If I was Burgling you, and I heard a noise from downstairs starting to head up, I might sneak into the nearest closet - wait for that thing to pass, then bolt out the door.
Whereas if you simply had a realtime view from many angles - there's no real chance I'd be able to dodge you seeing me - and possibly identifying me.
I have found the instant preview to be more of a pain than anything else. I didn't mind the drop down for commonly searched topics - that was good, but I don't want it to be showing results for something until I've actually finished entering something.
The end of the article says that some Ex Ambassador says that it MIGHT be a demonstration to China that US Subs can launch intercontinental missiles - since Obama is touring over there right now.
And different models as well - since you wouldn't want to see the same face with a different skin every moment either.
It's another advantage a makeup artist and a hundred extras has over CGI. It's pretty simple to find a bunch of people wanting to be a in a zombie movie, you can probably find a bunch of Teenagers off school willing to do it the whole day for like 20 bucks.
And then your costume and make up artists can spend 2 hours making them exactly how you want them - and you've got a wide variety for a fraction of the cost of having to model and skin each and every one
If an ordinary person can get fined millions of dollars for minor IP violations, then a corporation the size of Telstra should be fined tens of billions for knowingly violating the GPL in a flagship product. But of course, the law is never fair.
You have an extremely odd definition of Fair. You're saying that if one infraction is for millions of dollars, another one should go for tens of billions? Simply because one of them makes more money?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Law is fair. I also think there should be a seperate punishment for knowingly breaking laws and trying to hide it, and there are a few (fraud, obstruction of justice, etc). But to say that doing X should be X times a thousand for a rich company does't make the law seem any fairer.
Well essentially you're just transplanting the costs to someone else - where did that 3D model come from? It didn't just prop up out of nowhere.
Some things, like Zombies, are generally much cheaper on Make up than something like a talking Gorilla suit. One of the reason there are so many Zombie movies out there is because it's essentially the cheapest thing an Indie Film maker can make - They require little to no story writing, they don't require any special effects besides 1 good make up artist and a lot of cornsyrup and food colouring, and you can simply run around your city shooting.
Now - is it possible to make a Zombie model and transpose it over your actors? Definately. Is that cheaper? Not really. You're paying big bucks not only for the design of the model but the textures, skinning, skeleton work - there's a lot of stuff that goes into this.
One of the reasons this worked so well for James Cameron in Avatar is that essentially the world of Pandora was meant to be vast and immersive, which is really hard to do on a sound stage - or its extra expensive that way. Since the rest of the world was in CGI to cheapen the costs of producing an elaborate stage - it wasn't much of a stretch to move the Actors and Actresses into CGI as well - in fact for me personally I think it makes the parts with Live actors look more faked somehow (specifically the end fight scene).
So I don't think this is exactly "the end" for makeup and costume artists, because 100 yards of silk and a good tailor to do up Costumes can be a lot cheaper than a team of 3D modellers - and still look more real.
Actually I did that once with Blender, I was telling my friend about how there are so many hotkeys and shortcuts in Blender to do everything, he challenged me to animate a sphere moving without looking at the screen, from scratch. I wrote up a script of keys to press while the monitor was unplugged. It worked.
In high school, they don't have Computer science teachers (usually). They have a different teacher, who gets handed a text book on how to teach programming. They don't bother reading it, they probably teach language arts or Math - so they just kind of dole it out to the kids and try to help where they can.
At least, thats been my experience. I didn't reach anyone with programming experience till Post secondary.
That's the kind of stuff I'd expect at a high school level, not a post secondary that you are paying tons of money for. It's annoying when a teacher doesn't know the answer to a question, but I'm willing to let it slide. If they don't even know the terminology to understand my question though - I would ask for a refund.
Not exactly. Suppose we develop sufficient technology (and understand the theory enough) to adjust and alter the effects of the system. Would we not then be like Gods of that universe?
You know, there was a time when they didn't think there was anything smaller than a material's composition. Then they came up with Molecules. Then they came up with the elements. Then they came up with atoms. And then they came up with the quarks and qbits and all the quantum stuff that goes into atoms.
Are you saying there is nothing smaller than an Atom? Because there is.
The basis of your thesis "it would be impossible to create something ever smaller, since at one point you'd be trying to break down something which cannot be broken down." - this has not held true every time we've placed that restriction on something. Sure - at one point there might be something that can't be broken down.
Does that mean an actual universe can't be simulated by our mini-big bangs? We haven't discovered the limit where we can't break down anymore, so its easy to say that the simulation can be broken down at least as much as we've broken down our realm.
Or it could had its own relatavistic principles, where our mini Big Bang might have lasted mere seconds or fractions thereof - if it did in fact recreate the universe properly down to scale, then life and intelligence could have evolved, and died out in those mere seconds.
Depends on your definition. You're probably thinking "Creationism as in God created it" which is general enough that they aren't mutually exclusive.
Other people say that Creationism is more about using the Genesis section of the Bible to explain how life came to be as opposed to other biological answers like evolution.
By making a public display of low security standards - you impact more people.
Could he have told the ONE administrator of the site about the vulnerability, and HOPED that the Sysadmin would take the time out of the day to fix it - and not completely disregard his advice? Yeah, he COULD have done that, but that doesn't guarantee results or get the message to as many people.
Don't get me wrong, we just had to deal with the hooligans ourselves in my company, and it is a bit of a piss off to have to deal with it. However, I can say for a fact we're much better with our security standards now than we ever were before. And on top of that - anyone who finds out might think "Jeez, that kind of stuff is on the rise, maybe I should get to that update I've been sitting on".
It sucks if it happens to you - but its one of those things that seems necessary to keep things in line. I'd rather we be too secure as a society as opposed to being all willy nilly.
When Alice and Bob are allowed to get married, but Alice and Bobbi are not, merely because of the presence or absence of a Y chromosome, that is not equal protection under the law.
Am I the only one who mentally replaced "Bobbi" with "Eve" and had a fantasy crypto-erotic day-dream?
Oh yeah... you share that private key... don't worry baby... I got SSH!...
Slashdot Mirror
Is simply multiple cameras.
If I was Burgling you, and I heard a noise from downstairs starting to head up, I might sneak into the nearest closet - wait for that thing to pass, then bolt out the door.
Whereas if you simply had a realtime view from many angles - there's no real chance I'd be able to dodge you seeing me - and possibly identifying me.
I agree.
I have found the instant preview to be more of a pain than anything else. I didn't mind the drop down for commonly searched topics - that was good, but I don't want it to be showing results for something until I've actually finished entering something.
Yeah.
I'd like to know how many pushups he can do now that he's lost all that weight.
It's not so much that people should be trying to lose weight as it is they should be trying to lose fat
After all, equal volumes of fat and muscle: muscle weighs more.
DR
I'm onto you, hiding secret messages in your post. Look at the Capital Letters, seems too odd . Rearranging the letters I get this:
I KNOW THIS NOTION GUYS DIAL TIP
Tip, which is of course is 847 on the phone, which is of course the area code for Illinois!
LOOK OUT! THERE'S A MISSILE HEADING FOR ILLINOIS!
I'm glad you're willing to take that heat.
Of course, I'm Canadian! I'll take any heat I can get!
The end of the article says that some Ex Ambassador says that it MIGHT be a demonstration to China that US Subs can launch intercontinental missiles - since Obama is touring over there right now.
No one wants to take credit for it? Okay.
I'll take credit for it. If found please return it. Thanks.
And different models as well - since you wouldn't want to see the same face with a different skin every moment either.
It's another advantage a makeup artist and a hundred extras has over CGI. It's pretty simple to find a bunch of people wanting to be a in a zombie movie, you can probably find a bunch of Teenagers off school willing to do it the whole day for like 20 bucks.
And then your costume and make up artists can spend 2 hours making them exactly how you want them - and you've got a wide variety for a fraction of the cost of having to model and skin each and every one
If an ordinary person can get fined millions of dollars for minor IP violations, then a corporation the size of Telstra should be fined tens of billions for knowingly violating the GPL in a flagship product. But of course, the law is never fair.
You have an extremely odd definition of Fair. You're saying that if one infraction is for millions of dollars, another one should go for tens of billions? Simply because one of them makes more money?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Law is fair. I also think there should be a seperate punishment for knowingly breaking laws and trying to hide it, and there are a few (fraud, obstruction of justice, etc). But to say that doing X should be X times a thousand for a rich company does't make the law seem any fairer.
Didn't you at least have some kind of viewpane for what you were doing though?
Well essentially you're just transplanting the costs to someone else - where did that 3D model come from? It didn't just prop up out of nowhere.
Some things, like Zombies, are generally much cheaper on Make up than something like a talking Gorilla suit. One of the reason there are so many Zombie movies out there is because it's essentially the cheapest thing an Indie Film maker can make - They require little to no story writing, they don't require any special effects besides 1 good make up artist and a lot of cornsyrup and food colouring, and you can simply run around your city shooting.
Now - is it possible to make a Zombie model and transpose it over your actors? Definately. Is that cheaper? Not really. You're paying big bucks not only for the design of the model but the textures, skinning, skeleton work - there's a lot of stuff that goes into this.
One of the reasons this worked so well for James Cameron in Avatar is that essentially the world of Pandora was meant to be vast and immersive, which is really hard to do on a sound stage - or its extra expensive that way. Since the rest of the world was in CGI to cheapen the costs of producing an elaborate stage - it wasn't much of a stretch to move the Actors and Actresses into CGI as well - in fact for me personally I think it makes the parts with Live actors look more faked somehow (specifically the end fight scene).
So I don't think this is exactly "the end" for makeup and costume artists, because 100 yards of silk and a good tailor to do up Costumes can be a lot cheaper than a team of 3D modellers - and still look more real.
A single frame?
Shouldn't you be modelling a single frame?
Or did you try 3D Animation with a blindfold?
Actually I did that once with Blender, I was telling my friend about how there are so many hotkeys and shortcuts in Blender to do everything, he challenged me to animate a sphere moving without looking at the screen, from scratch. I wrote up a script of keys to press while the monitor was unplugged. It worked.
Sweetest 10 bucks I ever made.
Come on guys, there's no need to insult the monkeys.
In high school, they don't have Computer science teachers (usually). They have a different teacher, who gets handed a text book on how to teach programming. They don't bother reading it, they probably teach language arts or Math - so they just kind of dole it out to the kids and try to help where they can.
At least, thats been my experience. I didn't reach anyone with programming experience till Post secondary.
That's the kind of stuff I'd expect at a high school level, not a post secondary that you are paying tons of money for. It's annoying when a teacher doesn't know the answer to a question, but I'm willing to let it slide. If they don't even know the terminology to understand my question though - I would ask for a refund.
Not exactly. Suppose we develop sufficient technology (and understand the theory enough) to adjust and alter the effects of the system. Would we not then be like Gods of that universe?
You know, there was a time when they didn't think there was anything smaller than a material's composition. Then they came up with Molecules. Then they came up with the elements. Then they came up with atoms. And then they came up with the quarks and qbits and all the quantum stuff that goes into atoms.
Are you saying there is nothing smaller than an Atom? Because there is.
The basis of your thesis "it would be impossible to create something ever smaller, since at one point you'd be trying to break down something which cannot be broken down." - this has not held true every time we've placed that restriction on something. Sure - at one point there might be something that can't be broken down.
Does that mean an actual universe can't be simulated by our mini-big bangs? We haven't discovered the limit where we can't break down anymore, so its easy to say that the simulation can be broken down at least as much as we've broken down our realm.
Or it could had its own relatavistic principles, where our mini Big Bang might have lasted mere seconds or fractions thereof - if it did in fact recreate the universe properly down to scale, then life and intelligence could have evolved, and died out in those mere seconds.
Depends on your definition. You're probably thinking "Creationism as in God created it" which is general enough that they aren't mutually exclusive.
Other people say that Creationism is more about using the Genesis section of the Bible to explain how life came to be as opposed to other biological answers like evolution.
I assume the parent wants to disprove the later.
Freeon. Delicious Freeon.
She's filled out nicely.
By making a public display of low security standards - you impact more people.
Could he have told the ONE administrator of the site about the vulnerability, and HOPED that the Sysadmin would take the time out of the day to fix it - and not completely disregard his advice? Yeah, he COULD have done that, but that doesn't guarantee results or get the message to as many people.
Don't get me wrong, we just had to deal with the hooligans ourselves in my company, and it is a bit of a piss off to have to deal with it. However, I can say for a fact we're much better with our security standards now than we ever were before. And on top of that - anyone who finds out might think "Jeez, that kind of stuff is on the rise, maybe I should get to that update I've been sitting on".
It sucks if it happens to you - but its one of those things that seems necessary to keep things in line. I'd rather we be too secure as a society as opposed to being all willy nilly.
I suppose thats an equally effective countermeasure.
When Alice and Bob are allowed to get married, but Alice and Bobbi are not, merely because of the presence or absence of a Y chromosome, that is not equal protection under the law.
Am I the only one who mentally replaced "Bobbi" with "Eve" and had a fantasy crypto-erotic day-dream?
Oh yeah... you share that private key... don't worry baby... I got SSH! ...
No? Just me?