Those Dyson fans have a small-er noisy fan that feed the air multiplier. It only makes sense for a certain size of fans as what you reduce is the buffeting low-frequency sound that's annoying as hell with large blades. This makes zero sense for cooling fans in computers. The smaller feeder fans will simply wear out faster than the big ones, noise will not decrease.
Yet, these days you get Direct3D on anything that runs Windows, and you're guaranteed decent 9.0c support. OpenGL is a crapshoot. You can get better performing and more stable OpenGL ES 2.0 support if you use ANGLE running on top of Direct3D than if you depend on vendor driver support.
HD video recording and editing equipment is cheap these days. You can go to a large grocery store and buy everything you need -- a photo camera and some editing software, memory cards, perhaps an external hard drive or two. It's a trivially solved problem to record exams from even multiple angles. 20 years ago things were different, of course. These days, there's no excuse.
If you think you know something and can't give reasonable "exam grade" presentation about it without much preparation, you don't really know it. That's my humble opinion. Once I consider to know something, I probably don't have the best ways researched to teach it, but presenting it well enough off the bat to convince a professor that I know it -- meh. Of course some people can't present anything so that's an obstacle on its own, whether they know the subject cold or not.
I'm also amazed at how differently one can define cheating, depending on where you went to school. In most of former Eastern Europe, for example, cheating in exams meant that you had small pieces of paper with painstakingly "minimized" equations, facts, etc. These things were memory aids, and should not have been forbidden in the first place because unless you knew how to apply them, you wouldn't pass anyway. Verbatim copying of papers made little sense unless the teacher was very unobservant. Some things, such as lab reports, could be used as a guide, but it was usually very obvious if it was a copy. People who understood their stuff each had their own insights in their reports, copies all had same insights (or none at all).
WTF is wrong with copying class notes?! It was a normal part of growing up: you missed class, you had to copy class notes, at least for material that was not sufficiently covered in the textbook. I did it in the elementary school, as early as 2nd grade, for crying out loud. I do not mean copying the notes into the exam, of course.
I find that calling LEO "space" is really wrong. It's not space, it's vacuum, but otherwise it's just barely any worse than a couple hundred km down on the surface of our planet. Space is where your average laptop will work for less than an hour without crashing, potentially crashing in a way that is permanent (latch up that leads to a magic smoke escape).
The parent is just a young earth type of a lunatic, but in a different field. So completely out of whack with reality that it's not even funny anymore.
The location of ISS is to space like the wading water next to a beach in Bahamas is to deep ocean. There's the LEO that you call "space", and then there's interplanetary space, the real thing. Your bumbling about "chances of a cosmic ray" blah blah is so uninformed it's not even funny. Protip: there's plenty of well paid people whose job is to do the stuff you claim is unnecessary. Obviously they live in a reality distortion field, and it's you who is right. Whatever, but I've got a nice bridge to sell, and you're a prime buyer it'd seem. You're like the young earthers, to whom obviously all the geologists who work in the petrochemical industry know nothing and are demonstrably wrong all the time. I mean, come on there's denial, and then there's what you're spouting.
There's space, and then there's space. LEO is not really much of space, because you're in the magnetosphere bubble. Get into interplanetary space and things change very drastically. Radiation (cosmic ray) doses go up by 3-4 orders of magnitude. You have no clue what you're talking about.
Lobby for this bullshit "Directive" to be repealed.
Are you mad or something? This directive, and the standards it refers to, are nothing even remotely new! For all I know, Apple participates in the standards bodies that write this stuff. Wake up call: standards are written by volunteers from the industry. If you're in the industry and your company can afford it, there's not much left for you to do but to participate in the standards making process. Apple has no reason to complain about any of that, because with their money they could have people in every working group of IEC, ANSI and ISO there is. Many people, even.
You're crazy. This is nothing new, the industry has been aware of those changes for some years now! Who the heck do you think writes those standards? If Apple doesn't have a company person, or better, many people, in ANSI or IEC, they're being stupid. I don't know who the heck spun this non-story as if Apple was up to the wall, or this was a new regulation, or whatever. Nobody who knows how those standards come into being is surprised at all. Many big corporations join standards bodies and have their say and are always aware of what's going on. I'm pretty damn sure Apple must have their people in standards bodies. They can certainly afford it. Note: standards are written by volunteers. A company buys sufficiently large membership, and they get to have their people doing the work. That's how it has been since beginning of time, really.
OpenGL, including the ES subset, is not meant for direct use. You need a library on top of it that handles the minutiae. Qt 5's scene graph is a good foundation for 2D graphics to build on, for example, but it doesn't yet provide much in the way of geometry, all you get is rectangles and circles (rectangles with rounded borders degenerate into circles). If you want fancier geometry, you need to tessellate it yourself, but it's not meant to be that way in Qt 5 for much longer AFAIK. Same goes for use in any other framework. OpenSceneGraph is good if you want 3D geometry.
Example: If your application's primitives express nicely as Bezier polylines, then you deal with that, and pick a library to tessellate stuff and push the geometry to the OpenGL stack. Nobody who's sane will write raw OpenGL ES code in an application, there's no need for it, and it's a waste of time as the job has been done many times over. It's not the job of OpenGL to tessellate stuff for you, as this would quite constrain how you represent your own geometry. Everybody's needs are different there, so there's no one size fits all solution, not really. General purposes application toolkits, like Qt, address that need for 2D applications, other toolkits address that need for non-game 3D applications, game engines solve it for, well, games.
Well, Microsoft's own implementation of OpenGL is not kept up to date any longer, in spite of it still running OK for fixed pipeline code, and it runs on Direct3D of course. Yet, long live OpenGL, as the ANGLE open source implementation of OpenGL ES is good enough to be used by default by Qt 5. It runs on top of Direct 3D using IIRC DirectX 9.0 APIs. Qt 5 on Windows uses OpenGL ES for rendering, but I haven't checked yet if it includes Qt Widgets or is it for Qt Declarative only.
So does a couple of passengers lowering their chips and beer intake by a tiny bit. It's not something you can measure, and point at some account in airline X, and say: here's the money we lost.
Ta-da! Exactly. If admissions were truly competitive without quotas, U.S. STEM graduate education would be almost entirely attended by international students.
import the droves of internationals who take university positions away from residents of this country
University positions are awarded in a competitive process, usually, and at least on paper the process must be non-discriminating as to nationality etc. In truth you're quite deluded if you think that anyone here "imports droves of internationals" who take positions "away" from "residents". Those residents you mention are fiction. They don't exist. It's as easy as that.
Never mind that technically, a resident of this country is, in this whole discussion, anyone who passes the presence test for tax purposes, so:
To meet this test, you must be physically present in the United States on at least: 31 days during the current year, and 183 days during the 3-year period that includes the current year and the 2 years immediately before that, counting: All the days you were present in the current year, and 1/3 of the days you were present in the first year before the current year, and 1/6 of the days you were present in the second year before the current year.
Slashdot Mirror
Those Dyson fans have a small-er noisy fan that feed the air multiplier. It only makes sense for a certain size of fans as what you reduce is the buffeting low-frequency sound that's annoying as hell with large blades. This makes zero sense for cooling fans in computers. The smaller feeder fans will simply wear out faster than the big ones, noise will not decrease.
Yet, these days you get Direct3D on anything that runs Windows, and you're guaranteed decent 9.0c support. OpenGL is a crapshoot. You can get better performing and more stable OpenGL ES 2.0 support if you use ANGLE running on top of Direct3D than if you depend on vendor driver support.
Well said!
HD video recording and editing equipment is cheap these days. You can go to a large grocery store and buy everything you need -- a photo camera and some editing software, memory cards, perhaps an external hard drive or two. It's a trivially solved problem to record exams from even multiple angles. 20 years ago things were different, of course. These days, there's no excuse.
If you think you know something and can't give reasonable "exam grade" presentation about it without much preparation, you don't really know it. That's my humble opinion. Once I consider to know something, I probably don't have the best ways researched to teach it, but presenting it well enough off the bat to convince a professor that I know it -- meh. Of course some people can't present anything so that's an obstacle on its own, whether they know the subject cold or not.
I'm also amazed at how differently one can define cheating, depending on where you went to school. In most of former Eastern Europe, for example, cheating in exams meant that you had small pieces of paper with painstakingly "minimized" equations, facts, etc. These things were memory aids, and should not have been forbidden in the first place because unless you knew how to apply them, you wouldn't pass anyway. Verbatim copying of papers made little sense unless the teacher was very unobservant. Some things, such as lab reports, could be used as a guide, but it was usually very obvious if it was a copy. People who understood their stuff each had their own insights in their reports, copies all had same insights (or none at all).
WTF is wrong with copying class notes?! It was a normal part of growing up: you missed class, you had to copy class notes, at least for material that was not sufficiently covered in the textbook. I did it in the elementary school, as early as 2nd grade, for crying out loud. I do not mean copying the notes into the exam, of course.
No kidding. Cheating on a take-home is like killing puppies or something.
And how on Earth do you benefit from cheating in school? Aren't you there to learn or something?
I find that calling LEO "space" is really wrong. It's not space, it's vacuum, but otherwise it's just barely any worse than a couple hundred km down on the surface of our planet. Space is where your average laptop will work for less than an hour without crashing, potentially crashing in a way that is permanent (latch up that leads to a magic smoke escape).
The parent is just a young earth type of a lunatic, but in a different field. So completely out of whack with reality that it's not even funny anymore.
The location of ISS is to space like the wading water next to a beach in Bahamas is to deep ocean. There's the LEO that you call "space", and then there's interplanetary space, the real thing. Your bumbling about "chances of a cosmic ray" blah blah is so uninformed it's not even funny. Protip: there's plenty of well paid people whose job is to do the stuff you claim is unnecessary. Obviously they live in a reality distortion field, and it's you who is right. Whatever, but I've got a nice bridge to sell, and you're a prime buyer it'd seem. You're like the young earthers, to whom obviously all the geologists who work in the petrochemical industry know nothing and are demonstrably wrong all the time. I mean, come on there's denial, and then there's what you're spouting.
There's space, and then there's space. LEO is not really much of space, because you're in the magnetosphere bubble. Get into interplanetary space and things change very drastically. Radiation (cosmic ray) doses go up by 3-4 orders of magnitude. You have no clue what you're talking about.
Lobby for this bullshit "Directive" to be repealed.
Are you mad or something? This directive, and the standards it refers to, are nothing even remotely new! For all I know, Apple participates in the standards bodies that write this stuff. Wake up call: standards are written by volunteers from the industry. If you're in the industry and your company can afford it, there's not much left for you to do but to participate in the standards making process. Apple has no reason to complain about any of that, because with their money they could have people in every working group of IEC, ANSI and ISO there is. Many people, even.
You're crazy. This is nothing new, the industry has been aware of those changes for some years now! Who the heck do you think writes those standards? If Apple doesn't have a company person, or better, many people, in ANSI or IEC, they're being stupid. I don't know who the heck spun this non-story as if Apple was up to the wall, or this was a new regulation, or whatever. Nobody who knows how those standards come into being is surprised at all. Many big corporations join standards bodies and have their say and are always aware of what's going on. I'm pretty damn sure Apple must have their people in standards bodies. They can certainly afford it. Note: standards are written by volunteers. A company buys sufficiently large membership, and they get to have their people doing the work. That's how it has been since beginning of time, really.
OpenGL, including the ES subset, is not meant for direct use. You need a library on top of it that handles the minutiae. Qt 5's scene graph is a good foundation for 2D graphics to build on, for example, but it doesn't yet provide much in the way of geometry, all you get is rectangles and circles (rectangles with rounded borders degenerate into circles). If you want fancier geometry, you need to tessellate it yourself, but it's not meant to be that way in Qt 5 for much longer AFAIK. Same goes for use in any other framework. OpenSceneGraph is good if you want 3D geometry.
Example: If your application's primitives express nicely as Bezier polylines, then you deal with that, and pick a library to tessellate stuff and push the geometry to the OpenGL stack. Nobody who's sane will write raw OpenGL ES code in an application, there's no need for it, and it's a waste of time as the job has been done many times over. It's not the job of OpenGL to tessellate stuff for you, as this would quite constrain how you represent your own geometry. Everybody's needs are different there, so there's no one size fits all solution, not really. General purposes application toolkits, like Qt, address that need for 2D applications, other toolkits address that need for non-game 3D applications, game engines solve it for, well, games.
Not a problem for Qt 5 :) They use ANGLE to implement OpenGL ES 2 on top of DX9.
Well, Microsoft's own implementation of OpenGL is not kept up to date any longer, in spite of it still running OK for fixed pipeline code, and it runs on Direct3D of course. Yet, long live OpenGL, as the ANGLE open source implementation of OpenGL ES is good enough to be used by default by Qt 5. It runs on top of Direct 3D using IIRC DirectX 9.0 APIs. Qt 5 on Windows uses OpenGL ES for rendering, but I haven't checked yet if it includes Qt Widgets or is it for Qt Declarative only.
At least from the charging perspective they seem to be compatible. I think it's in the durability department where they most differ.
So does a couple of passengers lowering their chips and beer intake by a tiny bit. It's not something you can measure, and point at some account in airline X, and say: here's the money we lost.
Ta-da! Exactly. If admissions were truly competitive without quotas, U.S. STEM graduate education would be almost entirely attended by international students.
import the droves of internationals who take university positions away from residents of this country
University positions are awarded in a competitive process, usually, and at least on paper the process must be non-discriminating as to nationality etc. In truth you're quite deluded if you think that anyone here "imports droves of internationals" who take positions "away" from "residents". Those residents you mention are fiction. They don't exist. It's as easy as that.
Never mind that technically, a resident of this country is, in this whole discussion, anyone who passes the presence test for tax purposes, so:
To meet this test, you must be physically present in the United States on at least:
31 days during the current year, and
183 days during the 3-year period that includes the current year and the 2 years immediately before that, counting:
All the days you were present in the current year, and
1/3 of the days you were present in the first year before the current year, and
1/6 of the days you were present in the second year before the current year.
This, a million times this!!
IOW: they went lunatic over a 80kg of weight savings. Give me a fucking break. Someone at Boeing should get a beating with a cluebat.
NiMH and NiCad are similar enough, I presume?