G+ also does not let you login from the same ip address twice, from what I see so far. How can this work for families with many members but only one computef? or machines shared by different people in different shifts in a business setting?
We have more than one computer, but my wife and I both share the main PC. We're both logged into Google+, at the same time, on the same computer...but using different Windows profiles. No problems at all.
Yes...you're over thinking the circles concept. Each circle is just that...a circle on your "circles page" that you can drag and drop any of your contacts into. They don't interact with each other, nor do they take away any of your contacts from the general "contact pool" once that contact has been added to a particular circle.
If you really wanted to, I'm sure you could create a Vann Diagram to show the relations between all circles, but Google doesn't do that for you.
Agreed...the key word in the title is "above". Not "across" not "through" but above. I mean, the wingsuit is cool and all, but I don't see this as any more interesting as "Jetman flies above Canadian Tundra". Actually the latter might be more interesting if they included data on the perfomance of the suit in cold vs warmer climates.
In defense of the article, it did have some concrete conclusions, e.g.:
"There are conflicting reports, however, as to whether its graphics will be comparable to those on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 – meaning it could surpass or fall short of those systems.
Seems to me a similar story was posted not too long ago. Summary of the discussion: graphical calculators serve as an anti-cheating tool, as they cannot be programmed, except that they can be programmed if you're smart enough, and therefore actually serve no purpose. The only practical solution seemed to be providing students with a school owned graphic calculator at the beginning of the test (thus taking away any opportunity to pre-program the calculator).
If you select more than 20 items, size does no longer appear.
Technically correct, except you forgot to mention that a link then appears, which you can click to "Show Details". The total size then appears.
Its apperantly for performance reasons.
Lemme guess...if MS had allowed you select 20+ objects, requiring a few seconds each time to calculate the total size each time you did that, you would be the one screaming how slow and laggy W7 is. Some people you just can't please...especially the ones who have decided to hate you no matter what you do.
Actually, I think your post does a great job of reinforcing the point I was trying to make. All the examples you cite are kinda cool little projects in themselves, but why are these game changers? All I saw was a bunch of half baked UI projects, but how do they come together to significantly improve the way we interact with computers?
To cite an opposite example, take similar Apple PR videos. I'm no Apple fan, and own no Apple products, but I can't ever remember watching a promo video from them and not grasping the point right away. It is immediately apparent why they consider their product/feature to be a game changer.
Not the case with this video. I'll admit there were a couple "neat" moments, but between the half baked projects, the recycling of features they have been showing off for years (e.g. Surface), and the ability of the narrator to make zero points while prattling on for over three minutes ("we're ready for the future" How? "By having a vision" What fucking vision?), I was left with a big fat "SO WHAT"?
Did you watch the video? I found the summary's weaknesses much more palatable than the ridiculously vague video in TFA, which was filled with corporate-speak, and showed off a bunch of interactivity projects without demonstrating how any of these would be used in real world applications, let alone how they would improve the way we currently interact with computers.
So while I'll admit I know very little about Autism and the proper manner of raising a autistic child, am I the only one that found the mother's defense somehow wrong? When we notice a shortcoming in our kids, we attempt to find a solution for them to overcome it. As I understand, the most difficult action for most autistic children is interacting with the real world...so how is accepting "xbox is his only real friend" and "the only thing he ever does" helping him to overcome the issues he'll have to face in later years? It would seem to me allowing him to immerse himself in a virtual world, where no communication is required, would only exasperate the problem. That video did not make me feel sorry for the kid because the mom claimed he was being unfairly treated by Microsoft...it made me feel sorry for him because he might be treated unfairly by his mother. What really is the lesson here...fight the evil corporation who took away achievements or that achievements have no real value in the real world?
I really enjoyed GTA: Vice City and San Andreas, so I was surprised when I was completely turned off by Liberty City. I think that was a change in myself more than the game's format.
I had the same experience. But for me the reason wasn't so much a "change in myself". It was being stuck in city traffic for the entire game that made me hate Liberty City. San Andreas had a huge and highly varied landscape...hill country, desert, little towns and big cities...and a huge variety of vehicles to travel with. Going from one side of the map to the other was a lot fun and usually involved a mixture of air, sea and land vehicles. But I actually found myself groaning during Liberty City when I found out I had to drive across the map for a mission. Fighting city traffic, paying tolls...these things aren't fun in real life...why would they be fun in a game? And almost completely dropping all air vehicles? That was the final straw. Who cares if you can explore all you want, if there's nothing interesting to see and no interesting way of seeing it?
This analogy fails because all those products are all commodities. A TV, CD player, car, and light bulb can all be easily replaced by another model or even another brand that performs almost identically. Fallout: New Vegas cannot.
Sure there are other RPGs out there that share the same basic gameplay as FNV, but none offer almost an identical experience (except Fallout 3 of course, but I suspect most FNV players that are willing to buy the game despite the well known bugginess of it have already played through all of Fallout 3 and its DLC).
While I did find the constant crashes very annoying, the gameplay was still exciting and fun enough for me to prefer restarting and continue playing, rather than setting it aside and waiting a few months for the bugs to be ironed out. This coming from a 31 year old gamer with years of PC gaming experience, and not just an easily impressed teen.
Actually, the more I think about it, the more this kind of behaviour on the part of the game publishers makes sense. There's plenty of examples where people are so excited about something new, they are willing to accept a substandard product in exchange for the ability to experience it as soon as possible. Why do you think cam recordings of movies are popular, or why apple fans line up for first-gen releases of a gadget that even they know will likely be buggy, or even why people eat cookie dough before it is cooked? The game publishers are merely pandering to our human nature.
I think the solution is easy. What's the one common denominator with all airplane related terrorist acts? An airplane of course! So ban all airplanes! Problem solved.
What? Are you telling me the life of the thousands of innocent children that will inevitably die in the airplane related terrorist attacks if we don't ban airplanes are worth the luxury of a few less hours/days of travel?
Seriously...is there any other film franchise out there that blatantly squeezes more money out of its fans? I myself am not a real Star Wars fan, but even I'm disgusted at the constant re-releases / special editions / extra special editions with 23 extra seconds of never before seen footage. The VHS/DVD/BluRay upgrade cycle for the exact same movie is bad enough. I mean, I know the fans who keep buying into this shit are the ultimate ones to blame...but who do you hate more...the crackhead or the asshole dealer that will do anything to enable and string out the addict until there's nothing left?
Funny thing is, I would be happier if it concerned itself less with my current emotional state and more ensuring it just worked as it should. Considering the complexity of emotions and how differently people react to said emotions, I can't see how this could be implemented to anyone's satisfaction
Here Here! I started cooking after the beginning of my marriage, and all I had was a four inch Ikea knife and an old cast iron skillet. I made some of the best meals I've ever made. Now almost five years later, with much nicer knives and cooking supplies, I can make the same meals much quicker, but only increased experience makes them any better.
Getting away from the cable companies in America is already pretty easy - between netflix and hulu, you're pretty much covered. Unfortunately, these services are only available in the US. Netflix apparently is coming to Canada, but without the streaming service, which is all I really want from them.
Unless of course, they don't pay for cable. A lot of people, myself included, are tired of the cable companies bundling/pricing schemes. I only watch 4-5 shows every season...why should I pay for the hundreds I have no interest watching? I for one love the idea of renting shows online. I think the pricing is still too high, but it's a step in the right direction. Finally some real competition in TV offerings. Maybe this will force cable companies to offer plans that favour the consumer rather than the provider.
Who feels that is their right these days? I've never heard someone say "it's my right to drink and drive".
Actually, the opposite is usually true. Here in BC the legal limit will be dropping from.08 to.05 soon. Just try arguing against that. If you do, you're immediately regarded as an advocate for drinking and driving, rather than an advocate for moderation. Even if the subject is brought up among my friends, all of whom enjoy their beer, there's little to no indignation on their part, or a feeling that their rights are being taken away. The consensus is "well, guess we shouldn't be drinking and driving anyways." Never mind that the new limit will only punish moderates rather than the truly incapacitated that were already targeted under the previous limit.
In the end, I don't really care either - I'm just a little miffed MADD continues to push the laws towards their prohibitionist ideals and there's nothing you can do about it without looking like a drunk.
Slashdot Mirror
That's so offensive! They're called "Little People". Not "0.10's"
G+ also does not let you login from the same ip address twice, from what I see so far. How can this work for families with many members but only one computef? or machines shared by different people in different shifts in a business setting?
We have more than one computer, but my wife and I both share the main PC. We're both logged into Google+, at the same time, on the same computer...but using different Windows profiles. No problems at all.
Yes...you're over thinking the circles concept. Each circle is just that...a circle on your "circles page" that you can drag and drop any of your contacts into. They don't interact with each other, nor do they take away any of your contacts from the general "contact pool" once that contact has been added to a particular circle.
If you really wanted to, I'm sure you could create a Vann Diagram to show the relations between all circles, but Google doesn't do that for you.
Agreed...the key word in the title is "above". Not "across" not "through" but above. I mean, the wingsuit is cool and all, but I don't see this as any more interesting as "Jetman flies above Canadian Tundra". Actually the latter might be more interesting if they included data on the perfomance of the suit in cold vs warmer climates.
In defense of the article, it did have some concrete conclusions, e.g.:
"There are conflicting reports, however, as to whether its graphics will be comparable to those on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 – meaning it could surpass or fall short of those systems.
Seems to me a similar story was posted not too long ago. Summary of the discussion: graphical calculators serve as an anti-cheating tool, as they cannot be programmed, except that they can be programmed if you're smart enough, and therefore actually serve no purpose. The only practical solution seemed to be providing students with a school owned graphic calculator at the beginning of the test (thus taking away any opportunity to pre-program the calculator).
If you select more than 20 items, size does no longer appear.
Technically correct, except you forgot to mention that a link then appears, which you can click to "Show Details". The total size then appears.
Its apperantly for performance reasons.
Lemme guess...if MS had allowed you select 20+ objects, requiring a few seconds each time to calculate the total size each time you did that, you would be the one screaming how slow and laggy W7 is. Some people you just can't please...especially the ones who have decided to hate you no matter what you do.
Actually, I think your post does a great job of reinforcing the point I was trying to make. All the examples you cite are kinda cool little projects in themselves, but why are these game changers? All I saw was a bunch of half baked UI projects, but how do they come together to significantly improve the way we interact with computers?
To cite an opposite example, take similar Apple PR videos. I'm no Apple fan, and own no Apple products, but I can't ever remember watching a promo video from them and not grasping the point right away. It is immediately apparent why they consider their product/feature to be a game changer.
Not the case with this video. I'll admit there were a couple "neat" moments, but between the half baked projects, the recycling of features they have been showing off for years (e.g. Surface), and the ability of the narrator to make zero points while prattling on for over three minutes ("we're ready for the future" How? "By having a vision" What fucking vision?), I was left with a big fat "SO WHAT"?
Did you watch the video? I found the summary's weaknesses much more palatable than the ridiculously vague video in TFA, which was filled with corporate-speak, and showed off a bunch of interactivity projects without demonstrating how any of these would be used in real world applications, let alone how they would improve the way we currently interact with computers.
Suggested Form Letter:
Dear Sen. Susan Collins:
Fuck You. No.
Respectfully,
Your constituent
So while I'll admit I know very little about Autism and the proper manner of raising a autistic child, am I the only one that found the mother's defense somehow wrong? When we notice a shortcoming in our kids, we attempt to find a solution for them to overcome it. As I understand, the most difficult action for most autistic children is interacting with the real world...so how is accepting "xbox is his only real friend" and "the only thing he ever does" helping him to overcome the issues he'll have to face in later years? It would seem to me allowing him to immerse himself in a virtual world, where no communication is required, would only exasperate the problem. That video did not make me feel sorry for the kid because the mom claimed he was being unfairly treated by Microsoft...it made me feel sorry for him because he might be treated unfairly by his mother. What really is the lesson here...fight the evil corporation who took away achievements or that achievements have no real value in the real world?
This! I really liked the movie too, but every time that kid opened his mouth, I cringed a little. Whiny little runt.
I really enjoyed GTA: Vice City and San Andreas, so I was surprised when I was completely turned off by Liberty City. I think that was a change in myself more than the game's format.
I had the same experience. But for me the reason wasn't so much a "change in myself". It was being stuck in city traffic for the entire game that made me hate Liberty City. San Andreas had a huge and highly varied landscape...hill country, desert, little towns and big cities...and a huge variety of vehicles to travel with. Going from one side of the map to the other was a lot fun and usually involved a mixture of air, sea and land vehicles. But I actually found myself groaning during Liberty City when I found out I had to drive across the map for a mission. Fighting city traffic, paying tolls...these things aren't fun in real life...why would they be fun in a game? And almost completely dropping all air vehicles? That was the final straw. Who cares if you can explore all you want, if there's nothing interesting to see and no interesting way of seeing it?
This analogy fails because all those products are all commodities. A TV, CD player, car, and light bulb can all be easily replaced by another model or even another brand that performs almost identically. Fallout: New Vegas cannot.
Sure there are other RPGs out there that share the same basic gameplay as FNV, but none offer almost an identical experience (except Fallout 3 of course, but I suspect most FNV players that are willing to buy the game despite the well known bugginess of it have already played through all of Fallout 3 and its DLC).
While I did find the constant crashes very annoying, the gameplay was still exciting and fun enough for me to prefer restarting and continue playing, rather than setting it aside and waiting a few months for the bugs to be ironed out. This coming from a 31 year old gamer with years of PC gaming experience, and not just an easily impressed teen.
Actually, the more I think about it, the more this kind of behaviour on the part of the game publishers makes sense. There's plenty of examples where people are so excited about something new, they are willing to accept a substandard product in exchange for the ability to experience it as soon as possible. Why do you think cam recordings of movies are popular, or why apple fans line up for first-gen releases of a gadget that even they know will likely be buggy, or even why people eat cookie dough before it is cooked? The game publishers are merely pandering to our human nature.
So how do we, as a culture, try to fix this?
I think the solution is easy. What's the one common denominator with all airplane related terrorist acts? An airplane of course! So ban all airplanes! Problem solved.
What? Are you telling me the life of the thousands of innocent children that will inevitably die in the airplane related terrorist attacks if we don't ban airplanes are worth the luxury of a few less hours/days of travel?
Seriously...is there any other film franchise out there that blatantly squeezes more money out of its fans? I myself am not a real Star Wars fan, but even I'm disgusted at the constant re-releases / special editions / extra special editions with 23 extra seconds of never before seen footage. The VHS/DVD/BluRay upgrade cycle for the exact same movie is bad enough. I mean, I know the fans who keep buying into this shit are the ultimate ones to blame...but who do you hate more...the crackhead or the asshole dealer that will do anything to enable and string out the addict until there's nothing left?
Funny thing is, I would be happier if it concerned itself less with my current emotional state and more ensuring it just worked as it should. Considering the complexity of emotions and how differently people react to said emotions, I can't see how this could be implemented to anyone's satisfaction
Do not want!
Here Here! I started cooking after the beginning of my marriage, and all I had was a four inch Ikea knife and an old cast iron skillet. I made some of the best meals I've ever made. Now almost five years later, with much nicer knives and cooking supplies, I can make the same meals much quicker, but only increased experience makes them any better.
Pfft...real techs go to the source and scan the retinas
Quick...someone zoom in on the reflections in the monitor and enhance!
Getting away from the cable companies in America is already pretty easy - between netflix and hulu, you're pretty much covered. Unfortunately, these services are only available in the US. Netflix apparently is coming to Canada, but without the streaming service, which is all I really want from them.
Unless of course, they don't pay for cable. A lot of people, myself included, are tired of the cable companies bundling/pricing schemes. I only watch 4-5 shows every season...why should I pay for the hundreds I have no interest watching? I for one love the idea of renting shows online. I think the pricing is still too high, but it's a step in the right direction. Finally some real competition in TV offerings. Maybe this will force cable companies to offer plans that favour the consumer rather than the provider.
So yeah, he was completely unprofessional, and could have hurt the ground crew...but 7 years prison potentially? That seems a bit much.
Who feels that is their right these days? I've never heard someone say "it's my right to drink and drive".
.08 to .05 soon. Just try arguing against that. If you do, you're immediately regarded as an advocate for drinking and driving, rather than an advocate for moderation. Even if the subject is brought up among my friends, all of whom enjoy their beer, there's little to no indignation on their part, or a feeling that their rights are being taken away. The consensus is "well, guess we shouldn't be drinking and driving anyways." Never mind that the new limit will only punish moderates rather than the truly incapacitated that were already targeted under the previous limit.
Actually, the opposite is usually true. Here in BC the legal limit will be dropping from
In the end, I don't really care either - I'm just a little miffed MADD continues to push the laws towards their prohibitionist ideals and there's nothing you can do about it without looking like a drunk.