His confusion is not surprising considering the annoying tendency to keep calling all motion pictures 'films'
FWIW, in British English, 'film' is the generally accepted word for a motion picture. The BFI will not become the British Movie Institute any time soon. BAFTA (British Acadamy of Film and Television Arts) will not become BAMTA.
There is a distinction made between "Film" (as in a feature film) "short film" and a TV programme, which would not normally be referred to as either a movie or a film in Britain.
I don't think you would need more details. Jeremy Clarkson thought (and did) this in the UK and had to retract when people had signed him up for charity donations.
Why do we settle, when we can have anything? When do we start creating art?
There's room for both. Some people like Miley Cyrus, some people like Radiohead. Likewise in games. Some people like the hyper-realism of Forza Motorsport; some people like the artistic graphics of Viewtiful Joe
The PS3's complete graphical dominance over the Xbox 360 comes from:
And yet for most cross-platform games, Eurogamer's gloriously technical comparisons tend to come out for the 360 version on actual measurable graphical properties.
I have no doubt that you can work wonders on the PS3 when portability isn't a concern. But for many publishers that's not an option.
Both consoles have their own strengths. When you target one's strengths, you have to make compromises when porting to the other. The pyrotechnic first level of Bayonetta appears to have been designed with the strengths of the 360's GPU in mind. The PS3 port has the effects turned down, yet still runs at a poorer frame rate.
I'm sure you could design a level that pushes the balance towards the PS3. Horses for courses.
Back in context: This delay seemingly inherent in current implementations of Electronic Funds Transfer, is worse than a paper check...how, exactly?
Quoting the GP:
Within that time, the recipient has _no_ indication that funds have been approved or sent at all.
At least if I give someone a cheque, he knows he's been given a cheque. He doesn't know it will clear.
Whereas with current implementations, with a bank transfer he only has my word. So there's a simple improvement that could be made to the electronic system - notify the recipient that a transfer is in progress. I'm happy to allow the banks their artificial transfer time, since I don't pay for banking in any other way.
It's true you could set up a fraudulent direct debit in my name. But I could correct that with no penalty. I believe Clarkson did not claim back the money (because it was charity and he is loaded). But he could have done easily.
Yes, the sort code gives away which bank I use. That is its purpose. Why would I keep that a secret.
Any other form of payment would make my job ten times harder, due to needing personal visits, easy to lose cards, etc.
I don't think you realise how easy bank transfers are in Europe.
As long as you have that individual's or that village shop's account number and sort code (non-secrets; they can email it, tell you over the phone, publish it) you can go set up the payment on your bank's web site - as simple as "send £x to this account, giving the transaction this name. Submit, "are you sure", yes, done.
You can even set up recurring payments. It will make your job ten times easier.
How is a bank card easier to lose than a chequebook? (I don't know where my chequebook is).
I organised our office Christmas party this year. I accepted payment by bank transfer, or cash to my desk. I much preferred the people who paid it into my bank.
2) Large amounts between individuals: we're selling our car and aren't quite sure what to do. Obviously cash is a little inconvenient, but a wire transfer happens at a bank or online. So neither of these work as nicely as a check either.
It would be foolish to accept a cheque for a large sum of money. Cheques can bounce. The old-world solution in the UK is to get a banker's draft, which is no less hassle than getting cash.
What's the backup plan in case a massive solar flare fries our power and computing infrastructure?
What do you think happens when a cheque gets to the bank? It's transcribed to bits and bytes. The piece of paper is put in a folder, never looked at again unless there's an audit, then eventually destroyed.
Have we reached the point where that's the end of civilization anyway?
I like music, and when it's on, I can't help but listen to it. That means that while music is playing, I can't concentrate on reading a book, let alone write code. This applies to all but the most ambient styles of music. And a drone doesn't help me work either. If I thought all programmers were like me, I'd ban headphones too.
But, we're all different, and I know some people do their best work when zoned out behind their headphones.
It sounds like this management decision comes from someone who doesn't realise how much people vary.
It would make sense to provide programmers with an environment where they can escape prattle when they need to, as well.
Yeah, you'd have thought everyone would be able to read the little label next to the ESRB 17+ mark, suggesting a Teen rated alternative to the game you're looking at.
Errr, sorry what? You say there isn't such a label?
Do people actually do this? Do folks actually read in the bathtub?
Don't the pages get all weird from the humidity? What if you drop your book in the water? Don't your wet hands mess up the pages?
Short answer: yes people do.
There are obstacles of course, but once you're settled down there are few things as relaxing.
I'm sure everyone has their own routines. One way is to lower oneself into the bath while holding the book, without getting either hand wet. Another is to put the book on a reachable dry surface, then get into the bath, then towel your hands dry, and get the book.
When it's time to stop reading and start washing, toss the book onto a dry surface. I've never found that the temporary humidity did lasting damage to a book. Dropping one in is obviously disastrous.
Best only read light paperbacks or magazines in the bath.
switching a page takes something like 0.5-1 seconds, with the complete page flickering to black in the process...
I just watched some demos on YouTube, and it seemed much faster than 0.5s.
The flash to black as it switches does seem disruptive. Does anyone know why it's necessary? It seems to me that the firmware ought to be able to toggle individual pixels.
Definitely e-ink is the feature that makes these special.
- Much more readable, because it reflects rather than transmits light
- Readable in bright conditions, for the same reason
- Low power drain when showing static pages
Ironically, in a way, e-ink isn't good for much *except* e-readers (yet) because of the cost, the fact it's monochrome and the poor refresh rate.
If you drop a Kindle in the bath, you ruin $250-worth of gadget. Although on the up side, you probably don't lose the content, and it might be covered on your home contents insurance...
I haven't tried one myself. I'm a bit dubious about the way it's *all* PDF (reflowable text seems better for many kinds of writing). But if PDF works for you, Foxit are among the best at it. Their software PDF viewer is certainly better than Adobe's.
Apologizing for behavior is one thing. Making sure it never happens again is quite another.
It wasn't just an apology, but a better-for-like replacement. That is, people bought an unlicensed product, and were eventually given a licensed replacement.
Making sure it never happens again? It's plain to see that Amazon were smarting from the negative publicity. For entirely self serving reasons, they won't repeat that.
I'll repeat though - I don't think the 1984 episode shows Amazon in a particularly bad light. However I don't think buying DRM'd books is a wise move for most consumers.
I'm not keen on buying DRM'd e-books. But the fact is that in this case, Amazon showed itself to be capable of treating customers right, and of making the right reparations when standards slip.
Do you know why that would kill swarm performance? And even if it does, how bad do you think it would be if say 30% of the people on did so?
I think it only matters at as the swarm is starting up. Think about it - the most efficient thing would be if every leecher is fetching a different part of the file. That expedites the situation where peers can start sharing with each other, reducing the load on the seeder.
If everyone starts at the beginning, then most leechers will be looking for parts that only the original seeder has.
Once there's a good population of seeds, it's OK -- it does rely on people continuing to seed after they've finished watching their streamed movie.
I like Wildclaw's observation, that a leecher might fetch the parts it needs from the front, in parallel with random parts from later in the file, in order to at least have something to trade.
Slashdot Mirror
His confusion is not surprising considering the annoying tendency to keep calling all motion pictures 'films'
FWIW, in British English, 'film' is the generally accepted word for a motion picture. The BFI will not become the British Movie Institute any time soon. BAFTA (British Acadamy of Film and Television Arts) will not become BAMTA.
There is a distinction made between "Film" (as in a feature film) "short film" and a TV programme, which would not normally be referred to as either a movie or a film in Britain.
I don't think you would need more details. Jeremy Clarkson thought (and did) this in the UK and had to retract when people had signed him up for charity donations.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/07/clarkson_bank_prank_backfires/
See the comment "Nothing to see here MK2" to that story.
Where is the weird, the fantastic, the horrible and the wonderful?
Bayonetta? Brutal Legend? Katamari? Bit.Trip.Beat?
Why do we settle, when we can have anything? When do we start creating art?
There's room for both. Some people like Miley Cyrus, some people like Radiohead. Likewise in games. Some people like the hyper-realism of Forza Motorsport; some people like the artistic graphics of Viewtiful Joe
The PS3's complete graphical dominance over the Xbox 360 comes from:
And yet for most cross-platform games, Eurogamer's gloriously technical comparisons tend to come out for the 360 version on actual measurable graphical properties.
I have no doubt that you can work wonders on the PS3 when portability isn't a concern. But for many publishers that's not an option.
Both consoles have their own strengths. When you target one's strengths, you have to make compromises when porting to the other. The pyrotechnic first level of Bayonetta appears to have been designed with the strengths of the 360's GPU in mind. The PS3 port has the effects turned down, yet still runs at a poorer frame rate.
I'm sure you could design a level that pushes the balance towards the PS3. Horses for courses.
Back in context: This delay seemingly inherent in current implementations of Electronic Funds Transfer, is worse than a paper check...how, exactly?
Quoting the GP:
Within that time, the recipient has _no_ indication that funds have been approved or sent at all.
At least if I give someone a cheque, he knows he's been given a cheque. He doesn't know it will clear.
Whereas with current implementations, with a bank transfer he only has my word. So there's a simple improvement that could be made to the electronic system - notify the recipient that a transfer is in progress. I'm happy to allow the banks their artificial transfer time, since I don't pay for banking in any other way.
It's true you could set up a fraudulent direct debit in my name. But I could correct that with no penalty. I believe Clarkson did not claim back the money (because it was charity and he is loaded). But he could have done easily.
Yes, the sort code gives away which bank I use. That is its purpose. Why would I keep that a secret.
nobody is quite sure as to how public bank account numbers ought to be
Public. There, now you know.
My sort code is 08-92-86 and my account number is 04034315
With that information, you can send me money. You'd need more information to steal from me.
Any other form of payment would make my job ten times harder, due to needing personal visits, easy to lose cards, etc.
I don't think you realise how easy bank transfers are in Europe.
As long as you have that individual's or that village shop's account number and sort code (non-secrets; they can email it, tell you over the phone, publish it) you can go set up the payment on your bank's web site - as simple as "send £x to this account, giving the transaction this name. Submit, "are you sure", yes, done.
You can even set up recurring payments. It will make your job ten times easier.
How is a bank card easier to lose than a chequebook? (I don't know where my chequebook is).
I organised our office Christmas party this year. I accepted payment by bank transfer, or cash to my desk. I much preferred the people who paid it into my bank.
2) Large amounts between individuals: we're selling our car and aren't quite sure what to do. Obviously cash is a little inconvenient, but a wire transfer happens at a bank or online. So neither of these work as nicely as a check either.
It would be foolish to accept a cheque for a large sum of money. Cheques can bounce. The old-world solution in the UK is to get a banker's draft, which is no less hassle than getting cash.
What's the backup plan in case a massive solar flare fries our power and computing infrastructure?
What do you think happens when a cheque gets to the bank? It's transcribed to bits and bytes. The piece of paper is put in a folder, never looked at again unless there's an audit, then eventually destroyed.
Have we reached the point where that's the end of civilization anyway?
Not necessarily. As I said, I *like* music, so I could happily spend all day with headphones on, while doing a bad job.
Music's a great accompaniment to mindless drudgery, like housework.
I like music, and when it's on, I can't help but listen to it. That means that while music is playing, I can't concentrate on reading a book, let alone write code. This applies to all but the most ambient styles of music. And a drone doesn't help me work either. If I thought all programmers were like me, I'd ban headphones too.
But, we're all different, and I know some people do their best work when zoned out behind their headphones.
It sounds like this management decision comes from someone who doesn't realise how much people vary.
It would make sense to provide programmers with an environment where they can escape prattle when they need to, as well.
If you don't have age ratings on games etc., you end up with what Australia has, where adult content is banned outright.
Yeah, you'd have thought everyone would be able to read the little label next to the ESRB 17+ mark, suggesting a Teen rated alternative to the game you're looking at.
Errr, sorry what? You say there isn't such a label?
Oh, maybe this article has some merit then.
The whole point of the article is "You know from the ESRB ratings that these games aren't for kids. So for each one, what's a good substitute?"
"Undress for Success — The Naked Truth about Making Money at Home"
Is the subtext here that the only way to make money working from home is as a webcam stripper?
Or merely that when you're on the phone to your working-from-home colleague, he may be naked?
Do people actually do this? Do folks actually read in the bathtub?
Don't the pages get all weird from the humidity? What if you drop your book in the water? Don't your wet hands mess up the pages?
Short answer: yes people do.
There are obstacles of course, but once you're settled down there are few things as relaxing.
I'm sure everyone has their own routines. One way is to lower oneself into the bath while holding the book, without getting either hand wet. Another is to put the book on a reachable dry surface, then get into the bath, then towel your hands dry, and get the book.
When it's time to stop reading and start washing, toss the book onto a dry surface. I've never found that the temporary humidity did lasting damage to a book. Dropping one in is obviously disastrous.
Best only read light paperbacks or magazines in the bath.
switching a page takes something like 0.5-1 seconds, with the complete page flickering to black in the process...
I just watched some demos on YouTube, and it seemed much faster than 0.5s.
The flash to black as it switches does seem disruptive. Does anyone know why it's necessary? It seems to me that the firmware ought to be able to toggle individual pixels.
Definitely e-ink is the feature that makes these special.
- Much more readable, because it reflects rather than transmits light
- Readable in bright conditions, for the same reason
- Low power drain when showing static pages
Ironically, in a way, e-ink isn't good for much *except* e-readers (yet) because of the cost, the fact it's monochrome and the poor refresh rate.
If you drop a book in the bath, you ruin a book.
If you drop a Kindle in the bath, you ruin $250-worth of gadget. Although on the up side, you probably don't lose the content, and it might be covered on your home contents insurance...
I think the issue is the discomfort of holding a thumb in there to keep a book open, when holding it one-handed.
Have you considered the Foxit eSlick.
http://www.foxitsoftware.com/ebook/
I haven't tried one myself. I'm a bit dubious about the way it's *all* PDF (reflowable text seems better for many kinds of writing). But if PDF works for you, Foxit are among the best at it. Their software PDF viewer is certainly better than Adobe's.
Apologizing for behavior is one thing. Making sure it never happens again is quite another.
It wasn't just an apology, but a better-for-like replacement. That is, people bought an unlicensed product, and were eventually given a licensed replacement.
Making sure it never happens again? It's plain to see that Amazon were smarting from the negative publicity. For entirely self serving reasons, they won't repeat that.
I'll repeat though - I don't think the 1984 episode shows Amazon in a particularly bad light. However I don't think buying DRM'd books is a wise move for most consumers.
It was a bad decision on Amazon's part, but it was one they made good on in my opinion:
http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/09/04/big-amazon-will-give-you-back-your-copies-if-1984-annotations-wont-be-sent-into-the-chute/
I'm not keen on buying DRM'd e-books. But the fact is that in this case, Amazon showed itself to be capable of treating customers right, and of making the right reparations when standards slip.
Do you know why that would kill swarm performance? And even if it does, how bad do you think it would be if say 30% of the people on did so?
I think it only matters at as the swarm is starting up. Think about it - the most efficient thing would be if every leecher is fetching a different part of the file. That expedites the situation where peers can start sharing with each other, reducing the load on the seeder.
If everyone starts at the beginning, then most leechers will be looking for parts that only the original seeder has.
Once there's a good population of seeds, it's OK -- it does rely on people continuing to seed after they've finished watching their streamed movie.
I like Wildclaw's observation, that a leecher might fetch the parts it needs from the front, in parallel with random parts from later in the file, in order to at least have something to trade.