate more static, which makes their hair stand up a bit more...
Think about future games being natively written with 8 cores in mind.
Because game devs haven't spent the last 7 years writing games natively for 6 cores?
PhysX did take off, and it's still in use all over the place today (It's a very nice SDK to work with). The ageia cards failed as a concept, not because the hardware was bad, but because people wanted better quality simulations, rather than a million boxes in simulation. Arguably, the failure of the ageia cards helped to drive the development of OpenCL & Cuda, and that in my opinion is a very good thing.