Oddly enough, non-geeks seem to love video conferencing. We tend not to care much about seeing a person, but lots of grandparents of the world consider to be really great.
I think geeks are more interested in what a person has to say. The mundanes love all the non-lingual communication with body language, and seeing people smile and stuff. I don't really understand it, but it is very common.
People play multiplayer games on their cellphones?!
Is this guy not a tech writer or am I just hopelessly lost? The most exciting thing I've heard done on a Smartphone is Skype.
Yes, some people play multiplayer games on their cell phones. As the technology improves, and makes a wider range of multiplayer games easy an impressive, I'm sure it'll become more common. The cell phone is becoming a more ubiquitous platform for applications than the PC, which means that people have come up with all sorts of uses for them, and will continue to push the envelope with new ideas.
And, Skype is one of the things people commonly use for video conferencing.
like others said, using a digital map is somewhat substantial evidence that the crime was premeditated.
Unless I print out a map to my buddies house, go to his party, get drunk, and drunkenly grab his neighbor's lawn gnome on my way home.
It would be stupid of me. It would merit punishment for stealing a lawn gnome. But, why in the hell would it make sense for me to get a much harsher sentence than they guy in front of me who took a lawn gnome, but knew the area well enough that he didn't need to bring a map. Or the guy behind me who took a lawn gnome, but used a hand-drawn map to get to the party instead of a map from the internet?
Whoever came up with this needs to stop making laws.
Python is much easier to write and much more maintainable than a batch script. Unfortunately it can be unfeasible to require this dependency on Windows machines.
You can just make an exe out of a python script which collects the runtime and all dependencies into a single file. I'd want to do that before resorting to invoking VB. I guess if it is an all-MS shop locked in some sort of hellish time vortex (which is consistent with the OP asking about batch files) then they may keep enough Eye of Newt and pentagrams handy to make VB seem like a convenient option.
Everyone gets up on Intel integrated GPUs because they are slow, but they are looking at it from a gamer perspective. Yes, they suck ass for games, however that is NOT what they are for. Their intended purpose is to be cheap solutions for basic video, including things like Aero. This they do quite well. A modern Intel GMA does a fine job of this. They are also extremely low power, especially new newest ones that you find right on the Core i5 line in laptops.
Funny, at this point, I thought the purpose of Intel graphics was to try and make sure that OpenCL never becomes a viable solution. Seriously, Intel does everything in their power to make their terrible graphics chips universal. They've done some pretty shady dealing over the years to try and make it happen. At this point, they have even put their GPU's right on the CPU's of their current generation laptop chips. Apple and nVidia had to come up with dual-GPU solutions that can't be as power efficient as an Intel-only solution because they have to leave the Intel GPU also running and burning power. Intel is trying to sue nVidia out of the integrated chipset market. Examples go on and on.
Why? It isn't like Intel makes all that much money on their GPU's. It's nothing to sneeze at. Intel makes more money in a year on GPU's than I'll probably make in a lifetime, but that's peanuts on the scale of Intel. It's also not enough cash to justify the effort. But, if you look at it as a strategic move to make sure that the average consumer will never have a system that can run GPGPU code out of the box, it starts to make a little more sense. Intel is trying to compete on sheer terribleness of their GPU's, because if the average consumer has an nVidia integrated GPU in their chipset, then developers will bother to learn how to take advantage of GPU computing, which will marginalize Intel's importance.
I know it sounds kind of like a crazy conspiracy theory, but after the last several years of Intel-watching, it really does seem like quietly strangling GPGPU is a serious strategic goal for Intel.
If they had used RTG it could have functioned through the winter.
But, if the mass of the RTG's meant removing sensors in order to hit mass and volume budgets, there wouldn't have been any reason to care if it survived the winter. The MER's were done with basically the same launcher as Sojourner, so the fact that they accomplished as much as they did compared to Sojourner is truly amazing, IMO. Unfortunately, it's all about tradeoffs. Hopefully, Mars gets some serious attention and we can deploy some serious long duration hardware on the surface. Without major budget consideration, that just can't happen by itself.
Although I disagree with most of what that company does, their MPEG licensing fee is on the order of $2 per manufactured device to use their technology. This isn't really extortion. HDMI is 4 cents per device, but you're required to maintain a $10,000 license fee on top of that. I think gross abuse would be more on the order of $50/device.
If Vinny and Guido show up at your business with a baseball bat and remark that you have really unbroken knees, and it would be a shame if anything happened to them, it doesn't really matter if they demand $2 or $50. Once they show up at your business, willing to make threats about how they need a cut of the sales of a business that they may not have contributed anything to, they have gone too far. MPEG-LA are, at this point, basically operating under exactly the same business model as Mafia running a protection racket. They just invested enough in politics to make their game somehow legal.
Desserts with something fresh out of the oven and ice cream on top are similar- wait even 5 minutes and the melting ice cream hurts the taste and texture noticeably. Now, if they were talking about typical dishes without built-in temperature differences, I might agree with you.
Crispy things with a sauce on top often get soggy after a while. The more time you spend not eating it, the more likely that it will be soggy by the time you finally get around to it.
They are most likely using donated machines, something this charity is something of a "specialist" in...
Regardless, the difficulty in getting the shipping container and everything else so outweighs the difficulty of getting a more practical system that a 1% boost in the cost of the setup can literally provide a 10x improvement in performance. Even if they are trying to make use of donated equipment, they should still be able to get donated core2 and better systems at a greater rate than they get donated shipping containers...
You realise that the comparison is against a PS3, right?
Besides, the Mac is a fairly open platform. You can get kernel code and Webkit code under a genuine open source license. Good luck getting Windows NT kernel code and IE rendering engine as open source projects. Apple's developer tools are built around gcc, and the default shell is bash. Apple provides X11 support out of the box, so you can build an app for a Mac, and trivially move it to another platform if you choose to rely only on open standards.
Apple as a company may be psychotic, but I don't know why people insist the Mac is so hilariously closed.
Could we perhaps fight software patents by getting completely ridiculous and untenable patents accepted and afterwards make this public? -- This could have the desired effect but is probably never going to happen, because the whole patenting process is a bit expensive.:(
In America, we have a patent on a method of swinging on a swing. It hasn't caused reform. Other highlights include a patent on a method for making a sandwich, and a patent on rotating a card in a card game related to Magic: The Gathering. It's possible the German public would be more outraged when absurd patents came to light, but in America it has just sort of become accepted.
Because I've heard the exact same thing from people who actually believe it and have done it at their job. It is a comment made by a young, inexperienced person (I can't call them an administrator) who doesn't have the experience to understand the problems with doing this.
I hesitate to admit it, because I'm worried people will assume that I'm like the joking OP, but there actually have been occasions where I decided to do a custom kernel for a production box. Two occasions. And, one of them was actually for "maximum performance."
Of course, that was on 486-class hardware sued in an embedded application that had an absurdly small amount of RAM. I figured out what hardware was in the system, and built a kernel with only enough drivers to run what was needed for our application. I even disabled kernel loadable module support, and made everything built-in. The result was that I saved something like a half a Megabyte of RAM, or something similarly tiny. But, it was just enough to make everything work. With a stock kernel, the machine was incapable of playing our MP3's in real time - it started swapping itself shitless. With the custom kernel, it worked just fine.
The conservative sysadmin in me still feels a little dirty about that box, even though it was many years ago. The secret hax0r in me still feels l33t for demonstrating an ability to make any box serve my purpose, no matter how small.
Even faster than current generation discrete GPUs? I think not.
Not for most things, but for some specific GPGPU type stuff where you want to shuffle data between the CPU and the GPU, yes. Much, much faster. For exactly the same reasons that we no longer have off-chip FPU's. A modern separately socketed FPU could have massive performance. It could have its own cooling system, so you could use a ton of power just on the FPU. OTOH, you would still need to get data back and forth to the main CPU, so it makes more sense to have a slightly more modest FPU right on the chip for most things.
"Brick and Mortar" stores aren't going anywhere anytime soon. While there are many people who make almost all their purchases from online retailers, I find that most people would rather go to a B&M store for a purchase.
All of my friends and relatives make their purchases at B&M stores because they don't have to wait or pay for shipping, they can physically "preview" their purchase, they can pay in cash instead of a paying with a credit/debit card, and it's far easier to make a return on an item. The only reason I've known them to make an online purchase is for a SIGNIFICANT discount (books, hardware, etc.), though, many B&M stores have become very competitive with online retailers.
NOTE: I am referring to the purchase of physical items in my comment. Most of my friends make software purchases online (i.e. Steam).
I'd say it's not just that certain people are more attracted to physical stores, as much as certain products attract people to physical stores. There is a lot of stuff that i will order online. Software, as you mentioned, is a good example. RAM and CPU's are also another great example. I don't really care about the physicality of a CPU. All CPU's compatible with my motherboard will be roughly the same size and weight. Same durability of the pins. Even the most extreme l33t case modder is probably not using a see-though heat sink, so the aesthetics of the CPU's appearance will never be important. Consequently, I have no real reason to seek out a physical store for that type of purchase. It's a physical product, but there's no aspect of the physicality that will influence my purchasing decision. So, ordering from newegg saves me a trip, and probably a few dollars.
In some cases, the heat sink to go on that CPU is a completely different story. If I'm building a special small form factor system, then I may want to hold up the cooler to the case and make sure I have enough room. Maybe double check that the cable for the fan power is long enough to route where I need to plug it in, etc. In that case, I'd almost certainly prefer to buy it in a physical store. Physical store saves me the hassle of returning to newegg, maybe ordering the wrong thing a second time, etc.
A phone is a thing where physicality is hugely important. Sure, you can read reviews and spec sheets. You could build an accurately sized model of the phone to test putting it in your pocket, and weight it to the correct mass. But, it's really easy and convenient to hold the phone, look at it, play with it, and see if it is something you want to look at and lug around all day.
I ordered my n900 from newegg, and it was terrifying. Was I going to like the keyboard? the screen? Would it really be convenient in my pocket? I hope the unlocked phone - direct sales model catches on, but the big players like nokia will really need to push themselves into general retail stores in order to pull it off.
Where are these technical schools that the economists refer to?
The simple fact of the matter is that after decades of short sighted budget cuts, the US education system is geared for college prep, whether you want to go or not. The vocational classes have been slowly cut out of the system, usually perceived as expendable programs. School administrators realized long ago that they can't improve the ranking of their school by having the best automotive class - the only thing that counts is English & Math scores, so why bother fund anything else?
To the extent that these technical schools exist, it's almost considered a terrible shame to attend them. I attended community colleges in my spare time to pick up Russian and Japanese. If it ever comes up in conversation that I studied at a community college while having the audacity to have a job so that I could eat, instead of only being a full time student at a four year school, a lot of people really look down on me. WTF?! I can muddle my way through speaking five languages. You know a half dozen words of Spanish. And, I'm the one who gets looked down on for not being academic enough?
I've long said that we should have really respected, rigorous vocational programming schools in America. A lot of people want to bastardize a Computer Science curriculum into being a vocational programming degree because they don't understand what CS actually is. But, the concept of a serious, competetive vocational school that teaches useful job skills, and isn't a shitty mill like ITT Tech, is so foreign to the American educational market that it would be really hard to get something like that off the ground. Consequently, there are CS graduates who have never heard of assembly, have no idea how Java actually works, and have respected four year degrees.
Aside from all that, I think the policy wonks who want less education are dangerously wrong. We keep getting told that America needs to be able to compete in the 21st century Knowledge Economy in order to make up for the destruction of our industrial base. (We can't get the back now without crushing our economy, no matter how badly we educate our people.) In order to do that, we as a society need... Knowledge. America is already a horribly ignorant society compared to other first world nations. We actually need massive investments in education to try and get more people to actually give a damn about learning. Investments in primary education to make teaching a job that isn't an inherent sacrifice. Investments in higher education so that more people can go without having to bury themselves in personal debt. The policy wonks are basically saying that a select group of elites (themselves) should basically be the only ones with enough education to understand history and the implications of public policy decisions, so that they can do whatever they want, and rob the country blind without getting caught because they deserve it as the ruling class.
We need to make education better, not give up on it. Vaguely related to their point: If stricter academic standards mean a lower % of people graduate, that wouldn't bother me in the slightest.
If you're doing that, you're doing it wrong. What you should be doing is adding the following to about:config 'config.trim_on_minimize="true"' If you're still having trouble then it's almost certainly not Firefox. But didn't we settle the fact that Firefox performs better than the competition on memory utilization quite some time ago? I see people making these sorts of trollish remarks, but last time I checked the data didn't support the suggestion.
That option doesn't even exist by default. You literally have to *add* the setting to the config.
It only applies to Windows.
And it effects swap behavior, not total amount of memory used.
If that's the best solution available... Sure, I'm doing it wrong. What exactly am I doing wrong? Trying to use it.
The DMCA safe harbor provision was intended for exactly this case.
Yeah, that certainly seems to be the case, and I've never heard such an alternate reading being seriously considered previously, so it would seem like a matter of fairly established case law that *should* be fairly difficult to cast aside at this point.
And for their complaint about it being too great a burden... Well, they certainly aren't obliged to give a damn about it. They choose to. If you want to bring a civil action against somebody for the harm they have caused you, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you be aware of the harm. I mean, imagine if there were lawyers following everybody but me around every day, and every time somebody said something mean behind my back, they got sued for harassment without my having to be aware of it or do anything at all. Quote me in conversation without expressed permission: copyright lawsuit. Happen to be going down the same street as me: stalking. I'd just get checks delivered to me every day for all the lawsuits from all the things people ever said about me. That's basically what Big Media wants for themselves.
Where the fuck did MPEG 7 come from? I refuse to accept that I, sitting here in front of my 4 screens with a laser mouse, grazing the internet for Roomba cat videos, have never heard of such a thing.
Dude, you don't even want to know how much your mind is going to be blown when you find out that there is an MPEG-21 already. Yeah, really.
Only one problem. No Y encoded in the data stream, so it has to be interpolated.
In some cases, it could actually be useful. While most cameras shoot with RGB sensors, most video compression is in some variation of YUV (1) color space. If you shoot on something like a Red One (2) camera, you get a RAW format with more than 8 bits (3) of color information. If you have a sensible post pipeline, you can go to YUV for your distribution format and have plenty of color data to completely fill out the 8 bit YUV data. YUV and RGB don't have identical color reproduction and gamut, so you can wind up with the odd situation where you shot on an RGB sensor, and you decimated to 8 bit data for distribution, but a normal 8 bit RGB display can't quite show every color that you have.
I wouldn't expect brick-shittingly amazing results on such a system. I'd need to see it in person and see a measured gamut chart to have any particular opinion on this particular display, but I can't dismiss the concept out of hand.
(1) : Y in YUV isn't Yellow, it's Luma. Still, the imperfect conversion between YUV and RGB means that a fourth primary could make it possible to more accurately show YUV data on an RGBY display.
(2) : "Red" is a brand name. "Red" in the name of the camera doesn't specifically imply any relationship to RGB color space or anything like that. The camera does use a standard RGB Bayer pattern sensor, though.
(3) : 8 bit color in this context is always "per component" rather than "per pixel" and doesn't imply old school 256 total colors palleted mode. In a X11 config file for example, this would be referred to as 24 bit color. Video guys are more interested in per-component colors because they always do operations on components. When you are writing misc. GUI software, you are generally more concerned with bits per-pixel because you would never care about how much space it takes to upload a fraction of a pixel to a video card since you have to upload a full pixel to display it.
(4) : This footnote doesn't correspond to anything in the text. After all that, I'm now just in the habit of writing footnotes.
I have four cores. I run an IDE and an AppServer at all times, which uses up at least two cores. Then there is my bit-torrent app and...
Seems like you can easily use all those cores.
Stop using Azureus for your bit torrent client, and downloading a file will no longer require a fill core with of CPU time.
Or, if you are using a sane torrent client, what the hell kind of internet connection are you using that you are still CPU bound on a file transfer?!?!
why do you need 3 keys for your girlfriend's place? You have 3 girlfriends?
* The lock on the front door * The lock on her bedroom door * The lock on her chastity belt
I was thinking more like
* The key for the lock on the door to the Robot Parts Supply Room * The key for the ignition to activate the "Girlfriend" * The key that takes the OP to The Best Prom Ever!
H.264 is not "closed source", it's an open standard with open source encoders (famous x264, everything points to it being the best quality encoder available anywhere) and decoders (libavcodec), it's just that a bazillion companies have patents that cover every corner of video coding. It might be "unfree", but it's certainly not "closed source" or "closed standard" or "proprietary".
IP is one of those areas where the loudest voices in the arguments always seem to be incapable of actually saying anything.
Which is a shame, because there is a lot of real reason to be interested in these issues, and very concerned about them. Sadly, it's much easier to ramble on about the way you assume the world works than it is to take a little time and understand what's actually happening.
Would you prefer "Remote Access Desktop Professional Ultimate - Browser Edition 9 (SP4)"
Given all the use of XML and Javascript, and how some of us still consider normal client apps to be a valid solution to some problems, I would propose a slightly different name which would be extremely useful and self-descriptive...
Internetwork Remote Access -- Professional Edition
Slashdot Mirror
Oddly enough, non-geeks seem to love video conferencing. We tend not to care much about seeing a person, but lots of grandparents of the world consider to be really great.
I think geeks are more interested in what a person has to say. The mundanes love all the non-lingual communication with body language, and seeing people smile and stuff. I don't really understand it, but it is very common.
Yes, some people play multiplayer games on their cell phones. As the technology improves, and makes a wider range of multiplayer games easy an impressive, I'm sure it'll become more common. The cell phone is becoming a more ubiquitous platform for applications than the PC, which means that people have come up with all sorts of uses for them, and will continue to push the envelope with new ideas.
And, Skype is one of the things people commonly use for video conferencing.
If the bandwidth is cheaper than a Senator, they'll do exactly that.
Unless I print out a map to my buddies house, go to his party, get drunk, and drunkenly grab his neighbor's lawn gnome on my way home.
It would be stupid of me. It would merit punishment for stealing a lawn gnome. But, why in the hell would it make sense for me to get a much harsher sentence than they guy in front of me who took a lawn gnome, but knew the area well enough that he didn't need to bring a map. Or the guy behind me who took a lawn gnome, but used a hand-drawn map to get to the party instead of a map from the internet?
Whoever came up with this needs to stop making laws.
You can just make an exe out of a python script which collects the runtime and all dependencies into a single file. I'd want to do that before resorting to invoking VB. I guess if it is an all-MS shop locked in some sort of hellish time vortex (which is consistent with the OP asking about batch files) then they may keep enough Eye of Newt and pentagrams handy to make VB seem like a convenient option.
Funny, at this point, I thought the purpose of Intel graphics was to try and make sure that OpenCL never becomes a viable solution. Seriously, Intel does everything in their power to make their terrible graphics chips universal. They've done some pretty shady dealing over the years to try and make it happen. At this point, they have even put their GPU's right on the CPU's of their current generation laptop chips. Apple and nVidia had to come up with dual-GPU solutions that can't be as power efficient as an Intel-only solution because they have to leave the Intel GPU also running and burning power. Intel is trying to sue nVidia out of the integrated chipset market. Examples go on and on.
Why? It isn't like Intel makes all that much money on their GPU's. It's nothing to sneeze at. Intel makes more money in a year on GPU's than I'll probably make in a lifetime, but that's peanuts on the scale of Intel. It's also not enough cash to justify the effort. But, if you look at it as a strategic move to make sure that the average consumer will never have a system that can run GPGPU code out of the box, it starts to make a little more sense. Intel is trying to compete on sheer terribleness of their GPU's, because if the average consumer has an nVidia integrated GPU in their chipset, then developers will bother to learn how to take advantage of GPU computing, which will marginalize Intel's importance.
I know it sounds kind of like a crazy conspiracy theory, but after the last several years of Intel-watching, it really does seem like quietly strangling GPGPU is a serious strategic goal for Intel.
Newton.
But, if the mass of the RTG's meant removing sensors in order to hit mass and volume budgets, there wouldn't have been any reason to care if it survived the winter. The MER's were done with basically the same launcher as Sojourner, so the fact that they accomplished as much as they did compared to Sojourner is truly amazing, IMO. Unfortunately, it's all about tradeoffs. Hopefully, Mars gets some serious attention and we can deploy some serious long duration hardware on the surface. Without major budget consideration, that just can't happen by itself.
If Vinny and Guido show up at your business with a baseball bat and remark that you have really unbroken knees, and it would be a shame if anything happened to them, it doesn't really matter if they demand $2 or $50. Once they show up at your business, willing to make threats about how they need a cut of the sales of a business that they may not have contributed anything to, they have gone too far. MPEG-LA are, at this point, basically operating under exactly the same business model as Mafia running a protection racket. They just invested enough in politics to make their game somehow legal.
Crispy things with a sauce on top often get soggy after a while. The more time you spend not eating it, the more likely that it will be soggy by the time you finally get around to it.
Regardless, the difficulty in getting the shipping container and everything else so outweighs the difficulty of getting a more practical system that a 1% boost in the cost of the setup can literally provide a 10x improvement in performance. Even if they are trying to make use of donated equipment, they should still be able to get donated core2 and better systems at a greater rate than they get donated shipping containers...
You realise that the comparison is against a PS3, right?
Besides, the Mac is a fairly open platform. You can get kernel code and Webkit code under a genuine open source license. Good luck getting Windows NT kernel code and IE rendering engine as open source projects. Apple's developer tools are built around gcc, and the default shell is bash. Apple provides X11 support out of the box, so you can build an app for a Mac, and trivially move it to another platform if you choose to rely only on open standards.
Apple as a company may be psychotic, but I don't know why people insist the Mac is so hilariously closed.
In America, we have a patent on a method of swinging on a swing. It hasn't caused reform. Other highlights include a patent on a method for making a sandwich, and a patent on rotating a card in a card game related to Magic: The Gathering. It's possible the German public would be more outraged when absurd patents came to light, but in America it has just sort of become accepted.
I hesitate to admit it, because I'm worried people will assume that I'm like the joking OP, but there actually have been occasions where I decided to do a custom kernel for a production box. Two occasions. And, one of them was actually for "maximum performance."
Of course, that was on 486-class hardware sued in an embedded application that had an absurdly small amount of RAM. I figured out what hardware was in the system, and built a kernel with only enough drivers to run what was needed for our application. I even disabled kernel loadable module support, and made everything built-in. The result was that I saved something like a half a Megabyte of RAM, or something similarly tiny. But, it was just enough to make everything work. With a stock kernel, the machine was incapable of playing our MP3's in real time - it started swapping itself shitless. With the custom kernel, it worked just fine.
The conservative sysadmin in me still feels a little dirty about that box, even though it was many years ago. The secret hax0r in me still feels l33t for demonstrating an ability to make any box serve my purpose, no matter how small.
Not for most things, but for some specific GPGPU type stuff where you want to shuffle data between the CPU and the GPU, yes. Much, much faster. For exactly the same reasons that we no longer have off-chip FPU's. A modern separately socketed FPU could have massive performance. It could have its own cooling system, so you could use a ton of power just on the FPU. OTOH, you would still need to get data back and forth to the main CPU, so it makes more sense to have a slightly more modest FPU right on the chip for most things.
I'd say it's not just that certain people are more attracted to physical stores, as much as certain products attract people to physical stores. There is a lot of stuff that i will order online. Software, as you mentioned, is a good example. RAM and CPU's are also another great example. I don't really care about the physicality of a CPU. All CPU's compatible with my motherboard will be roughly the same size and weight. Same durability of the pins. Even the most extreme l33t case modder is probably not using a see-though heat sink, so the aesthetics of the CPU's appearance will never be important. Consequently, I have no real reason to seek out a physical store for that type of purchase. It's a physical product, but there's no aspect of the physicality that will influence my purchasing decision. So, ordering from newegg saves me a trip, and probably a few dollars.
In some cases, the heat sink to go on that CPU is a completely different story. If I'm building a special small form factor system, then I may want to hold up the cooler to the case and make sure I have enough room. Maybe double check that the cable for the fan power is long enough to route where I need to plug it in, etc. In that case, I'd almost certainly prefer to buy it in a physical store. Physical store saves me the hassle of returning to newegg, maybe ordering the wrong thing a second time, etc.
A phone is a thing where physicality is hugely important. Sure, you can read reviews and spec sheets. You could build an accurately sized model of the phone to test putting it in your pocket, and weight it to the correct mass. But, it's really easy and convenient to hold the phone, look at it, play with it, and see if it is something you want to look at and lug around all day.
I ordered my n900 from newegg, and it was terrifying. Was I going to like the keyboard? the screen? Would it really be convenient in my pocket? I hope the unlocked phone - direct sales model catches on, but the big players like nokia will really need to push themselves into general retail stores in order to pull it off.
To the extent that these technical schools exist, it's almost considered a terrible shame to attend them. I attended community colleges in my spare time to pick up Russian and Japanese. If it ever comes up in conversation that I studied at a community college while having the audacity to have a job so that I could eat, instead of only being a full time student at a four year school, a lot of people really look down on me. WTF?! I can muddle my way through speaking five languages. You know a half dozen words of Spanish. And, I'm the one who gets looked down on for not being academic enough?
I've long said that we should have really respected, rigorous vocational programming schools in America. A lot of people want to bastardize a Computer Science curriculum into being a vocational programming degree because they don't understand what CS actually is. But, the concept of a serious, competetive vocational school that teaches useful job skills, and isn't a shitty mill like ITT Tech, is so foreign to the American educational market that it would be really hard to get something like that off the ground. Consequently, there are CS graduates who have never heard of assembly, have no idea how Java actually works, and have respected four year degrees.
Aside from all that, I think the policy wonks who want less education are dangerously wrong. We keep getting told that America needs to be able to compete in the 21st century Knowledge Economy in order to make up for the destruction of our industrial base. (We can't get the back now without crushing our economy, no matter how badly we educate our people.) In order to do that, we as a society need... Knowledge. America is already a horribly ignorant society compared to other first world nations. We actually need massive investments in education to try and get more people to actually give a damn about learning. Investments in primary education to make teaching a job that isn't an inherent sacrifice. Investments in higher education so that more people can go without having to bury themselves in personal debt. The policy wonks are basically saying that a select group of elites (themselves) should basically be the only ones with enough education to understand history and the implications of public policy decisions, so that they can do whatever they want, and rob the country blind without getting caught because they deserve it as the ruling class.
We need to make education better, not give up on it. Vaguely related to their point: If stricter academic standards mean a lower % of people graduate, that wouldn't bother me in the slightest.
That option doesn't even exist by default. You literally have to *add* the setting to the config.
It only applies to Windows.
And it effects swap behavior, not total amount of memory used.
If that's the best solution available... Sure, I'm doing it wrong. What exactly am I doing wrong? Trying to use it.
Yeah, that certainly seems to be the case, and I've never heard such an alternate reading being seriously considered previously, so it would seem like a matter of fairly established case law that *should* be fairly difficult to cast aside at this point.
And for their complaint about it being too great a burden... Well, they certainly aren't obliged to give a damn about it. They choose to. If you want to bring a civil action against somebody for the harm they have caused you, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that you be aware of the harm. I mean, imagine if there were lawyers following everybody but me around every day, and every time somebody said something mean behind my back, they got sued for harassment without my having to be aware of it or do anything at all. Quote me in conversation without expressed permission: copyright lawsuit. Happen to be going down the same street as me: stalking. I'd just get checks delivered to me every day for all the lawsuits from all the things people ever said about me. That's basically what Big Media wants for themselves.
Dude, you don't even want to know how much your mind is going to be blown when you find out that there is an MPEG-21 already. Yeah, really.
In some cases, it could actually be useful. While most cameras shoot with RGB sensors, most video compression is in some variation of YUV (1) color space. If you shoot on something like a Red One (2) camera, you get a RAW format with more than 8 bits (3) of color information. If you have a sensible post pipeline, you can go to YUV for your distribution format and have plenty of color data to completely fill out the 8 bit YUV data. YUV and RGB don't have identical color reproduction and gamut, so you can wind up with the odd situation where you shot on an RGB sensor, and you decimated to 8 bit data for distribution, but a normal 8 bit RGB display can't quite show every color that you have.
I wouldn't expect brick-shittingly amazing results on such a system. I'd need to see it in person and see a measured gamut chart to have any particular opinion on this particular display, but I can't dismiss the concept out of hand.
(1) : Y in YUV isn't Yellow, it's Luma. Still, the imperfect conversion between YUV and RGB means that a fourth primary could make it possible to more accurately show YUV data on an RGBY display.
(2) : "Red" is a brand name. "Red" in the name of the camera doesn't specifically imply any relationship to RGB color space or anything like that. The camera does use a standard RGB Bayer pattern sensor, though.
(3) : 8 bit color in this context is always "per component" rather than "per pixel" and doesn't imply old school 256 total colors palleted mode. In a X11 config file for example, this would be referred to as 24 bit color. Video guys are more interested in per-component colors because they always do operations on components. When you are writing misc. GUI software, you are generally more concerned with bits per-pixel because you would never care about how much space it takes to upload a fraction of a pixel to a video card since you have to upload a full pixel to display it.
(4) : This footnote doesn't correspond to anything in the text. After all that, I'm now just in the habit of writing footnotes.
Stop using Azureus for your bit torrent client, and downloading a file will no longer require a fill core with of CPU time.
Or, if you are using a sane torrent client, what the hell kind of internet connection are you using that you are still CPU bound on a file transfer?!?!
No, more like saying that an airplane crashed because of one faulty pilot.
Flying straight into a mountain isn't the yoke's fault, even if the pilot actually should have pushed it up instead of down.
I was thinking more like
* The key for the lock on the door to the Robot Parts Supply Room
* The key for the ignition to activate the "Girlfriend"
* The key that takes the OP to The Best Prom Ever!
IP is one of those areas where the loudest voices in the arguments always seem to be incapable of actually saying anything.
Which is a shame, because there is a lot of real reason to be interested in these issues, and very concerned about them. Sadly, it's much easier to ramble on about the way you assume the world works than it is to take a little time and understand what's actually happening.
Given all the use of XML and Javascript, and how some of us still consider normal client apps to be a valid solution to some problems, I would propose a slightly different name which would be extremely useful and self-descriptive...
Internetwork Remote Access -- Professional Edition
I RAPE.