There should be a technical lead in every case. Someone who has the penultimate responsibilty for the technical decisions. The project manager interfaces (chirst I hate that word) with him and the rest of the people on the project to assign roles. Buit technical decisions not involving budget or release dates are left to the technical lead.
No, but I can run a restaurant without knowing how to cook. The chef is the lead cook. The lead programmer is the lead programmer, a projetc manager should neither cook nor program.
Every new version of software released should have its interface customizable in such a way that one can easily choose to interact with the new version in the same way as the old version. New features should be made available to the user at their discretion.
I really would like a new version of software to look exactly liek an old version, but as I progress and want to use the new features I can add them on eat a time and select their hotkeys and what not on the fly.
I'm not surprised creative doesn't use all 24 bits.
24 bit audio in a pc is not really practical as 24-bit audio means an equivalent SNR of 59 dB.
Most sound cards run at 1V Peak, which means one needs a noise floor of around a millivolt or two or less to make this sort of thing practical.
Most measurements of PC system noise are between --50 and -60 dB, there's a fan there and what not. So you cannot really use all 24 bits. The effective number of bits one would get out of a perfect D/A (infinite number of bits) would be somewhere around 22.
That doesn't stop people from advertising 24 bit... 64 bit audio processing. People are familiar with the number of bits in a completely different context, in which they matter much more. 64 bit processing certainly has its advantages over 32 bit, and a 64 bit address bus makes a very big difference. But in this case, you'll have to shield your sound card to get that sort of performance (not impractical).
My point was that legislating against these things was as you say "not rationally justified by a situation". Waiting and considering was what was not done. Stem cell use was legal until made otherwise.
Yes, baby harvesting is bad. But proceeding with too much caution costs more lives than it saves. If there is a promising technology available now that improve lives soon, don't we owe it to the terminally ill, to develop these things as quickly as possible. I'm sure everyone could agree on some basic unambiguous ethical guidelines (baby harvesting is certainly one of them) and progress from there.
Nuclear weapons save lives but at a great risk, and at a great human cost. Stem cells are abundant and can be harvested without loss of life. If you believe in organ donation, you should believe in this.
This is truly amazing. I don't understand how people can be so against a technology which is so obviously going to save many many lives. Perhaps the pro-life anti-stem cell people should be the ones we call baby killers, as without these new technologies so many lives will be lost. A new Thymus! Who'd of thunk?
Although it seems liek VOIP has little or no market share in north america, it is a completely different story in the developing world.
I was travelling through asia and later in south america. Callign home using a conventional calling card was ridiculously expensive.
But, a lot of little businesses were around offering international calls for very cheap. From Laos to canada for 15 cents a minute. Sure there was a little delay, but it was well worth it. All of these were using some sort of VOIP box./
In places without much telecommunications infrastructure, especially when most of the peopel own cell phones and not land phones, VOIP allows the convergence of all sorts of telecommunications traffic onto one simple infrastructure.
And by using open source software, free to all, the third world can much more easily afford it.
It also plans to send clean copies of the program to every registered customer free of charge and is attempting to contact developers who may have bought the product but not registered it.
Its not our fault...he never sent us his personal information and registered his product. Oh well, he'll learn for next time.
Making disribution more accessible
on
P2P Television?
·
· Score: 1
This would certainly allow small content producers to have access to every consumer. I like the idea of being able to wacth local programming from wherever on my t.v. and have it accessible at the same rate as huge networks. Wayne and Garth wouldn't of had to sellout to the big networks.
Know how to use a PDA? aren't these things supposed to be easy to use; aasier than a deep frier even. I've burnt all sorts of things with a deep frier, but was able to operate the calculator on my PDA first try.
I'm not so sure. If you look at the average bandwidth usage per user and ignore let's say the top 20% you still end up with a huge increase in consumption. Certailly the average person is downloading less than you but they are downloading more than they did before. My parents and most of their friends, have no idea (according to you, and me too) how to use their computers, but they purchase a cable internet account. If they don't use it they help make the cable internet business more, not less viable.
There is a market price for bandwidth. There is a cost, though perhaps sort of ethereal, to delivering it and administering it. There are not infinitely 0C-whatever fibers coming into my bedroom. If someone charges far too much for bandwidth another company will charge less, and the first will lower its price, and so on. Especially in a few years when the options for broadband delivery are more extensive.
By the way, noone will ever charge anyone more for bandwidth (or anything else) than it is worth to them.
Hunh, I mean the bandwidth caps are going to be something in the multiple gigs per month. People can still dowload music and movies. But probably they will download the ones they want to watch instead of just collecting and collecting.
No company will ever charge more for banwidth than its worth, and the worth of bandwidth will drop as the fiber is paid for etc.
What we'll see is not a curbing of the current traffic but a move towards more efficient distribution of future media.
If they were really smart they would generate files with the same name and of exactly the same size as those on the network. Then, as a result of the kazaa multiple download system peopel woudl end up with pieces of garbage interspersed with their movie. The next person who downloads ends up with garbage in different places and so on... the whole system is screwed. How easy would it be to make a piece of software to look for titles, generate random bit streams with those titles and then post them on the p2p network?
There is something to be said for the passivity of the television experience. People do not, generally, plan to sit down and watch a movie or a television show. They watch whatever is on. I would like to see the actual statistics of what percentage of commercials are skipped by owners of these PVRs compared to the average television owner. One would have to consider the demographic who owns these things, but I would bet that even generally not many commercials are missed.
It takes some effort to do that, and christ, i'm already wasting time watching the tv to start with what's another few minutes staring at commercials. Its much worse for the content providers to make it any more difficult to watch tv. They should be careful, advertisers will pay much for tv time than users will. The act of paying will remind people of how long they've been watching etc, and people might do something else.
Slashdot Mirror
its better than my dad you calls gigahertz jigaboobs.
There should be a technical lead in every case. Someone who has the penultimate responsibilty for the technical decisions. The project manager interfaces (chirst I hate that word) with him and the rest of the people on the project to assign roles. Buit technical decisions not involving budget or release dates are left to the technical lead.
No, but I can run a restaurant without knowing how to cook. The chef is the lead cook. The lead programmer is the lead programmer, a projetc manager should neither cook nor program.
Imagine getting kicked in the junk by one of these beasts, or heading-butting them while going for a header. Scary.
Every new version of software released should have its interface customizable in such a way that one can easily choose to interact with the new version in the same way as the old version.
New features should be made available to the user at their discretion.
I really would like a new version of software to look exactly liek an old version, but as I progress and want to use the new features I can add them on eat a time and select their hotkeys and what not on the fly.
Hustler! Every IT guy should read it. Obviosuly IT girls might want something a little different.
http://www.hustler.com/
yah, sorry, oops. I confess I knew there was some relationship and picked the first reference on the net. silly me.
isnt it 2*NB+11?
Maybe I'm wrong, I haven't done this for a while, if so thanks
Especially with a name like final fantasy! One good game, one great amount of pornography.
I'm not surprised creative doesn't use all 24 bits.
24 bit audio in a pc is not really practical as 24-bit audio means an equivalent SNR of 59 dB.
Most sound cards run at 1V Peak, which means one needs a noise floor of around a millivolt or two or less to make this sort of thing practical.
Most measurements of PC system noise are between --50 and -60 dB, there's a fan there and what not. So you cannot really use all 24 bits. The effective number of bits one would get out of a perfect D/A (infinite number of bits) would be somewhere around 22.
That doesn't stop people from advertising 24 bit... 64 bit audio processing. People are familiar with the number of bits in a completely different context, in which they matter much more. 64 bit processing certainly has its advantages over 32 bit, and a 64 bit address bus makes a very big difference. But in this case, you'll have to shield your sound card to get that sort of performance (not impractical).
My point was that legislating against these things was as you say "not rationally justified by a situation". Waiting and considering was what was not done. Stem cell use was legal until made otherwise.
Yes, baby harvesting is bad. But proceeding with too much caution costs more lives than it saves. If there is a promising technology available now that improve lives soon, don't we owe it to the terminally ill, to develop these things as quickly as possible. I'm sure everyone could agree on some basic unambiguous ethical guidelines (baby harvesting is certainly one of them) and progress from there.
Nuclear weapons save lives but at a great risk, and at a great human cost. Stem cells are abundant and can be harvested without loss of life. If you believe in organ donation, you should believe in this.
Since when is action worse than inaction? The act of legislating against these techniques is killing, failure to legislate at all is inaction.
That was funny. I disagree with the mod there. Damn Aussie's. Next they'll start making claims about some kind of animal with a pouch or something.
This is truly amazing. I don't understand how people can be so against a technology which is so obviously going to save many many lives. Perhaps the pro-life anti-stem cell people should be the ones we call baby killers, as without these new technologies so many lives will be lost. A new Thymus! Who'd of thunk?
Although it seems liek VOIP has little or no market share in north america, it is a completely different story in the developing world.
I was travelling through asia and later in south america. Callign home using a conventional calling card was ridiculously expensive.
But, a lot of little businesses were around offering international calls for very cheap. From Laos to canada for 15 cents a minute. Sure there was a little delay, but it was well worth it. All of these were using some sort of VOIP box./
In places without much telecommunications infrastructure, especially when most of the peopel own cell phones and not land phones, VOIP allows the convergence of all sorts of telecommunications traffic onto one simple infrastructure.
And by using open source software, free to all, the third world can much more easily afford it.
It also plans to send clean copies of the program to every registered customer free of charge and is attempting to contact developers who may have bought the product but not registered it.
Its not our fault...he never sent us his personal information and registered his product. Oh well, he'll learn for next time.
This would certainly allow small content producers to have access to every consumer. I like the idea of being able to wacth local programming from wherever on my t.v. and have it accessible at the same rate as huge networks. Wayne and Garth wouldn't of had to sellout to the big networks.
????
Know how to use a PDA? aren't these things supposed to be easy to use; aasier than a deep frier even. I've burnt all sorts of things with a deep frier, but was able to operate the calculator on my PDA first try.
I'm not so sure. If you look at the average bandwidth usage per user and ignore let's say the top 20% you still end up with a huge increase in consumption. Certailly the average person is downloading less than you but they are downloading more than they did before. My parents and most of their friends, have no idea (according to you, and me too) how to use their computers, but they purchase a cable internet account. If they don't use it they help make the cable internet business more, not less viable.
There is a market price for bandwidth. There is a cost, though perhaps sort of ethereal, to delivering it and administering it. There are not infinitely 0C-whatever fibers coming into my bedroom. If someone charges far too much for bandwidth another company will charge less, and the first will lower its price, and so on. Especially in a few years when the options for broadband delivery are more extensive.
By the way, noone will ever charge anyone more for bandwidth (or anything else) than it is worth to them.
Hunh, I mean the bandwidth caps are going to be something in the multiple gigs per month. People can still dowload music and movies. But probably they will download the ones they want to watch instead of just collecting and collecting.
No company will ever charge more for banwidth than its worth, and the worth of bandwidth will drop as the fiber is paid for etc.
What we'll see is not a curbing of the current traffic but a move towards more efficient distribution of future media.
the pin number to bill gates chequing account?
or ma bitches phone numbers?
If they were really smart they would generate files with the same name and of exactly the same size as those on the network. Then, as a result of the kazaa multiple download system peopel woudl end up with pieces of garbage interspersed with their movie. The next person who downloads ends up with garbage in different places and so on... the whole system is screwed. How easy would it be to make a piece of software to look for titles, generate random bit streams with those titles and then post them on the p2p network?
There is something to be said for the passivity of the television experience. People do not, generally, plan to sit down and watch a movie or a television show. They watch whatever is on. I would like to see the actual statistics of what percentage of commercials are skipped by owners of these PVRs compared to the average television owner. One would have to consider the demographic who owns these things, but I would bet that even generally not many commercials are missed.
It takes some effort to do that, and christ, i'm already wasting time watching the tv to start with what's another few minutes staring at commercials. Its much worse for the content providers to make it any more difficult to watch tv. They should be careful, advertisers will pay much for tv time than users will. The act of paying will remind people of how long they've been watching etc, and people might do something else.