As far as I'm concerned, recent CPUs and GPUs are no less of a technological achievment than, say, a Shuttle launch.
Not exactly the same kind of risk involved or the same type of experience -- one is a spectacle and the other is not:
To watch a launch of a vehicle breaking the bonds of earth's gravity to venture out into an inhospitable environment where those on board risk their lives is on a somewhat different scale than, say, pushing the power button on my desktop.
Things fail spectacularly in the silicon world, too.
Really? The same way they can in Space Exploration? Really?
Funny how you cite critical thinking and hold it up as a value when you, yourself, open with an ad hominem and then follow up with another one. You've mounted no argument whatsoever and simply stomped your feet calling your interlocutor names -- by your own conditional statement you are unfit to live.
Envisional’s business is built around unique, patented search technologies and a superb team of experienced analysts.
We use this powerful combination to help corporations protect themselves and their customers from fraud, fakes, piracy and online brand abuse.
You seriously can't be this obtuse -- really. The article is aimed at developers -- while it might not be of interest to you since, as you say, you are not a developer it will be of interest to many here who are developers or might be thinking about becoming developers. It's far from "nothing to see" for those who are developers as it describes one persons experience distributing his app through a particular venue.
Two factors are important: Build them large enough, so traffic flowing in has a chance to anticipate an open spot. And make people aware of how they work. Tell it on the radio, in TV spots and so on.
Exactly. These are two important points. Canada is also adopting the roundabout in some areas and the size is a real issue as many are so small that you might as well just put a 4-way stop or traffic lights in because the traffic just backs up in all four directions anyway -- the roundabout is too small to allow the traffic to keep flowing and merging. On the point of education, I received a flyer in the mail at the beginning of the year providing instructions on how to properly use a roundabout. You can see the website it pointed to here: http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettingaround/roundabouts.asp?OpenDocument&mode=1
The interesting thing for me was that I had been in England since 2000 and only returned back to my native Canada in 2010 to suddenly see roundabouts as part of the roadways. My first reaction was, "But almost nobody would have taken a driving test that would include roundabout protocol" -- this was painfully obvious when I saw the "seat of the pants" approach many took to coming upon a roundabout. I'm now back in England and actually kept the flyer I received to show to the locals here -- I have rarely seen such laughter upon reading a pamphlet.
I'm guessing, but I would wager roundabouts are cheaper to implement than the other traffic flow solutions -- the authorities like to talk about safety, improved traffic flow etc. but when you put in a new element on the roadways with minimal education and build it on an ineffective scale, then that makes me think that cost is the driving factor.
Yep. The difference today is that you can see the sharing going on -- and that, of course, is why the media companies then mobilized their wall of lawyers.
For an industry that's "going out of business" due to sharing, they sure as hell are taking a long time to die.
I was wondering why the submitter included the part "including Canadians". What was that supposed to mean? Why was it there? Like, it's in Europe but someone from America was there too! Moronic submitter.
Actually, its from the article source which is the CBC -- Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. It's just the local news agency pointing out that locals were involved in the experiment.
I can't even recall what class this was for, so I don't feel that I robbed myself of any learning.
Perhaps if you had actually done the work you would recall the class and also the material. I appreciate your honesty, but I really do you think you robbed yourself of some learning.
Hmm, maybe not, but they won two back to back in 92-93 -- not many clubs have one World Series win, let alone two back to back. Maybe you should have trash talked the Tokyo Samurai.
That sounds like he can't get cable, but there should be better DSL options available. Even SKY t.v. has a pretty good plan compared to that -- truly unlimited and 20 Mb download speed, my sister and brother-in-law have it and are quite happy with it for their purposes. Downside is that it's Rupert Murdoch's outfit. http://www.sky.com/shop/broadband-talk/
I just moved back to Canada after living the past 10 years in England -- when I first got there internet speeds, data rates, etc. were far behind what was available in Canada for a lot more money. 10 years later and I return to find that Canada seems like some sort of internet backwater with these severely limiting caps and astronomical prices -- the near monopolies have gamed the system well over the past 10 years. I paid the equivalent of $30 a month for a 10 meg down/1 meg up line with no total data cap. You would get shaped down to 3 meg download speed for 4 hours if you moved more than a couple of gigs over a 4 hour period which I found to be a fair system -- but that was it -- not protocol throttling, no monthly caps plus charges, etc. And that was the lowest tier package available -- the higher packages included 50 meg down with much more higher data movement before being temporarily shaped. And I always got my maximum line speed when it should have been available -- no doubt not everyone had perfect service, but I can only say that for myself it was a rock solid and reliable line.
In short, Canadians have been hosed severely over the last 10 years when it comes to internet services -- and we just got more hosed.
That array was added to a pre-stretched sheet of rubber, which was then itself encapsulated inside another piece of rubber, this one being bio-compatible and transparent.
From my perspective, Mythbusters seems pretty anti-science.
Perhaps it's your perspective that is skewed then:
Perhaps you should consider that adding in a placard reading "Warning: Science Content" is a light hearted way to present science content to those who would otherwise turn away at that point. Perhaps its overly pedantic to read the sign as literal warning that one ought to be on guard for what is to follow. Perhaps your perspective lacks any sense of humour, wit or charitable interpretation.
Ration rules were just an example. 4th Ed is streamlined in such a way that we're actually playing the game more than we are looking up rules. It's not about having to read, I've read it. It's about being tied up in details everytime something remotely unordinary props up.
You're not describing my experiences playing tabletop D&D using 1st ed. rules -- that's for sure:
More time looking up rules than playing? Never had that experience. Sure, things have popped up from time to time that required a minute or two leafing through a text, but more time doing that than playing? -- has never happened to me.
Being tied up in detail everytime something remotely unordinary happens? Again, can't say I've had that experience -- yes, sometimes unordinary situations require a reference or a minute or two of thought by the DM, but not all that often and not when something only somewhat out of the norm occurs.
These things are part of the process of playing -- they're not necessarily antithetical to "play."
Slashdot Mirror
As far as I'm concerned, recent CPUs and GPUs are no less of a technological achievment than, say, a Shuttle launch.
Not exactly the same kind of risk involved or the same type of experience -- one is a spectacle and the other is not:
To watch a launch of a vehicle breaking the bonds of earth's gravity to venture out into an inhospitable environment where those on board risk their lives is on a somewhat different scale than, say, pushing the power button on my desktop.
Things fail spectacularly in the silicon world, too.
Really? The same way they can in Space Exploration? Really?
Funny how you cite critical thinking and hold it up as a value when you, yourself, open with an ad hominem and then follow up with another one. You've mounted no argument whatsoever and simply stomped your feet calling your interlocutor names -- by your own conditional statement you are unfit to live.
http://www.envisional.com/
Envisional’s business is built around unique, patented search technologies and a superb team of experienced analysts. We use this powerful combination to help corporations protect themselves and their customers from fraud, fakes, piracy and online brand abuse.
You seriously can't be this obtuse -- really. The article is aimed at developers -- while it might not be of interest to you since, as you say, you are not a developer it will be of interest to many here who are developers or might be thinking about becoming developers. It's far from "nothing to see" for those who are developers as it describes one persons experience distributing his app through a particular venue.
Two factors are important: Build them large enough, so traffic flowing in has a chance to anticipate an open spot. And make people aware of how they work. Tell it on the radio, in TV spots and so on.
Exactly. These are two important points. Canada is also adopting the roundabout in some areas and the size is a real issue as many are so small that you might as well just put a 4-way stop or traffic lights in because the traffic just backs up in all four directions anyway -- the roundabout is too small to allow the traffic to keep flowing and merging. On the point of education, I received a flyer in the mail at the beginning of the year providing instructions on how to properly use a roundabout. You can see the website it pointed to here: http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettingaround/roundabouts.asp?OpenDocument&mode=1
The interesting thing for me was that I had been in England since 2000 and only returned back to my native Canada in 2010 to suddenly see roundabouts as part of the roadways. My first reaction was, "But almost nobody would have taken a driving test that would include roundabout protocol" -- this was painfully obvious when I saw the "seat of the pants" approach many took to coming upon a roundabout. I'm now back in England and actually kept the flyer I received to show to the locals here -- I have rarely seen such laughter upon reading a pamphlet.
I'm guessing, but I would wager roundabouts are cheaper to implement than the other traffic flow solutions -- the authorities like to talk about safety, improved traffic flow etc. but when you put in a new element on the roadways with minimal education and build it on an ineffective scale, then that makes me think that cost is the driving factor.
When you grow up...
You'll stop using this little phrase in order to make yourself feel superior to someone you disagree with.
Yep. The difference today is that you can see the sharing going on -- and that, of course, is why the media companies then mobilized their wall of lawyers. For an industry that's "going out of business" due to sharing, they sure as hell are taking a long time to die.
So it's like hockey?
Only slower.
I was wondering why the submitter included the part "including Canadians". What was that supposed to mean? Why was it there? Like, it's in Europe but someone from America was there too! Moronic submitter.
Actually, its from the article source which is the CBC -- Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. It's just the local news agency pointing out that locals were involved in the experiment.
Take off!
Or maybe he just got something wrong. Why does he have to be a sell out?
I can't even recall what class this was for, so I don't feel that I robbed myself of any learning.
Perhaps if you had actually done the work you would recall the class and also the material. I appreciate your honesty, but I really do you think you robbed yourself of some learning.
Hmm, maybe not, but they won two back to back in 92-93 -- not many clubs have one World Series win, let alone two back to back. Maybe you should have trash talked the Tokyo Samurai.
For completeness, here's beardy Branson's outfit: http://shop.virginmedia.com/broadband/compare-broadband-packages.html
That sounds like he can't get cable, but there should be better DSL options available. Even SKY t.v. has a pretty good plan compared to that -- truly unlimited and 20 Mb download speed, my sister and brother-in-law have it and are quite happy with it for their purposes. Downside is that it's Rupert Murdoch's outfit. http://www.sky.com/shop/broadband-talk/
I just moved back to Canada after living the past 10 years in England -- when I first got there internet speeds, data rates, etc. were far behind what was available in Canada for a lot more money. 10 years later and I return to find that Canada seems like some sort of internet backwater with these severely limiting caps and astronomical prices -- the near monopolies have gamed the system well over the past 10 years. I paid the equivalent of $30 a month for a 10 meg down/1 meg up line with no total data cap. You would get shaped down to 3 meg download speed for 4 hours if you moved more than a couple of gigs over a 4 hour period which I found to be a fair system -- but that was it -- not protocol throttling, no monthly caps plus charges, etc. And that was the lowest tier package available -- the higher packages included 50 meg down with much more higher data movement before being temporarily shaped. And I always got my maximum line speed when it should have been available -- no doubt not everyone had perfect service, but I can only say that for myself it was a rock solid and reliable line.
In short, Canadians have been hosed severely over the last 10 years when it comes to internet services -- and we just got more hosed.
That array was added to a pre-stretched sheet of rubber, which was then itself encapsulated inside another piece of rubber, this one being bio-compatible and transparent.
"...and all they take in return is paper with patterns painted on it."
And if this little characterization doesn't falls under the "dream abnormalities and hallucinations" heading, then I don't know what would.
"When it's been unavoidable, they've shown placards reading "Warning: Science content"
From my perspective, Mythbusters seems pretty anti-science.
Perhaps it's your perspective that is skewed then:
Perhaps you should consider that adding in a placard reading "Warning: Science Content" is a light hearted way to present science content to those who would otherwise turn away at that point. Perhaps its overly pedantic to read the sign as literal warning that one ought to be on guard for what is to follow. Perhaps your perspective lacks any sense of humour, wit or charitable interpretation.
+1 Pedantic.
:p
C'mon, he was making with the jocularity -- unbunch your panties for a minute.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBbAZVw3_7A
I hope his experience taught him something about Islam.
That not all Muslims are the same? Yeah, that must be it.
Aw, c'mon...anyone can miss the US! All tucked away down there...
...under the Great White North.
I hear they might be rebroadcasting Single Female Lawyer this fall now that they have all of the episodes.
Ration rules were just an example. 4th Ed is streamlined in such a way that we're actually playing the game more than we are looking up rules. It's not about having to read, I've read it. It's about being tied up in details everytime something remotely unordinary props up.
You're not describing my experiences playing tabletop D&D using 1st ed. rules -- that's for sure:
More time looking up rules than playing? Never had that experience. Sure, things have popped up from time to time that required a minute or two leafing through a text, but more time doing that than playing? -- has never happened to me.
Being tied up in detail everytime something remotely unordinary happens? Again, can't say I've had that experience -- yes, sometimes unordinary situations require a reference or a minute or two of thought by the DM, but not all that often and not when something only somewhat out of the norm occurs.
These things are part of the process of playing -- they're not necessarily antithetical to "play."