No, it forces candidates to focus their campaigns on states with a lot of votes.
Frankly, the whole system is undemocratic, and while I understand why it was needed in order for the union to first form, it amazes me that people still defend it. Well, that's not true... I can see why someone from Rhode Island would defend it... their votes are worth *significantly* more than the votes of most people in the country. But those who just happen to live in large states get screwed, as their votes are actually worse less than the average US citizen.
I did read it, and I think it's silly they brought it up in the article, too. 'course, it's a CNet article, so the fact it's poorly written is no big surprise.
Yeah, really. The TSA blog has no more information than we do. In fact, he explicitly says "Here is my theory", because all he's read are news reports.
IOW, the TSA blog also fell victim to the astroturfing... which, really, just makes 'em look like bigger jackasses. Nice job!
Mostly they're just angry that the Republicans got to abuse the system, and they didn't.
Really? You've interviewed most of the democrats in government, and most of them feel this way?
Frankly, I think this kind of cynical whining is a) pointless, and b) deeply damaging to the American political system. The reality is that, in all probably, a good number of republicans *and* democrats disagree with what the president has done, and desire to change things. Unfortunately, armchair cynics like yourself will probably swing people over to your side, and the result? Yet more apathy that will allow the executive to run roughshod over the rights of the people. Nice work, guy. Really great contribution.
Yeah, you're right! The 9/11 commission, the watergate investigation... those things were totally useless. I say to hell with government oversight. I mean, what's the point, they don't do anything, right? Might as well just forget the whole thing.
You could do it in 5 minutes using the gmail FUSE plugin and a cronjob. But, not everyone has said expertise, which is why little utilities like this exist. *shrug*
Yeah, there's no f*cking way airport security is gonna do any more than ask him to flip the bloody thing open. The minute they saw the screen and keyboard, the show would've been over, and worst case, they would've just asked him to turn it on.
Sorry, I call BS on this one... it's astroturfing, plain and simple.
That is such an understatement, and as a developer, I applaud anyone who works hard and does a good job in test.
As a developer, I do my absolute best to ensure I've tested my code such that it meets at least a minimum level of quality. But it takes a very unique personally and skillset to be a good, quality tester, and they are *pure gold* if you can find them. These people are usually testers by choice and by trade, and they understand that testing should *not* simply be the path through which new developers are forced to slog until they're considered qualified to do what they actually want to do.
It's just a shame more organizations don't realize this.
but disregarding them as a human being is just ignorant.
Huh? What does that even mean? And who said anyone was doing it, in the first place?
If someone believes we might live inside something portrayed in the Matrix, they're free to do so, I can't prove them wrong, nor does it matter.
And when they decide to, say, deny their children medical treatment because they feel the Agents will come along and fix their child's tuberculosis by editing their code, thus endangering the health of both their child and those their child come in contact with, what then?
My point is, sometimes, it really does matter. Hell, just look at how the US government is run (for example, their "approach" to sexual education and STD prevention) to see how dangerous unchecked religious beliefs can be.
In short, your rights end where mine begin. And you can be damned sure I'm going to defend my rights if I feel you're overstepping your bounds. The real problem is that, now that atheists have started fighting back, the poor, Christians choose to cry foul, claiming their being unfairly attacked, despite having done the same damn things the past 50 years or so.
Have you had kids yet? If not, what do you plan to do if/when you do? (BTW, my marriage wife and I also hold differing spiritual beliefs, but we don't want to breed, so it's not a problem in our case).
Ha ha, that's actually deliciously ironic... astrology succeeds where Intelligent Design (aka creationism) fails: the former is a valid (though false) scientific theory, while the latter is not.
Well, they have that option for any broadcast channels available locally OTA. For any other content, they may discover the provider has enabled encryption, at which point firewire is no better than an ATSC tuner.
Sorry, I should say, not just 3D accelerator, but also accelerated video and MPEG2 decoding card of choice. For example, the Geforce FX5200 (or newer) has been the recommended card for MythTV for years.
You're almost certainly thinking of ATI, who's drivers for Linux have historically been of very poor quality (though I understand they're working to fix these issues, and in fact may already have done so). This would be why Nvidia cards have generally been the 3D accelerator of choice for Linux users for many years, now.
Of course it'd be nice to get similar performance but currently raytracing is orders of magnitude slower than rasterization for the same scene and all those things you really need the rays for tend to be really awful for the performance too.
Who cares, as long as you're still achieving necessary framerates? The point isn't that raytracing is, on it's own, more efficient that rasterization. That's obviously not the case. The point is that, with the technology we have now, it may be feasible to use raytracing for realtime rendering, and with that, you get a whole raft of effects that are essentially impossible using modern rasterizers.
It might be feasible to use raytracing in realtime already but the scenes you can display at a decent framerate would be much simpler than the scenes we're currently getting with rasterizers.
Umm, no, scene complexity is precisely where raytracers win. That's one of the reasons people consider it the way of the future... in general, raytracing complexity increases with resolution, whereas rasterization scales with the number of polygons.
You can't switch to raytracing and get similar performance. If you could then games would already be using it today.
No one is saying you can, today, and you bringing it up constitutes a strawman. The point is that we're getting to the point, in terms of available technology, where it *will* be possible.
The rest of your post is based on the same, erroneous presumption, so there seems little point in addressing it.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it forces candidates to focus their campaigns on states with a lot of votes.
Frankly, the whole system is undemocratic, and while I understand why it was needed in order for the union to first form, it amazes me that people still defend it. Well, that's not true... I can see why someone from Rhode Island would defend it... their votes are worth *significantly* more than the votes of most people in the country. But those who just happen to live in large states get screwed, as their votes are actually worse less than the average US citizen.
I did read it, and I think it's silly they brought it up in the article, too. 'course, it's a CNet article, so the fact it's poorly written is no big surprise.
Yeah, really. The TSA blog has no more information than we do. In fact, he explicitly says "Here is my theory", because all he's read are news reports.
IOW, the TSA blog also fell victim to the astroturfing... which, really, just makes 'em look like bigger jackasses. Nice job!
Good job moving the goalposts! Hard to lose an argument when you're constantly changing the rules.
Is it an ultraportable? No? Then why'd you even bring it up?
Mostly they're just angry that the Republicans got to abuse the system, and they didn't.
Really? You've interviewed most of the democrats in government, and most of them feel this way?
Frankly, I think this kind of cynical whining is a) pointless, and b) deeply damaging to the American political system. The reality is that, in all probably, a good number of republicans *and* democrats disagree with what the president has done, and desire to change things. Unfortunately, armchair cynics like yourself will probably swing people over to your side, and the result? Yet more apathy that will allow the executive to run roughshod over the rights of the people. Nice work, guy. Really great contribution.
Yeah, you're right! The 9/11 commission, the watergate investigation... those things were totally useless. I say to hell with government oversight. I mean, what's the point, they don't do anything, right? Might as well just forget the whole thing.
You could do it in 5 minutes using the gmail FUSE plugin and a cronjob. But, not everyone has said expertise, which is why little utilities like this exist. *shrug*
Actually, it makes plenty of sense... if you're an idiot developer. Honestly, have you met some developers? Nothing surprises me these days...
Just tried it here on Windows, and it works fine.
Yeah, there's no f*cking way airport security is gonna do any more than ask him to flip the bloody thing open. The minute they saw the screen and keyboard, the show would've been over, and worst case, they would've just asked him to turn it on.
Sorry, I call BS on this one... it's astroturfing, plain and simple.
That is such an understatement, and as a developer, I applaud anyone who works hard and does a good job in test.
As a developer, I do my absolute best to ensure I've tested my code such that it meets at least a minimum level of quality. But it takes a very unique personally and skillset to be a good, quality tester, and they are *pure gold* if you can find them. These people are usually testers by choice and by trade, and they understand that testing should *not* simply be the path through which new developers are forced to slog until they're considered qualified to do what they actually want to do.
It's just a shame more organizations don't realize this.
Is it?
Yes. If you believe in logic, you cannot believe in astrology. As other posters have pointed out, astrology has been firmly, solidly debunked.
but disregarding them as a human being is just ignorant.
Huh? What does that even mean? And who said anyone was doing it, in the first place?
If someone believes we might live inside something portrayed in the Matrix, they're free to do so, I can't prove them wrong, nor does it matter.
And when they decide to, say, deny their children medical treatment because they feel the Agents will come along and fix their child's tuberculosis by editing their code, thus endangering the health of both their child and those their child come in contact with, what then?
My point is, sometimes, it really does matter. Hell, just look at how the US government is run (for example, their "approach" to sexual education and STD prevention) to see how dangerous unchecked religious beliefs can be.
In short, your rights end where mine begin. And you can be damned sure I'm going to defend my rights if I feel you're overstepping your bounds. The real problem is that, now that atheists have started fighting back, the poor, Christians choose to cry foul, claiming their being unfairly attacked, despite having done the same damn things the past 50 years or so.
Yes... marriage wife... that's how I refer to her, so suck it!
Have you had kids yet? If not, what do you plan to do if/when you do? (BTW, my marriage wife and I also hold differing spiritual beliefs, but we don't want to breed, so it's not a problem in our case).
And yes, I'm braced for the blind atheistic mockery of Slashdot.
Why? Your point is, IMHO, absolutely correct, despite the fact that I disagree with your religious views.
Just because she believes in astrology and forest spirits doesn't mean that she rejects science and logic.
The best part of this statement is how you don't realize it's self-contradictory...
Ha ha, that's actually deliciously ironic... astrology succeeds where Intelligent Design (aka creationism) fails: the former is a valid (though false) scientific theory, while the latter is not.
Well, they have that option for any broadcast channels available locally OTA. For any other content, they may discover the provider has enabled encryption, at which point firewire is no better than an ATSC tuner.
Sorry, I should say, not just 3D accelerator, but also accelerated video and MPEG2 decoding card of choice. For example, the Geforce FX5200 (or newer) has been the recommended card for MythTV for years.
You're almost certainly thinking of ATI, who's drivers for Linux have historically been of very poor quality (though I understand they're working to fix these issues, and in fact may already have done so). This would be why Nvidia cards have generally been the 3D accelerator of choice for Linux users for many years, now.
Of course it'd be nice to get similar performance but currently raytracing is orders of magnitude slower than rasterization for the same scene and all those things you really need the rays for tend to be really awful for the performance too.
Who cares, as long as you're still achieving necessary framerates? The point isn't that raytracing is, on it's own, more efficient that rasterization. That's obviously not the case. The point is that, with the technology we have now, it may be feasible to use raytracing for realtime rendering, and with that, you get a whole raft of effects that are essentially impossible using modern rasterizers.
It might be feasible to use raytracing in realtime already but the scenes you can display at a decent framerate would be much simpler than the scenes we're currently getting with rasterizers.
Umm, no, scene complexity is precisely where raytracers win. That's one of the reasons people consider it the way of the future... in general, raytracing complexity increases with resolution, whereas rasterization scales with the number of polygons.
Umm... assuming I've got my multiplication right... correct. Your point?
You can't switch to raytracing and get similar performance. If you could then games would already be using it today.
No one is saying you can, today, and you bringing it up constitutes a strawman. The point is that we're getting to the point, in terms of available technology, where it *will* be possible.
The rest of your post is based on the same, erroneous presumption, so there seems little point in addressing it.