>youu can keep zooming in and zooming in for a very long time before there's any noticable degradation
I think a better way to put it would be that here is that if you want a smaller image( less information) you can selectively crop it out. If you're targeting 1-2 megapixels final size, you could be quite selective in finding the perfect picture in a 500 megapixel image.
Digital "zoom" is badly named because it's not really a zoom, it's a crop, followed by a resample. In practice most people find that they want to take full resolution pictures all the time, and save the cropping for later, on their PC - where they can have tighter control. I imagine that the buyers of this device would have a huge storage device to attach to it, and still do the same thing.
>Any suggestions as to component brands? I'd love to hear some experiences, especially with passive sinks for the AMDs.
I use:
Enermax power supplies with tunable fans. It's very important to get a PSU with an air intake on the bottom.
Seagate Barracuda Hard drives (liquid bearings).
Arctic Silver III thermal paste.
Rounded IDE cables for better airflow.
Matrox G400 video card. No fans, works great with Linux.
Zallman "flower" style coolers. They're not quite passive, in that they require a fan arm attached to the case. Some people say they're loud, but when tightened and tuned properly, they're very quiet. It helps to have a very solid case.
Then I put the case fans on a varaible resistors (Zallman), and run them at about half speed. Two fans running at half speed are much quieter than one at full speed. If your case can accept a larger fan, that would be better yet.
Really? Then why is there a whole sub-culture of people working on quieting their PCs? You can now buy quiet PSUs, Quiet CPU coolers, and oversize case fans with variable speeds.
When I upgraded from celerons to athlon XPs, I was amazed at the noise generated by the cooling equipment. Then I swapped out a few parts, and I can hear my MP3s again. My PC used to sound like a cheap vacumn cleaner, now it's barely audible, quieter than most laptops. It really improves your state of mind to not be assulted by so much noise.
>What could POSSIBLY be the reason for porting Wine to MinGW?
Maybe so you can test and debug your software on a single platform, and target it for multiple, making the development of cross-platform solutions easier? If I'm going to do a WineLib port, I imagine it would be very nice to see the native version running side by side with the WineLib version.
>He didn't. Someone made up this tale, and it had a few years of life. It is dead now: the Democrats pushed it to the forefront, the media investigated it, and found that Bush served, and there was no AWOL.
Really? So when he transferred to Alabama, he actually showed up, even though his unit commander said he didn't? Have any evidence to support that claim? Where was he in 1972?
It's hard to find unbiased sources on this matter. Here's the best one I could find: http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?A RTICLE_ ID=36977
>Whose service didn't (just cost the taxpayers money)? Anyone who did their duty as an American, instead of pulling strings to get pork assignments, like GW's champagne squadron. If you actually DO something (train for a squadron that's preparing to fight, serve in the chain of command, etc.), you're providing a useful service.
He hasn't denied it either, even when asked point blank.
>Draft dodging?
Absolutely. He used his family influence to get a cush assignment in the Texas National Guard. He left when it suited him before his service was up.
>Fascist?
Hell yes.
From Wikipedia: "The word fascism has come to mean any system of government resembling Mussolini's, that exalts ation and often race above the individual, and uses violence and modern techniques of propaganda and censorship to forcibly suppress political opposition, engages in severe economic and social regimentation, and espouses nationalism"
Now think about the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
>They pushed for more vests, actually. John Kerry and others voted against it and won.
Please. Voting down an omnibus spending package is different than voting down a line item.
> Bush and Rumsfeld have already gone over there. Yes, but neither have ever served in the millitary. Don't give me that crap about Bush serving in the Texas National guard. He was in the "champagne squadron". That was too much for him, so he went AWOL. His military "service" did nothing but cost taxpayers money. Thanks GW.
Why is this relevant? I hardly think that Bush is qualified to say what the soldiers need. Kerry, however, knows the importance of a bullet proof vest due to his experience.
>In fact, the things IBM doesn't want to have thrown out are their counterclaims against SCO. IBM does ask for almost all of SCO's claims to be thrown out.
Not really. What SCO claims in the media is "IBM stole our code and put it in Linux". Their COURT claims, however, are different. If you look at SCO's second ammended complaint, Copyright infringement is the fifth cause of action, but they never directly accuse IBM of putting UNIX code in Linux (just "derivative works"). The rest of the claims are contract violation, unfair competition, etc.
Partial summary judgement on copyright infringement would be a PR nightmare for SCO (even though they'll spin it as though that's what they wanted), but I would expect the case to continue until SCO becomes the largest crater in Utah.
Pursuant to DUCivR 56-1(a) and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56 and 37(b)(2), Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff International Business Machines Corporation ("IBM") respectfully submits this cross-motion for partial summary judgment on its claim against Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") for a declaration of non-infringement with respect to IBM's Linux activities (the "Tenth Counterclaim").
A partial summary judgement and a dismissal are entirely different. A partial summary judgement does not end the case.
It still seems odd to me to refer to a plant by its marketing-induced final product name, but apparently it is done in the agricultural community when it comes to Canola. IMHO It's a bit like calling a cow grown for beef production a "quarter pounder with cheese".:)
FYI... There is no such thing as a canola plant or, by extension, canola seeds.
The term "canola" is a bastardization of "Canadian Oil", used by canadian growers in place of the less consumer-friendly name of the actual crop "rapeseed". The crop isn't refered to as canola until the oil is extracted.
So what you have here is "Roundup Ready Rapeseed", which sort of rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?
Re:Why not just use LYNX?
on
Mozilla's Mini-Me
·
· Score: 3, Informative
>The first browsers were GUIs (Mosaic).
The first HTTP/HTML browsers were GUI-driven, yes. But I would point out that if you define "web browser" as an application that lets you publish and browse ONLINE internet content, the first "web browser" was Gopher. Gopher was text based and released a good two years before Mosaic.
For a time, gopher was much more stable, usable, and popular than HTTP/HTML.
Ah... That reminds me of the days before AOL connected to the internet. Makes me all weepy eyed.
>Using a computer to measure ____ seems like an improvement, as a computer won't mark you down for race, religion, opinion, etc - things that tend to drive humans to have lower opinions of each other (and consequently can bias grading).
Yes, a computer has no bias. It also cannot comprehend what is written AT ALL. All it can do is process a few heuristics. This means that a child that's incapable of forming an intelligent thought will get rewarded for simply putting random words in a sentence structure.
Sorry, but that's not an improvement. We already have spelling and grammar checkers that students can use at home. What we need are intelligent people grading essays to give feedback on things like coherency, strength, voice, etc.
The point of writing is to communicate. How can you test communication when the target of that communication cannot understand what is written? To give you an example: Suppose I want to test your ability to speak french. I hire a Russian who can't speak a word of French, and ask him to count the words you speak and determine if your accent sounds French. You could be speaking Swahili with a French accent and he would never know.
Using a computer to test essays is even more ridiculous because not only does it not know the language, but it's incapable of even intelligently guessing at the meaning of an expression.
>These are all services for which the government is Constitutionally *obligated* to provide service.
Um... no. You've got it backwards.
The constitution says nothing about schools, security guards or research institutions. The constitution provides very little in the way of federal services.
However, I would argue that since the federal government has decided to levy an income tax, it IS obligated to provide for the preperation of the necessary documentation in the most secure fashion possible, using the technologies of the day. I should not be required to use the pony express to submit my forms if a much cheaper and more reliable method is available. Additionally, the IRS could reduce operating expenses (and hence reduce my taxes) if it provided free electronic form submission. This situation is pure "pork".
Technically yes, but that's not how they're defined or intended to be used. Patents are about licensing. If I patent a particular widget, I would expect other people to produce that same widget and give me royalties. The patent system was designed around physical processes and widgets. This is so a the inventor of a particular widget is duly compensated.
Now, in the software world, things slightly completely different. Software, unlike your typical physical widget, is protected by copyright. Absent a patent, you already have the ability to lisence a particular software widget. Naturally, this means that few patent holders are interested in licensing their patents. This changes the nature of patents to be a more exclusive model, where all many are interested in doing is suing the crap out of any small fish who come up with the same idea. If you don't want to have your company squashed in patent litigation, the only available defense at the moment is to have your own patent portfolio, with the hope that you can countersue anyone that sues you.
Apple does indeed need to patent a lot of seemingly obvious things for this very reason. If Microsoft sues them over patent A, they counter with patent B, and they're at a stalemate.
>a law saying that the government can't compete with a private business
I've heard that before too. It seems to me such a law is quite useless and stupid, because the government can, will, and does compete with private business on a regular basis. For example: There are public and private schools (esp at the secondary level). There are government-sponsored and private hospitals. There are public and private research facilities, security guards... the list goes on and on. I can't imagine how provding electronic tax form submission could be lumped into that and not any of those other things. It would be interesting to read the text of the law to see just how much smoke this congressman is blowing.
>You do realize that these tend to be contradictory. Keeping up with traffic for the most part requires speeding.
I do realize that. I see no problem with going 5-10 miles above the speed limit if that's what traffic is doing. I do, however, see a problem with weaving around everyone at close range in order to try to gain that extra couple of minutes.
>When your father is on his death bed in a hospital 40 miles away and you and your siblings want to get there to see him before he passes, I'm sure you'll want your car to be stuck doing the speedlimit...
That's not that great an argument. Speeding doesn't really get you anywhere appreciably faster. You could easily get pulled over and ticketed, causing you to be even further delayed. Besides, there's the possibility you could get in an accident and join your father on the other side much sooner than you had anticipated... possibly taking some innocent bystander with you.
Overall, however, I'm against both speed controls and speeding. Agressive driving (excessive speeding included) causes most accidents. Idiots in a hurry (whatever the reason) cause many more deaths than drunk driving.
I'm against speed controls simply because I've been in situations where I had to hit the gas to avoid an accident.
I just wish America could learn to chill out. There's no reason to be in such a goddam hurry. Go the same speed as traffic, don't hug anyone's bumper, signal before changing lanes, change one lane at a time, let other cars in if they want to switch lanes. You'll get there at about the same time, and not kill anyone in the process.
Giga- derives from the same root as "giant"... One would suspect that's why it's pronounced similarly (or many would claim). Personally, I only started hearing the hard "g" when computers with gigabyte hard drives reached the masses. These same masses also claimed that 3.5 inch floppy disks were "hard disks" because they were less floppy than the 5.25" variety:)
Gigabyte sounds much cooler with the soft G (Jiga). Let's go with that.
The latest Knoppix includes the "captive" package, which uses the windows NTFS driver (if it can find it) to give Linux NTFS read/write support!
That said, this still isn't that great of an idea. Linux is fast, but video driver tweaks make all the difference in frame rate comparisons. Do we expect this bootable linux doom3 combination to blow away the performance on Windows, when video card companies focus their driver tweaking efforts on Windows?
I doubt it. You'll get "about the same" performance, but have to re-boot to use the game. The whole advantage of a linux client is not having run windows at all (greater stability, usability, speed etc), re-booting back and forth is a waste of time.
>with a bit of luck we'll see these features in worldwide mobiles sometime in 2005
correction: with a bit of luck, we WON'T be seeing these features in worldwide mobiles EVER.
Whatever happened to the engineering concept of affordance?
Portable phone: The ideal one is really portable and really a phone. Make it small, light, have the battery last forever and never lose calls. I'll buy that one. Keep the dog translator, thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
>youu can keep zooming in and zooming in for a very long time before there's any noticable degradation
I think a better way to put it would be that here is that if you want a smaller image( less information) you can selectively crop it out. If you're targeting 1-2 megapixels final size, you could be quite selective in finding the perfect picture in a 500 megapixel image.
Digital "zoom" is badly named because it's not really a zoom, it's a crop, followed by a resample. In practice most people find that they want to take full resolution pictures all the time, and save the cropping for later, on their PC - where they can have tighter control. I imagine that the buyers of this device would have a huge storage device to attach to it, and still do the same thing.
>Any suggestions as to component brands? I'd love to hear some experiences, especially with passive sinks for the AMDs.
I use:
Enermax power supplies with tunable fans. It's very important to get a PSU with an air intake on the bottom.
Seagate Barracuda Hard drives (liquid bearings).
Arctic Silver III thermal paste.
Rounded IDE cables for better airflow.
Matrox G400 video card. No fans, works great with Linux.
Zallman "flower" style coolers. They're not quite passive, in that they require a fan arm attached to the case. Some people say they're loud, but when tightened and tuned properly, they're very quiet. It helps to have a very solid case.
Then I put the case fans on a varaible resistors (Zallman), and run them at about half speed. Two fans running at half speed are much quieter than one at full speed. If your case can accept a larger fan, that would be better yet.
>people are not complaining about noise
Really? Then why is there a whole sub-culture of people working on quieting their PCs? You can now buy quiet PSUs, Quiet CPU coolers, and oversize case fans with variable speeds.
When I upgraded from celerons to athlon XPs, I was amazed at the noise generated by the cooling equipment. Then I swapped out a few parts, and I can hear my MP3s again. My PC used to sound like a cheap vacumn cleaner, now it's barely audible, quieter than most laptops. It really improves your state of mind to not be assulted by so much noise.
>What could POSSIBLY be the reason for porting Wine to MinGW?
Maybe so you can test and debug your software on a single platform, and target it for multiple, making the development of cross-platform solutions easier? If I'm going to do a WineLib port, I imagine it would be very nice to see the native version running side by side with the WineLib version.
>>That was too much for him, so he went AWOL.
A RTICLE_ ID=36977
>He didn't. Someone made up this tale, and it had a few years of life. It is dead now: the Democrats pushed it to the forefront, the media investigated it, and found that Bush served, and there was no AWOL.
Really? So when he transferred to Alabama, he actually showed up, even though his unit commander said he didn't? Have any evidence to support that claim? Where was he in 1972?
It's hard to find unbiased sources on this matter. Here's the best one I could find:
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?
>Whose service didn't (just cost the taxpayers money)?
Anyone who did their duty as an American, instead of pulling strings to get pork assignments, like GW's champagne squadron. If you actually DO something (train for a squadron that's preparing to fight, serve in the chain of command, etc.), you're providing a useful service.
>There is no evidence of the cocaine.
He hasn't denied it either, even when asked point blank.
>Draft dodging?
Absolutely. He used his family influence to get a cush assignment in the Texas National Guard. He left when it suited him before his service was up.
>Fascist?
Hell yes.
From Wikipedia: "The word fascism has come to mean any system of government resembling Mussolini's, that exalts ation and often race above the individual, and uses violence and modern techniques of propaganda and censorship to forcibly suppress political opposition, engages in severe economic and social regimentation, and espouses nationalism"
Now think about the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
>They pushed for more vests, actually. John Kerry and others voted against it and won.
Please. Voting down an omnibus spending package is different than voting down a line item.
> Bush and Rumsfeld have already gone over there.
Yes, but neither have ever served in the millitary. Don't give me that crap about Bush serving in the Texas National guard. He was in the "champagne squadron". That was too much for him, so he went AWOL. His military "service" did nothing but cost taxpayers money. Thanks GW.
Why is this relevant? I hardly think that Bush is qualified to say what the soldiers need. Kerry, however, knows the importance of a bullet proof vest due to his experience.
>Similar to UNIX-like it can be good and sometimes better for what you want to do, but it is still not UNIX.
Not going to touch that one. *ahem*
>In fact, the things IBM doesn't want to have thrown out are their counterclaims against SCO. IBM does ask for almost all of SCO's claims to be thrown out.
Not really. What SCO claims in the media is "IBM stole our code and put it in Linux". Their COURT claims, however, are different. If you look at SCO's second ammended complaint, Copyright infringement is the fifth cause of action, but they never directly accuse IBM of putting UNIX code in Linux (just "derivative works"). The rest of the claims are contract violation, unfair competition, etc.
Partial summary judgement on copyright infringement would be a PR nightmare for SCO (even though they'll spin it as though that's what they wanted), but I would expect the case to continue until SCO becomes the largest crater in Utah.
A partial summary judgement and a dismissal are entirely different. A partial summary judgement does not end the case.
Thanks for the link. Very informative.
:)
It still seems odd to me to refer to a plant by its marketing-induced final product name, but apparently it is done in the agricultural community when it comes to Canola. IMHO It's a bit like calling a cow grown for beef production a "quarter pounder with cheese".
>Roundup Ready canola seeds
FYI... There is no such thing as a canola plant or, by extension, canola seeds.
The term "canola" is a bastardization of "Canadian Oil", used by canadian growers in place of the less consumer-friendly name of the actual crop "rapeseed". The crop isn't refered to as canola until the oil is extracted.
So what you have here is "Roundup Ready Rapeseed", which sort of rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?
>The first browsers were GUIs (Mosaic).
The first HTTP/HTML browsers were GUI-driven, yes. But I would point out that if you define "web browser" as an application that lets you publish and browse ONLINE internet content, the first "web browser" was Gopher. Gopher was text based and released a good two years before Mosaic.
For a time, gopher was much more stable, usable, and popular than HTTP/HTML.
Ah... That reminds me of the days before AOL connected to the internet. Makes me all weepy eyed.
>Using a computer to measure ____ seems like an improvement, as a computer won't mark you down for race, religion, opinion, etc - things that tend to drive humans to have lower opinions of each other (and consequently can bias grading).
Yes, a computer has no bias. It also cannot comprehend what is written AT ALL. All it can do is process a few heuristics. This means that a child that's incapable of forming an intelligent thought will get rewarded for simply putting random words in a sentence structure.
Sorry, but that's not an improvement. We already have spelling and grammar checkers that students can use at home. What we need are intelligent people grading essays to give feedback on things like coherency, strength, voice, etc.
The point of writing is to communicate. How can you test communication when the target of that communication cannot understand what is written? To give you an example: Suppose I want to test your ability to speak french. I hire a Russian who can't speak a word of French, and ask him to count the words you speak and determine if your accent sounds French. You could be speaking Swahili with a French accent and he would never know.
Using a computer to test essays is even more ridiculous because not only does it not know the language, but it's incapable of even intelligently guessing at the meaning of an expression.
>These are all services for which the government is Constitutionally *obligated* to provide service.
Um... no. You've got it backwards.
The constitution says nothing about schools, security guards or research institutions. The constitution provides very little in the way of federal services.
However, I would argue that since the federal government has decided to levy an income tax, it IS obligated to provide for the preperation of the necessary documentation in the most secure fashion possible, using the technologies of the day. I should not be required to use the pony express to submit my forms if a much cheaper and more reliable method is available. Additionally, the IRS could reduce operating expenses (and hence reduce my taxes) if it provided free electronic form submission. This situation is pure "pork".
>Patents are rights to exclude
Technically yes, but that's not how they're defined or intended to be used. Patents are about licensing. If I patent a particular widget, I would expect other people to produce that same widget and give me royalties. The patent system was designed around physical processes and widgets.
This is so a the inventor of a particular widget is duly compensated.
Now, in the software world, things slightly completely different. Software, unlike your typical physical widget, is protected by copyright. Absent a patent, you already have the ability to lisence a particular software widget. Naturally, this means that few patent holders are interested in licensing their patents. This changes the nature of patents to be a more exclusive model, where all many are interested in doing is suing the crap out of any small fish who come up with the same idea. If you don't want to have your company squashed in patent litigation, the only available defense at the moment is to have your own patent portfolio, with the hope that you can countersue anyone that sues you.
Apple does indeed need to patent a lot of seemingly obvious things for this very reason. If Microsoft sues them over patent A, they counter with patent B, and they're at a stalemate.
>a law saying that the government can't compete with a private business
I've heard that before too. It seems to me such a law is quite useless and stupid, because the government can, will, and does compete with private business on a regular basis.
For example: There are public and private schools (esp at the secondary level). There are government-sponsored and private hospitals. There are public and private research facilities, security guards... the list goes on and on. I can't imagine how provding electronic tax form submission could be lumped into that and not any of those other things. It would be interesting to read the text of the law to see just how much smoke this congressman is blowing.
>You do realize that these tend to be contradictory. Keeping up with traffic for the most part requires speeding.
I do realize that. I see no problem with going 5-10 miles above the speed limit if that's what traffic is doing. I do, however, see a problem with weaving around everyone at close range in order to try to gain that extra couple of minutes.
>When your father is on his death bed in a hospital 40 miles away and you and your siblings want to get there to see him before he passes, I'm sure you'll want your car to be stuck doing the speedlimit...
That's not that great an argument. Speeding doesn't really get you anywhere appreciably faster. You could easily get pulled over and ticketed, causing you to be even further delayed. Besides, there's the possibility you could get in an accident and join your father on the other side much sooner than you had anticipated... possibly taking some innocent bystander with you.
Overall, however, I'm against both speed controls and speeding. Agressive driving (excessive speeding included) causes most accidents. Idiots in a hurry (whatever the reason) cause many more deaths than drunk driving.
I'm against speed controls simply because I've been in situations where I had to hit the gas to avoid an accident.
I just wish America could learn to chill out. There's no reason to be in such a goddam hurry. Go the same speed as traffic, don't hug anyone's bumper, signal before changing lanes, change one lane at a time, let other cars in if they want to switch lanes. You'll get there at about the same time, and not kill anyone in the process.
>You can easily convert a 1.5Mbs wav to a 128Kbps .wav.
.083 seconds!
>All you have to do is limit the length of the song to
good lord. There's TWO of them.
>The best 128kbps audio format is .wav ...
>wav files just don't last as long as mp3s
and the music plays "dum, dum, dum, dum, dum"
"ps" in "kbps" means PER SECOND.
>Everyone I know says giga with a hard G.
:)
Giga- derives from the same root as "giant"... One would suspect that's why it's pronounced similarly (or many would claim). Personally, I only started hearing the hard "g" when computers with gigabyte hard drives reached the masses. These same masses also claimed that 3.5 inch floppy disks were "hard disks" because they were less floppy than the 5.25" variety
Gigabyte sounds much cooler with the soft G (Jiga). Let's go with that.
>you know Linux and NTFS
The latest Knoppix includes the "captive" package, which uses the windows NTFS driver (if it can find it) to give Linux NTFS read/write support!
That said, this still isn't that great of an idea. Linux is fast, but video driver tweaks make all the difference in frame rate comparisons. Do we expect this bootable linux doom3 combination to blow away the performance on Windows, when video card companies focus their driver tweaking efforts on Windows?
I doubt it. You'll get "about the same" performance, but have to re-boot to use the game. The whole advantage of a linux client is not having run windows at all (greater stability, usability, speed etc), re-booting back and forth is a waste of time.
>with a bit of luck we'll see these features in worldwide mobiles sometime in 2005
correction: with a bit of luck, we WON'T be seeing these features in worldwide mobiles EVER.
Whatever happened to the engineering concept of affordance?
Portable phone: The ideal one is really portable and really a phone. Make it small, light, have the battery last forever and never lose calls. I'll buy that one. Keep the dog translator, thanks.
>What sort of efforts, if any, are being made toward letting people trivially recompile existing Windows programs to run natively under Linux/X?
:)
WineLib.
Thanks for playing