It's not an issue of viewing cheating sites; Steam is looking for DNS lookups performed on DRM servers (not the Steam ones). Many cheats are paid-for so, in a cruel twist of fate some might say, they use DRM to check if the cheater has paid for the priviledge of doing so.
gaben himself has said that this tactic only lasted a matter of weeks anyway, until the cheatware started futzing around with the player's DNS cache to avoid these checks.
Parent is confusing the brake lights with the tail lights. It's a forgivable mistake since they're often the same bulb, which is either off, on (when the side/headlights are on) and bright (when the brakes are applied).
Anyone who hasn't read Manna, go do it! It is worth it.
Apart from the second half. The author does a good job showing how technology can be used to turn people into mindless worker bees, then later pull the rug out from under them. Sadly he/she doesn't do nearly as well when it comes to talking about how things could be done right. The Australia project(?) was very much in need of fleshing out.
Call me when they release these "classified documents", name the "mandarins" concerned and find someone who can give a more reasoned opinion than Nijel "why does this man deserve equal coverage on the BBC?" Farage, otherwise I'll just assume this is just more of The Telegraph's usual anti-EU ranting.
Oh, look, the Mail's covering it too. Fancy that.
For heaven's sake, there's more than enough EU bumbling going on as it is without editors concocting more of their own.
Just because the Mail is slightly to the right of Genghis Khan doesn't make them "tory friendly"; they will happily stick a boot in no matter which party happens to be in charge.
So basically, it's blackmail. Or, if you like a slightly less inflammatory term, coercion.
Actually, it's closer to extortion. As a general rule of thumb, if the threat takes the form "do/pay X or we will reveal/tell Y", it's blackmail; if it's more along the lines of "do/pay X or we will do/not do Y" it's extortion.
It's not completely relevant but you've reminded me of an anecdote from a high school biology teacher. Before he became a teacher he worked as an exterminator. When he first began the rat poison he used was fast-acting but apparently painful to the rodents concerned, as they were sometimes heard squeaking as they died. Some customers complained and warfarin was adopted as the weapon of choice. This poison killed the rats over a period of days by causing massive internal bleeding; they died quietly. This was seen as more humane.
Our pristine world has yet to fall victim to the scourge of silicon-based life. You will report to the nearest re-education station immediately or prepare to have your gas sacs forcibly removed for inciting unnecessary panic among the loyal citizenry.
Signed, K'traal, assistant speaker for The Council.
I can't help but project the cloning of 500 pigs is pointless if you do not raise them on precisely the same diet, same amount, same schedule. Otherwise you could just leave it to nature to create 500 piglets for you.
Feeding 500 pigs exactly the same diet, same amount, same schedule is trivial compared to creating 500 cloned pigs. Isn't that how many farmed pigs are fed now?
If a part exists (the one you are scanning), why do I need to duplicate it with my 3D printer?
I can think of a handful of scenarios off the top of my head where I might want to do just this:
+ I want to copy something that doesn't belong to me, like we used to do with those shiny things with music on them, then give the original back to the owner.
+ I want to duplicate a part with geometries too complex to recreate myself; the sort of thing that was sculpted in the first place and a mould made from the prototype.
+ Because I just want a spare.
If I just broke my lawnmower handle in half I'm not going to spend hours trying to get the NURBS just right when I can scan in both pieces, put them back together again with two clicks and print out a new one.
None of the 3D scanners I have seen have high enough resolution to allow the function to be duplicated. So as far as I can tell, these things are good for roughly duplicating small, nonfunctional objects.
The same thing used to be said about 3D printers just a few years ago and, like 3D printers, 3D scans can be finished/tidied up to the same standard as the original much more quickly than doing the whole thing.
I can't imagine not using CAD to design custom parts to be printed on my printer.
Your lack of imagination is not a fault of 3D scanners. Do you design everything that comes out of your 2D printer from scratch too?
If you want to use your printer to design new things and improve your CAD skills then more power to you, but to pooh-pooh a new* technology just because you can't immediately see a use for it is just plain foolish.
*New in the sense that it arguably predates the technology that it "logically" follows...
Is the value in the object itself, or in the arrangement of the molecules which make up the object?
It depends on the object. For something like a stylish (but mass-produced) art deco chair, which can be duplicated fairly easily, then the answer is more likely to be the latter. An object with a bit more provenance such as a famous work of art, an illuminated manuscript or something on which a famous French arse was once perched is definitely going to be the former. After all, people don't go to view the Mona Lisa because it's an especially good painting, do they? Do people pay ten times the price because a handbag with a little dog on it is ten times better than one without? No, for many people things like branding or nebulously defined authenticity add value to an otherwise mundane lump of matter.
tl;dr People will pay handsomely for an antique firearm but they'll pay through the nose if it has shot someone famous.
You don't need anything as elaborate as a video. When you move in to a leasehold you take inventory and note any damage or other problems with the property then have both parties sign off on it. When you move out you go through the inventory with the landlord present and sign off again before you hand over the keys.
I've found this works very well with letting agencies, who are apparently the only group of professionals* who will try harder to swindle you than estate agents.
*I use the term advisedly, since there's essentially no accreditation required to become one.
I think that was the point. Kind of like a government agent telling you to "call your senator" when their department does something you don't like.
If that sort of thing happens then the case usually ends up in court. The government will generally appeal and appeal until they're blue in the face - perhaps to bankrupt whomever was mad enough to test them - but they can and have lost such cases. The government may not like it, but until whatever rabble is in power at that time can stop squabbling long enough to change the law they generally have to obey the ones the previous lot have enacted.
I may look at an icon, then decide not to use it, when considering my options. Or what If I want to activate an icon but need to activate it at a precise moment... I have to avoid looking at it until the right moment? That's not user friendly.
A wink or a blink would serve as a decent substitute for a right/left or middle click.
I myself am ambivalent in seeing it applied to games, but if doing so serves to inject a little capital into technology that could help so many people with various disabilities it seems like a win-win.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not an issue of viewing cheating sites; Steam is looking for DNS lookups performed on DRM servers (not the Steam ones). Many cheats are paid-for so, in a cruel twist of fate some might say, they use DRM to check if the cheater has paid for the priviledge of doing so.
gaben himself has said that this tactic only lasted a matter of weeks anyway, until the cheatware started futzing around with the player's DNS cache to avoid these checks.
Parent is confusing the brake lights with the tail lights. It's a forgivable mistake since they're often the same bulb, which is either off, on (when the side/headlights are on) and bright (when the brakes are applied).
Anyone who hasn't read Manna, go do it! It is worth it.
Apart from the second half. The author does a good job showing how technology can be used to turn people into mindless worker bees, then later pull the rug out from under them. Sadly he/she doesn't do nearly as well when it comes to talking about how things could be done right. The Australia project(?) was very much in need of fleshing out.
Call me when they release these "classified documents", name the "mandarins" concerned and find someone who can give a more reasoned opinion than Nijel "why does this man deserve equal coverage on the BBC?" Farage, otherwise I'll just assume this is just more of The Telegraph's usual anti-EU ranting.
Oh, look, the Mail's covering it too.
Fancy that.
For heaven's sake, there's more than enough EU bumbling going on as it is without editors concocting more of their own.
But Doc, all the best stuff is made in Ja-
Never mind.
Just because the Mail is slightly to the right of Genghis Khan doesn't make them "tory friendly"; they will happily stick a boot in no matter which party happens to be in charge.
So basically, it's blackmail. Or, if you like a slightly less inflammatory term, coercion.
Actually, it's closer to extortion. As a general rule of thumb, if the threat takes the form "do/pay X or we will reveal/tell Y", it's blackmail; if it's more along the lines of "do/pay X or we will do/not do Y" it's extortion.
In this instance, it's merely politics.
It's not completely relevant but you've reminded me of an anecdote from a high school biology teacher. Before he became a teacher he worked as an exterminator. When he first began the rat poison he used was fast-acting but apparently painful to the rodents concerned, as they were sometimes heard squeaking as they died. Some customers complained and warfarin was adopted as the weapon of choice. This poison killed the rats over a period of days by causing massive internal bleeding; they died quietly. This was seen as more humane.
How many people's lives do you wish to use up in tax payments, keeping alive a mass murderer?
Cute.
How many innocent lives are you prepared to sacrifice to forgo spending all that tax money?
Every decision in life is based on incomplete information. That doesn't mean we should be frozen into inaction until all data is certain.
Nor does it mean we take the "shoot 'em all" approach.
Our pristine world has yet to fall victim to the scourge of silicon-based life. You will report to the nearest re-education station immediately or prepare to have your gas sacs forcibly removed for inciting unnecessary panic among the loyal citizenry.
Signed,
K'traal, assistant speaker for The Council.
Why not simply shoot them? I'm staunchly against the death penalty myself, but if you must do it then at least make it quick.
Of course, putting a bullet in someone's head might make the people invited to watch the event just a tad squeamish...
Yes, yes, but is it gastronomical or gastrophysical research?
Waste not, want not.
I can't help but project the cloning of 500 pigs is pointless if you do not raise them on precisely the same diet, same amount, same schedule. Otherwise you could just leave it to nature to create 500 piglets for you.
Feeding 500 pigs exactly the same diet, same amount, same schedule is trivial compared to creating 500 cloned pigs. Isn't that how many farmed pigs are fed now?
If a part exists (the one you are scanning), why do I need to duplicate it with my 3D printer?
I can think of a handful of scenarios off the top of my head where I might want to do just this:
+ I want to copy something that doesn't belong to me, like we used to do with those shiny things with music on them, then give the original back to the owner.
+ I want to duplicate a part with geometries too complex to recreate myself; the sort of thing that was sculpted in the first place and a mould made from the prototype.
+ Because I just want a spare.
If I just broke my lawnmower handle in half I'm not going to spend hours trying to get the NURBS just right when I can scan in both pieces, put them back together again with two clicks and print out a new one.
None of the 3D scanners I have seen have high enough resolution to allow the function to be duplicated. So as far as I can tell, these things are good for roughly duplicating small, nonfunctional objects.
The same thing used to be said about 3D printers just a few years ago and, like 3D printers, 3D scans can be finished/tidied up to the same standard as the original much more quickly than doing the whole thing.
I can't imagine not using CAD to design custom parts to be printed on my printer.
Your lack of imagination is not a fault of 3D scanners. Do you design everything that comes out of your 2D printer from scratch too?
If you want to use your printer to design new things and improve your CAD skills then more power to you, but to pooh-pooh a new* technology just because you can't immediately see a use for it is just plain foolish.
*New in the sense that it arguably predates the technology that it "logically" follows...
Is the value in the object itself, or in the arrangement of the molecules which make up the object?
It depends on the object. For something like a stylish (but mass-produced) art deco chair, which can be duplicated fairly easily, then the answer is more likely to be the latter. An object with a bit more provenance such as a famous work of art, an illuminated manuscript or something on which a famous French arse was once perched is definitely going to be the former. After all, people don't go to view the Mona Lisa because it's an especially good painting, do they? Do people pay ten times the price because a handbag with a little dog on it is ten times better than one without? No, for many people things like branding or nebulously defined authenticity add value to an otherwise mundane lump of matter.
tl;dr People will pay handsomely for an antique firearm but they'll pay through the nose if it has shot someone famous.
It's not like energy companies ever pass on cheaper wholesale prices to their customers.
More likely they erroneously assumed they did not need a translator.
Indeed. I gather that the Swede in question only needed to stuff a potato in their mouth and this whole mess could have been averted.
You don't need anything as elaborate as a video. When you move in to a leasehold you take inventory and note any damage or other problems with the property then have both parties sign off on it. When you move out you go through the inventory with the landlord present and sign off again before you hand over the keys.
I've found this works very well with letting agencies, who are apparently the only group of professionals* who will try harder to swindle you than estate agents.
*I use the term advisedly, since there's essentially no accreditation required to become one.
Can't I just spend 109$ on a serviceable coat with a premium zip?
I think that was the point. Kind of like a government agent telling you to "call your senator" when their department does something you don't like.
If that sort of thing happens then the case usually ends up in court. The government will generally appeal and appeal until they're blue in the face - perhaps to bankrupt whomever was mad enough to test them - but they can and have lost such cases. The government may not like it, but until whatever rabble is in power at that time can stop squabbling long enough to change the law they generally have to obey the ones the previous lot have enacted.
And neither of you should be posting to slashdot while driving, jerks.
Don't worry. It's a self-correcting problem.
That's not very fair on Budweiser; their product still tastes like beer... just beer that's already been through someone else.
I'd like to see cancer bite my shiny metal ass.
Just wait until your nanotech self-repair mechanisms get a bit hinkey and mix up "break down" with "build up".
I may look at an icon, then decide not to use it, when considering my options. Or what If I want to activate an icon but need to activate it at a precise moment... I have to avoid looking at it until the right moment? That's not user friendly.
A wink or a blink would serve as a decent substitute for a right/left or middle click.
I myself am ambivalent in seeing it applied to games, but if doing so serves to inject a little capital into technology that could help so many people with various disabilities it seems like a win-win.
You know what happened to me today? Absolutely nothing.
One of Feynman's, I think.