Umm... you don't have to do that on a K6-2 or a K6-3, or any PC for that matter, either. You do realize you can get a 320x240 video mode on a PC, right?:)
Dear lord, when did pragmatism go out the window in favour of this zealous, excessive obsession over "freedom". Christ, do you ask that all cars be free? Or bridges? Or books? No? Then why software?
Interestingly, it's wasn't hard to find that you have an "incredibly squeezable a$$". Just thought you might like to know that because it as much bearing on the discussion as my lack of knowledge on Germany's motivations.;)
Well, given that I walk around telling everyone on the street that, not to mention posting it in every discussion forum, mailing list, and blog I can find, I fail to see what your point is here.;)
You make an interesting point, but you have to remember, it's very difficult to design a binary format for data which contains no (or at least minimal) redundancy. So, assuming you concede that point, if data footprint is really a big issue for you (and assuming you have the CPU cycles to spare... the argument is different in, say, an embedded environment), the only really good way to ensure optimal size is to compress your data, whether it be binary or text, since a compressor will always be able to do better. And if you're going to compress anyway, you might as well use a nice, readable, interoperable file format, than a closed, cryptic, binary one.
No, he seized power Hitler-style by taking advantage of a weak government, a depressed economy, and a US government who was ready, willing, and able to install him as the new dictator of Iraq. Without US involvment, there's no telling where we'd be today (for better or worse).
Right, and everything the government says is just a big old lie. Come on, use your damned head once in a while rather than just screaming "War for Oil" like a fucking lemming.
And everything the US government says is the truth? Like the wonderful accuracy of the Patriot Missiles in the Gulf War? Or the story of the "Mobile Scud Launchers" the US supposedly blew up, when in fact the entire thing was fabricated (they were Jordanian oil tankers, in case you were wondering)?
Funny how so many Americans prefer to completely disregard the idea that the motivations of the US government are not entirely noble. Why? Because it's distasteful or, god forbid, unpatriotic? Are you seriously naive enough to believe that everything the US is doing, all the money it's spending, all the troops it's sacrificing, are strictly for the benefit of the Iraqi people? Because that's what the Bush administration is attempting to claim, and it appears you're swallowing it.
Don't get me wrong, I think the motivations of the current US government are mixed, as opposed to many who believe oil is the one and only reason behind the war. In fact, I'd like to believe oil is lower down on the list (after all, the US gets a much larger portion of it's oil imports from Canada, Mexico, and South Amerca). Then again, this administration isn't the brightest in the world, so ya never know. But I'm not so blind to think that it's only about freeing the Iraqi people either.
After all, if it was just about that, the US could have moved in long ago. Hell, they could have tackled this situation back during the Gulf War (after creating it, of course... the US installed Saddam as dictator of Iraq, in case you forgot)! Instead, just as the population of the country was rising up against Saddam, the US left! So, tell me again about how great and noble the United States government is.
Yup... the only trick is that some of the movies have their audio encoded/split funny.
In the first episode, the small and large versions have the soundtrack split into two pieces, of which mplayer only plays the longest. Hence, audio is delayed 10 seconds... solution? Play the medium sized one which, oddly enough, isn't like this. Another option is to dump the audio from the medium version (using -dumpaudio and -dumpfile) and play it alongside the large version with mplayer's -audiofile option.
For the second episode (and presumably the remaining ones), the audio is encoded using MPEG4-AAC. Unfortunately, mplayer's support was broken for mp4a (at least in rc4, is this fixed in rc5?). The solution here was to dump the audio stream using mplayer and manually decode it using faad (search google). Then, play the resulting wav file along with the video using -audiofile.
"We are very close to securing the remaining oil fields. These will soon be our property, and will be important later for US economic growth."
Or, maybe even
"We are very close to securing the remaining oil fields. These are the property of the people of Iraq, and will be a very important asset to us when we install the new, US-friendly government"
Come on, don't be naive. Whatever the intentions of the US government are, they are not entirely noble, and they sure as hell won't tell you what they are in their entirety.
Re:How immature of Mr. Packard...
on
XFree86 Politics
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I find it very funny that you ask:
if everyone started forking the kernel, glibc, gcc, and XFree among other core packages, where would that leave us?
When this exact thing happened with GCC some time ago. Did you know that GCC 3.0 is based off a fork of GCC 2.7.2 (IIRC) which for a while was known as EGCS? But, as EGCS progressed, it quickly surpassed GCC and, eventually, was adopted as the new GCC 3.0. So, had this fork not occured, GCC wouldn't be where it is today. I'm assuming that answers your question.:)
Actually, diesel only really has to warm up if the temperature is fairly low. And it's not the "sparks" that need to heat up... since there are no spark plugs in a diesel engine. The combustion is triggered purely by compression of air... Air is compressed inside the cylinder, and then diesel is injected into it. The heat from compression of the air causes the diesel to ignite. BUT, this means that the air in the cylinder must be warm enough to begin with to generate enough heat for the combustion process to occur. Hence having to warm the cylinders when it's cold (which makes diesels fun in the frigid Canadian winters up here:).
Ugh! It has been said again, and again, and again... the US does not get the majority of it's oil from the middle east! Yes, it gets a lot, but it gets far more from Canada, Mexico, and South America. See here.
You make a good point, but the fact that no one thinks of this is just a symptom of the short-sighted, bottom-line-oriented thinking that dominates corporate AND government policy decisions (can we say Kyoto Accord?) Trying to change that, is, unfortunately virtually impossible, IMHO.
Yes, but guess WHY the radiation levels are so high? No magnetosphere, due to the cold core. After all, how do you think the earth's surface (and to a lesser degree, an astronaut in LEO) is protected from solar and extrasolar radiation?
there are certainly a large number of people with allergys to it, and that and that alone is enough to keep me and anyone I can sway away from it.
Now answer me this. Do you keep everyone you can sway away from peanuts? There is a fair number of people out there who are deathly allergic to peanuts. So, I guess that means no one should eat them, right?
I hope you see my point... allergies are one thing, general toxicity is definitely another. If aspartame turns out to be toxic, fine, sway people away from it. But if it really is an allergy, then there's really nothing inherently evil about it... it's just something some people can eat, and some people can't.
Erm... the electricity has to be stored somehow, right? Like, in a battery... or, say, a fuel cell! You do realize that hydrogen fuel cells are, really, just fancy batteries, right? The difference is you just "charge" them up with hydrogen, which is a convenient energy storage medium.
Actually, comments most definitely CAN hurt. Too much commenting can result in "noisy" code, where the comments actually get in the way of reading the code itself. After all, your code is self-documenting and easy to read, right? So the code can serve as a fine document, and the comments just exist to clarify less-than-clear parts of the code, provide over-all algorithmic descriptions, or document public interfaces/objects/etc.
Now, I'm not advocating no comments at all... but there are many who use commenting as a crutch because the code itself is just far too confusing, rather than re-designing/cleaning up the code itself. Worse, in these situations, the comments could fall out of sync with the code, and then you're really screwed. So just write clean, self-documenting code in the first place, and everyone will be happier for it.
Basically, commenting is good... but, in this case, there really is such a thing as too much of a good thing.
Well, the GBA is just a slightly different animal (I know, I dev for it as well:). On higher-end consoles, the games sometimes run on some sort of rudimentary OS (eg, I thought the Dreamcast used WinCE?). 'course, that doesn't change the fact that you might directly access the hardware anyway, but there's still an OS layer to simplify certain common operations.
Incidentally, there's no reason a game written to run on Linux for the PS2 couldn't run in root mode and access all the hardware directly.
Slashdot Mirror
Err... you don't *need* a link cable. It can take advantage of one for multiple players, but PocketNES runs quite nicely stand-alone.
Umm... you don't have to do that on a K6-2 or a K6-3, or any PC for that matter, either. You do realize you can get a 320x240 video mode on a PC, right? :)
Dear lord, when did pragmatism go out the window in favour of this zealous, excessive obsession over "freedom". Christ, do you ask that all cars be free? Or bridges? Or books? No? Then why software?
Interestingly, it's wasn't hard to find that you have an "incredibly squeezable a$$". Just thought you might like to know that because it as much bearing on the discussion as my lack of knowledge on Germany's motivations. ;)
;)
Well, given that I walk around telling everyone on the street that, not to mention posting it in every discussion forum, mailing list, and blog I can find, I fail to see what your point is here.
You make an interesting point, but you have to remember, it's very difficult to design a binary format for data which contains no (or at least minimal) redundancy. So, assuming you concede that point, if data footprint is really a big issue for you (and assuming you have the CPU cycles to spare... the argument is different in, say, an embedded environment), the only really good way to ensure optimal size is to compress your data, whether it be binary or text, since a compressor will always be able to do better. And if you're going to compress anyway, you might as well use a nice, readable, interoperable file format, than a closed, cryptic, binary one.
Umm... you forgot Germany, which strikes me as an amusing oversight. What's your great conspiracy theory there?
No, he seized power Hitler-style by taking advantage of a weak government, a depressed economy, and a US government who was ready, willing, and able to install him as the new dictator of Iraq. Without US involvment, there's no telling where we'd be today (for better or worse).
Right, and everything the government says is just a big old lie. Come on, use your damned head once in a while rather than just screaming "War for Oil" like a fucking lemming.
And everything the US government says is the truth? Like the wonderful accuracy of the Patriot Missiles in the Gulf War? Or the story of the "Mobile Scud Launchers" the US supposedly blew up, when in fact the entire thing was fabricated (they were Jordanian oil tankers, in case you were wondering)?
Funny how so many Americans prefer to completely disregard the idea that the motivations of the US government are not entirely noble. Why? Because it's distasteful or, god forbid, unpatriotic? Are you seriously naive enough to believe that everything the US is doing, all the money it's spending, all the troops it's sacrificing, are strictly for the benefit of the Iraqi people? Because that's what the Bush administration is attempting to claim, and it appears you're swallowing it.
Don't get me wrong, I think the motivations of the current US government are mixed, as opposed to many who believe oil is the one and only reason behind the war. In fact, I'd like to believe oil is lower down on the list (after all, the US gets a much larger portion of it's oil imports from Canada, Mexico, and South Amerca). Then again, this administration isn't the brightest in the world, so ya never know. But I'm not so blind to think that it's only about freeing the Iraqi people either.
After all, if it was just about that, the US could have moved in long ago. Hell, they could have tackled this situation back during the Gulf War (after creating it, of course... the US installed Saddam as dictator of Iraq, in case you forgot)! Instead, just as the population of the country was rising up against Saddam, the US left! So, tell me again about how great and noble the United States government is.
Yup... the only trick is that some of the movies have their audio encoded/split funny.
In the first episode, the small and large versions have the soundtrack split into two pieces, of which mplayer only plays the longest. Hence, audio is delayed 10 seconds... solution? Play the medium sized one which, oddly enough, isn't like this. Another option is to dump the audio from the medium version (using -dumpaudio and -dumpfile) and play it alongside the large version with mplayer's -audiofile option.
For the second episode (and presumably the remaining ones), the audio is encoded using MPEG4-AAC. Unfortunately, mplayer's support was broken for mp4a (at least in rc4, is this fixed in rc5?). The solution here was to dump the audio stream using mplayer and manually decode it using faad (search google). Then, play the resulting wav file along with the video using -audiofile.
Umm... I was under the impression they were only releasing the first four episodes online, and the rest on DVD. Any links supporting/refuting this?
Oh man, that was brilliant. Kudos! :)
Well... yeah. What else is he gonna say?
"We are very close to securing the remaining oil fields. These will soon be our property, and will be important later for US economic growth."
Or, maybe even
"We are very close to securing the remaining oil fields. These are the property of the people of Iraq, and will be a very important asset to us when we install the new, US-friendly government"
Come on, don't be naive. Whatever the intentions of the US government are, they are not entirely noble, and they sure as hell won't tell you what they are in their entirety.
I find it very funny that you ask:
:)
if everyone started forking the kernel, glibc, gcc, and XFree among other core packages, where would that leave us?
When this exact thing happened with GCC some time ago. Did you know that GCC 3.0 is based off a fork of GCC 2.7.2 (IIRC) which for a while was known as EGCS? But, as EGCS progressed, it quickly surpassed GCC and, eventually, was adopted as the new GCC 3.0. So, had this fork not occured, GCC wouldn't be where it is today. I'm assuming that answers your question.
Err... I suspect the grandparent post was more a satire on recent US-led world events (guess which one! :)
Actually, diesel only really has to warm up if the temperature is fairly low. And it's not the "sparks" that need to heat up... since there are no spark plugs in a diesel engine. The combustion is triggered purely by compression of air... Air is compressed inside the cylinder, and then diesel is injected into it. The heat from compression of the air causes the diesel to ignite. BUT, this means that the air in the cylinder must be warm enough to begin with to generate enough heat for the combustion process to occur. Hence having to warm the cylinders when it's cold (which makes diesels fun in the frigid Canadian winters up here :).
Who cares if it was posted already... it was in the damn article summary!
Ugh! It has been said again, and again, and again... the US does not get the majority of it's oil from the middle east! Yes, it gets a lot, but it gets far more from Canada, Mexico, and South America. See here.
You make a good point, but the fact that no one thinks of this is just a symptom of the short-sighted, bottom-line-oriented thinking that dominates corporate AND government policy decisions (can we say Kyoto Accord?) Trying to change that, is, unfortunately virtually impossible, IMHO.
Wow. That was an absolutely fantastic rebuttal. My hat goes off to you.
Yes, but guess WHY the radiation levels are so high? No magnetosphere, due to the cold core. After all, how do you think the earth's surface (and to a lesser degree, an astronaut in LEO) is protected from solar and extrasolar radiation?
Ctrl-G. Read the typeahead find page. :)
Okay... you say:
there are certainly a large number of people with allergys to it, and that and that alone is enough to keep me and anyone I can sway away from it.
Now answer me this. Do you keep everyone you can sway away from peanuts? There is a fair number of people out there who are deathly allergic to peanuts. So, I guess that means no one should eat them, right?
I hope you see my point... allergies are one thing, general toxicity is definitely another. If aspartame turns out to be toxic, fine, sway people away from it. But if it really is an allergy, then there's really nothing inherently evil about it... it's just something some people can eat, and some people can't.
Erm... the electricity has to be stored somehow, right? Like, in a battery... or, say, a fuel cell! You do realize that hydrogen fuel cells are, really, just fancy batteries, right? The difference is you just "charge" them up with hydrogen, which is a convenient energy storage medium.
Actually, comments most definitely CAN hurt. Too much commenting can result in "noisy" code, where the comments actually get in the way of reading the code itself. After all, your code is self-documenting and easy to read, right? So the code can serve as a fine document, and the comments just exist to clarify less-than-clear parts of the code, provide over-all algorithmic descriptions, or document public interfaces/objects/etc.
Now, I'm not advocating no comments at all... but there are many who use commenting as a crutch because the code itself is just far too confusing, rather than re-designing/cleaning up the code itself. Worse, in these situations, the comments could fall out of sync with the code, and then you're really screwed. So just write clean, self-documenting code in the first place, and everyone will be happier for it.
Basically, commenting is good... but, in this case, there really is such a thing as too much of a good thing.
Well, the GBA is just a slightly different animal (I know, I dev for it as well :). On higher-end consoles, the games sometimes run on some sort of rudimentary OS (eg, I thought the Dreamcast used WinCE?). 'course, that doesn't change the fact that you might directly access the hardware anyway, but there's still an OS layer to simplify certain common operations.
Incidentally, there's no reason a game written to run on Linux for the PS2 couldn't run in root mode and access all the hardware directly.