Someone is trying to pull out the old 'learn Humanities, everything else is easy' bs. Of course this is only believed by Humanities grads, who generally blinker themselves to the technical capabilities of others while flitting from disaster to disaster because interview skills are all that matters, truth to them is a very flexible thing, and it takes around 12 to 24 months for reality (and the mess they have created) to catch up with them, by which time they move on.
No. Humanities teaches little that is not learnt through normal social and workplace interaction, and often in a more correct and accurate way and over a similar timescale. Technical capabilities are not so easily learnt. Humanities students have generally demonstrated a lack of commitment and interest in technical fields, so will rarely Excel in them.
Funny you should mention that country. Ever been there? I have.
It is a 'country' in the same way several other tiny tax haven fiefdoms are.. They have no poor, no production (unless its fashionable to do so), and they pretty much exist as a playground to the rich, supported on the service industry for those same people.
Their population is so low, and so service biased, that they have in effect no industry to support, or general workers to worry about.
Lovely country to visit though, so long as you have plenty of money..
Well, they are (were) paying billions for it, so I am pretty sure it wasnt just to put it at their own expense in to landfills.....
What they have done also, is not to STOP it, bt to only allow waste that is actually correctly sorted and classified. Its hilarious (and dissapointing) to see the 'we are professional recyclers' all trying to spin that as 'we are blocked!' - just do your fecking job properly, instead of skimming huge profits as a middleman.
How do so many people have the mental disconnect that allows them to think things are 'free' when really the cost is just being spread, and often hugely inefficiently?
Tell me, how is the 'free' education in California going these days..
Sure, you keep thinking that, and I will keep no adblocker, noscript, ghostery, etc tuned up to block this BS.
Going to complain endlessly that I am 'breaking your site'? fine, remove 90% of the cruft that is not needed to deliver what you need to, and I will have no reason to make this extra effort.
FWIW, yes, it makes a HUGE difference. I was pointing out to a client who wanted a pile of such cruft that while they were seeing 0.5 second load times from their office, that was most likely due to their 100mbit connection and 35ms latency to their servers. I could see 5mbit and 150ms, due to someone between myself and their servers having a borked network config (the endless funz of the internet), so the load time was more like 15 seconds..
So, just checking here. We would be paying them to provide them with personal details, and a lockin gateway to the internet controlled by them?
Hard to see how people took offense to that, I wonder if they had also considered marketing online 'security' cameras for every room in peoples houses to make sure they didnt do anything 'bad' there either.
Hell, if we paid them enough perhaps they could just develop implantable live tracker chips we could have inserted at birth, with all the data streaming directly to their servers (for our own good of course).
There were SOME ways to identify people, when they chose to be. And sometimes admins would even help with that, usually because people had access through universities, and had signed agreements...
However, it was far Far FAR from the organised monitored recorded clusterfuck of privacy rape that it is these days.
WTF does this have to do with a cashless society, and why are you bothering to comment when so very uninformed? This was not even UBI, but UBI has exactly zero to do with a cashless society.
I suggest you go back to step one, and perhaps learn just a very few very basic facts about subjects you want to discuss with adults. It will help.
'We realised that UBI reduces governments ability to grow its control over peoples lives, grow is bureaucracy, and make small changes every electoral round therefore trumpeting how we have fixed everything this time. With this in mind we have dropped this like a hot potato, because its not best for US'
Totalitarianist governments, left and right, HATE UBI because it reduces their power, hence it will never happen.
What you want is for loans to be unavailable, therefore meaning only people from wealthy families can study?
You also believe that people should not have personal responsibility for large financial commitments they make when young, therefore teaching them that stealing from institutions is a valid life choice..
Apparently they do, I well remember a few years ago they did a big media splash about a 'design project' wanting public input, mostly on what colour and fashion style they should be.
Perhaps if they had spent just a little more time designing an actual space suit, and less time on PR/Public Image, then they may have one.
Here we go, 2014 (a random story pre, and the results post).. https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/179157-nasa-shows-off-next-generation-z-2-spacesuits-makes-us-question-its-fashion-sense https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-s-next-prototype-spacesuit-has-a-brand-new-look-and-it-s-all-thanks-to-you
Yes, a 'guaranteed job' pretty much means 'YOU better find a job you like, or we will find one you DONT' Its just renamed 'work for your unemployment benefit', which it most definitely a stick, not a carrot.
Of course the powers that be LIKE people to be at their behest, and LIKE to have to control, so why am I not surprised they will try and sell that as a solution.
A real UBI system (and nearly every time we see those in power talking one it is NOT, it is just another benefit for people who 'need' it) is very different from that. It is a reward for being part of a system, that is not dependent on your position in the system. And, almost as importantly, it REPLACES most of the other parts. It replaces benefit for unemployment, sickness (but not necessarily medical), old age, education, and many many more, thus removing the HUGE beuraucracy that is wrapped around operating and policing those. Why do those in power hate it? because it reduces their control, and their ability to sell themselves as 'helping us' by endlessly making slight changes for how they give our own money back to us when they decide we need it.
But no, they must sell UBI as being a form of benefit for people who failed, because they think that will help keep it from ever happening, because they are sure the silent majority hate such things. That is why pretty much every proposed UBI 'trial' is not UNIVERSAL.
It will take a big change in the political systems before we ever see anything like UBI (and no, i don't mean to some kind of socialist nirvana, such people generally hate anything equal and universal with a great passion).
Oh wait a second, you want the government to fund and give away and 'service' you find interesting/useful? You know how efficiently governments run programs, right? ESPECIALLY anything IT based. I can only assume you love paying an ever increasing rate of tax? (Actually, I assume you pay little tax because you are a taker, not an earner, but hey..)
I can actually understand why they did something like this, although I would have suggested a rate limit on a 'free' tier instead.
An example is, I heard a complaint from a city public transport agency. They had a phone app using this, and were railing against the new charges. Turns out their app, which people have open for planning routes, and sitting waiting for busses/trains/etc, is written insanely and was re-requesting EVERYTHING every 5 seconds while the app was running, so they were generating millions of API calls, to service a few thousand users...
They were trying to make a big public fuss about this, claiming google was evil. Perhaps they should just fix their damn app.
Of course the new solution isnt great either, a rate controlled free tier would be sensible, plus clear ways to limit your total exposure. But I suspect there are a hell of a lot of maps API 'apps' that are just as retarded, and that the traffic/cost has become huge enough that they decided to do something.
No... more likely a kid trying to be an adult. Probably got pushed around a bit too much by older/bigger/more alpha kids this week, and is trying to make up for it. Feel sorry for them, their life is going to be pretty pathetic anyway.
I would assume, as they are not investigative or law enforcement officials, then they have no power to detain, arrest, require information, etc? Nice to know..
So, I point out that ideas were thrown around and nothing become a standard, and it is not generally accepted and implemented throughout the VP codec family, and you repeat your link with the one method of encoding via the one codec that implements the hack and you think *I* have my head up my arse?
Perhaps you should actually read the link your own link points to, from 2012, then you may realize that this hack involved using a supplemental frame of content for Alpha, by substituting it for Y and zeroing U,V, and encoding in the same lossy way as the primary frame (and only in yuva420). I really hope you dont want any well defined alpha edges in your lower thirds..
Here is a good reference for how 'clean' this solution is: https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-user/2014-January/019283.html
I see in 2017 this VP8 hack was pushed in to an adobe export path, the discussion is enlightening as to how nicely official this has always been: https://github.com/fnordware/AdobeWebM/issues/17
ffmpeg forced you to sample in yuva420p, son you are in subsampled hell, perhaps ok for final pass for the web, not useful for production editing. and again, it uses the double-frame hack, without specific rate control for alpha - which is just broken. it took them years to even bother to support the same hack in vp9..
AV1 is seems is playing a similar and foolish/broken game, trying to treat alpha channel as a separate image. This inevitably leads to artifacts, and incompatible codec implementations.
To be clear, what I was is thought out, first class alpha support, in the official spec, that doesnt just exist as a hack though up in 2012 on a whim and half implemented in some of the codecs.
Does that not make sense?
AVI supports alpha to about the same level of quality - actually slightly better, as RGBA is supported, it is just not standardised as to how the specify the A doing in and out, so different applications handle it or not, randomly. That is why people also dont use AVI for alpha content - quicktime is usually used, unless something else is forced, because it just works (tm) for codecs that claim they support it.
So, perhaps instead of being an insulting douche, you could perhaps consider that *proper* alpha support would be a good thing.
It has existed as a concept, and has never worked, not even supported in most codecs. This is the problem. The test it as 'yeah we don't really care, I guess you could hack it on the side like this.. But we are not going to actually make it work properly or support it officially' And yet it is essential to the work flow of the people actually making the content. Very sorry sighted and such a chance to be better than mpeg group efforts.
The other issue is when will they start taking alpha channels (transparency) seriously. Been promised since vp8. If they did, it could quickly become the standard in production and post production, which had to be Good thing right?
But they just don't seem to realise that. It's not (very) difficult.
Because they are not, and are talking out their arse? If they were really making 100-500x the normal salary, they would: a) not be posting on slashdot b) actually realize that running a company and owning a company are very different things.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone is trying to pull out the old 'learn Humanities, everything else is easy' bs.
Of course this is only believed by Humanities grads, who generally blinker themselves to the technical capabilities of others while flitting from disaster to disaster because interview skills are all that matters, truth to them is a very flexible thing, and it takes around 12 to 24 months for reality (and the mess they have created) to catch up with them, by which time they move on.
No.
Humanities teaches little that is not learnt through normal social and workplace interaction, and often in a more correct and accurate way and over a similar timescale. Technical capabilities are not so easily learnt. Humanities students have generally demonstrated a lack of commitment and interest in technical fields, so will rarely Excel in them.
Funny you should mention that country.
Ever been there? I have.
It is a 'country' in the same way several other tiny tax haven fiefdoms are..
They have no poor, no production (unless its fashionable to do so), and they pretty much exist as a playground to the rich, supported on the service industry for those same people.
Their population is so low, and so service biased, that they have in effect no industry to support, or general workers to worry about.
Lovely country to visit though, so long as you have plenty of money..
Well, they are (were) paying billions for it, so I am pretty sure it wasnt just to put it at their own expense in to landfills.....
What they have done also, is not to STOP it, bt to only allow waste that is actually correctly sorted and classified.
Its hilarious (and dissapointing) to see the 'we are professional recyclers' all trying to spin that as 'we are blocked!' - just do your fecking job properly, instead of skimming huge profits as a middleman.
You have just already paid for it..
How do so many people have the mental disconnect that allows them to think things are 'free' when really the cost is just being spread, and often hugely inefficiently?
Tell me, how is the 'free' education in California going these days..
Sure, you keep thinking that, and I will keep no adblocker, noscript, ghostery, etc tuned up to block this BS.
Going to complain endlessly that I am 'breaking your site'? fine, remove 90% of the cruft that is not needed to deliver what you need to, and I will have no reason to make this extra effort.
FWIW, yes, it makes a HUGE difference. I was pointing out to a client who wanted a pile of such cruft that while they were seeing 0.5 second load times from their office, that was most likely due to their 100mbit connection and 35ms latency to their servers. I could see 5mbit and 150ms, due to someone between myself and their servers having a borked network config (the endless funz of the internet), so the load time was more like 15 seconds..
Or perhaps you dont consider that 'a difference'.
Not to mention prostate cancer, that gets even less support, and kills more people.
Breast cancer researchers have actually BLOCKED prostate cancer researchers from sharing their data, because....
In 2014, out of every dollar they raised, $0.15 was actually passed on through grants and support to research.
85% is eaten up internally. They are bordering on a scam.
So, just checking here.
We would be paying them to provide them with personal details, and a lockin gateway to the internet controlled by them?
Hard to see how people took offense to that, I wonder if they had also considered marketing online 'security' cameras for
every room in peoples houses to make sure they didnt do anything 'bad' there either.
Hell, if we paid them enough perhaps they could just develop implantable live tracker chips we could have inserted at birth,
with all the data streaming directly to their servers (for our own good of course).
They should be considered saviors of society!
You never used Usenet, did you.
There were SOME ways to identify people, when they chose to be.
And sometimes admins would even help with that, usually because people had access through universities, and had signed agreements...
However, it was far Far FAR from the organised monitored recorded clusterfuck of privacy rape that it is these days.
WTF does this have to do with a cashless society, and why are you bothering to comment when so very uninformed?
This was not even UBI, but UBI has exactly zero to do with a cashless society.
I suggest you go back to step one, and perhaps learn just a very few very basic facts about subjects you want to discuss with adults. It will help.
Exactly, this was not even distantly related to UBI, it was simply being labeled that for political reasons.
Translation:
'We realised that UBI reduces governments ability to grow its control over peoples lives, grow is bureaucracy, and make small changes every electoral round therefore trumpeting how we have fixed everything this time. With this in mind we have dropped this like a hot potato, because its not best for US'
Totalitarianist governments, left and right, HATE UBI because it reduces their power, hence it will never happen.
So let me check..
What you want is for loans to be unavailable, therefore meaning only people from wealthy families can study?
You also believe that people should not have personal responsibility for large financial commitments they make when young, therefore teaching them that stealing from institutions is a valid life choice..
I see.
Apparently they do, I well remember a few years ago they did a big media splash about a 'design project' wanting public input, mostly on what colour and fashion style they should be.
Perhaps if they had spent just a little more time designing an actual space suit, and less time on PR/Public Image, then they may have one.
Here we go, 2014 (a random story pre, and the results post)..
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/179157-nasa-shows-off-next-generation-z-2-spacesuits-makes-us-question-its-fashion-sense
https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-s-next-prototype-spacesuit-has-a-brand-new-look-and-it-s-all-thanks-to-you
Yes, a 'guaranteed job' pretty much means 'YOU better find a job you like, or we will find one you DONT'
Its just renamed 'work for your unemployment benefit', which it most definitely a stick, not a carrot.
Of course the powers that be LIKE people to be at their behest, and LIKE to have to control, so why am I not surprised they will try and sell that as a solution.
A real UBI system (and nearly every time we see those in power talking one it is NOT, it is just another benefit for people who 'need' it) is very different from that.
It is a reward for being part of a system, that is not dependent on your position in the system.
And, almost as importantly, it REPLACES most of the other parts.
It replaces benefit for unemployment, sickness (but not necessarily medical), old age, education, and many many more, thus removing the HUGE beuraucracy that is wrapped around operating and policing those.
Why do those in power hate it? because it reduces their control, and their ability to sell themselves as 'helping us' by endlessly making slight changes for how they give our own money back to us when they decide we need it.
But no, they must sell UBI as being a form of benefit for people who failed, because they think that will help keep it from ever happening, because they are sure the silent majority hate such things. That is why pretty much every proposed UBI 'trial' is not UNIVERSAL.
It will take a big change in the political systems before we ever see anything like UBI (and no, i don't mean to some kind of socialist nirvana, such people generally hate anything equal and universal with a great passion).
Great..
Oh wait a second, you want the government to fund and give away and 'service' you find interesting/useful?
You know how efficiently governments run programs, right? ESPECIALLY anything IT based.
I can only assume you love paying an ever increasing rate of tax?
(Actually, I assume you pay little tax because you are a taker, not an earner, but hey..)
They haven't killed competitors.
I can actually understand why they did something like this, although I would have suggested a rate limit on a 'free' tier instead.
An example is, I heard a complaint from a city public transport agency. They had a phone app using this, and were railing against the new charges.
Turns out their app, which people have open for planning routes, and sitting waiting for busses/trains/etc, is written insanely and was re-requesting EVERYTHING
every 5 seconds while the app was running, so they were generating millions of API calls, to service a few thousand users...
They were trying to make a big public fuss about this, claiming google was evil. Perhaps they should just fix their damn app.
Of course the new solution isnt great either, a rate controlled free tier would be sensible, plus clear ways to limit your total exposure.
But I suspect there are a hell of a lot of maps API 'apps' that are just as retarded, and that the traffic/cost has become huge enough that they decided to do something.
it is las latinx or los latinx, depending on if its a group or males or females ;);)
No... more likely a kid trying to be an adult.
Probably got pushed around a bit too much by older/bigger/more alpha kids this week, and is trying to make up for it.
Feel sorry for them, their life is going to be pretty pathetic anyway.
I would assume, as they are not investigative or law enforcement officials, then they have no power to detain, arrest, require information, etc?
Nice to know..
So, I point out that ideas were thrown around and nothing become a standard, and it is not generally accepted and implemented throughout the VP codec family, and you repeat your link with the one method of encoding via the one codec that implements the hack and you think *I* have my head up my arse?
Perhaps you should actually read the link your own link points to, from 2012, then you may realize that this hack involved using a supplemental frame of content for Alpha, by substituting it for Y and zeroing U,V, and encoding in the same lossy way as the primary frame (and only in yuva420). I really hope you dont want any well defined alpha edges in your lower thirds..
Here is a good reference for how 'clean' this solution is:
https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-user/2014-January/019283.html
I see in 2017 this VP8 hack was pushed in to an adobe export path, the discussion is enlightening as to how nicely official this has always been:
https://github.com/fnordware/AdobeWebM/issues/17
ffmpeg forced you to sample in yuva420p, son you are in subsampled hell, perhaps ok for final pass for the web, not useful for production editing.
and again, it uses the double-frame hack, without specific rate control for alpha - which is just broken. it took them years to even bother to support
the same hack in vp9..
AV1 is seems is playing a similar and foolish/broken game, trying to treat alpha channel as a separate image.
This inevitably leads to artifacts, and incompatible codec implementations.
To be clear, what I was is thought out, first class alpha support, in the official spec, that doesnt just exist as a hack though up in 2012 on a whim and half
implemented in some of the codecs.
Does that not make sense?
AVI supports alpha to about the same level of quality - actually slightly better, as RGBA is supported, it is just not standardised as to how the specify the A
doing in and out, so different applications handle it or not, randomly.
That is why people also dont use AVI for alpha content - quicktime is usually used, unless something else is forced, because it just works (tm) for codecs that claim they support it.
So, perhaps instead of being an insulting douche, you could perhaps consider that *proper* alpha support would be a good thing.
Sorry but wrong.
It has existed as a concept, and has never worked, not even supported in most codecs. This is the problem.
The test it as 'yeah we don't really care, I guess you could hack it on the side like this.. But we are not going to actually make it work properly or support it officially'
And yet it is essential to the work flow of the people actually making the content.
Very sorry sighted and such a chance to be better than mpeg group efforts.
The other issue is when will they start taking alpha channels (transparency) seriously. Been promised since vp8.
If they did, it could quickly become the standard in production and post production, which had to be Good thing right?
But they just don't seem to realise that. It's not (very) difficult.
Lolz. Found the investor.
Disney have no political clout. No really. Lolz
Because they are not, and are talking out their arse?
If they were really making 100-500x the normal salary, they would:
a) not be posting on slashdot
b) actually realize that running a company and owning a company are very different things.