But there has been a massive *decrease* in the amount of resources the US has to take care of itself. There is infrastructure to be built, research to be done, debt to be paid down, an education system to be fixed, and on and on... and all of these things are being neglected because of the sheer cost of these wars.
If bin Laden's goal is to, by terrorist attacks, cause material damage to the USA, he doesn't have to attack us. The USA has an autoimmune disorder of the first degree -- we're doing more damage to ourselves than bin Laden could ever dream of doing.
The space between letters on my screen generally has a lot of anti-alias grey pixels, and even subpixel-rendering-derived colored pixels, in it. It's not empty.
One approach would be to apply this sort of kerning logic to a font in a completely analog way (like one would in print), assuming an infinite-resolution display, and then use antialiasing and subpixel-level antialiasing to squeeze more resolution out of the screen.
Nonetheless, text looks better when lines fall evenly on a pixel boundary -- if a line is one pixel wide, for instance, I'd rather have column 10 illuminated fully than a mix of columns 10 and 11 dictated by the kerning algorithm and provided by the antialiasing code.
Zelaous application of the kerning rules would result in nearly all characters falling halfway between two pixels. Antialiasing makes diagonal lines look smooth, and it's wonderful for that, but I don't want all my text looking like it's displayed on an LCD at non-native resolution.
Interestingly, The GIMP has two modes for its text tool -- one that makes some compromises on "the exact shape and spacing dictated by the font" in order to *improve* readability once you quantize distance by sticking the characters in pixels. I find this mode is far more readable for small characters than the one that doesn't.
I will listen to no argument by Republicans suggesting any spending cuts whatsoever, and will simply laugh in their face and secretly hope they get hit by a bus, until we stop wasting money in Iraq.
The amount of money wasted on an excessively powerful military (far beyond what is needed for national defense) and useless wars dwarfs any other bit of governmental waste.
Do we really need a PC gaming revolution? I dunno, but right now it seems like anything that developers can come up with, they can do already -- on WinXP, and on Linux if they cared enough.
It's not like there's some massive potential that can be unlocked by some new OS or related technology. The technology is fine -- now what we need is smart people writing good software. Arena.net's streaming software for Guild Wars? Now *that* is a revolution.
So it's apparently legal to shoot polar bears in Canada, despite the fact that they're considered one of the animals facing increasing threats in the future from withdrawing sea ice?
And it's also legal to shoot a half-grizzly, even though shooting grizzlies is illegal?
What a waste of a magnificent (and apparently rare) animal. I'm probably one of the more pro-hunting folk around here; I grew up eating deer and gamebirds shot by my father, and have a bunch of respect for people who know how to turn a shotgun shell or rifle bullet into dinner. But these wealthy big-game trophy hunters, who look for rare and wondrous animals only to shoot them and turn them into rugs or wall ornaments, make me sick.
Imagine if some guy wandering around the Antarctic finds a meteorite with evidence of Martian life in it, and whacks it with a sledgehammer...
Call me ignorant, but what's the Irish objection to nuclear power?
I don't get it. You'd think the Greens would be all over nuclear (fission) power. It's clean, and the only problems with it are ones that can be solved: meltdown and the production of waste are both manageable, and with a little effort and ingenuity. The risk of meltdown has basically been solved by new reactor designs, as I understand it.
The problems in coal and oil power are not solvable, namely the CO2 emission and the fact that we're going to run out of the stuff. It's feasible that with scrubbers and new technology it might be possible to reduce other emissions to manageable levels, but there's really not much that can be done with all that CO2. (Proposals like "stick it under the ocean" that I've heard floated don't seem practical.)
Hydro's tapped out, we're still waiting on the promised wind farms to be set up, etc. Nuclear power is proven to work; why don't we use it? It's not because I'm unconcerned about the environment that I advocate it; it's because I *am* concerned.
It's been known for a while that AMD's Opteron 165's ($330) will o/c to at or above the performance of an FX-60 ($1000).
All this article really says is that the ultra-high-end isn't worth it.
I'd like to see a comparison between this thing and the Opty-165 o/c. The Pentium may be a bit cheaper, but factor in the power and cooling bill and (I expect) the higher performance of the Opteron, and it's probably about even.
If I had to buy a machine with Windows, I'd rather buy it from John's Shady Computer Store and not have to pay for Windows.
Microsoft has already surrendered their right to get any ethical consideration for things like this. It's like the Scientologists' "Fair Game" policy -- piss them off and you become fair game for anything nasty. Same thing for MS: they consider themselves above the law, apparently, so they should be considered outside it. If anticompetition statutes don't apply to them, copyright doesn't either.
I've heard power consumption cited as one advantage of DDR-2 over DDR. On laptops that idle around a dozen watts, even a few hundred milliwatts in the memory subsystem can be a signficant change.
That's not a problem inherent in nuclear reactors, or a problem for the people who design them.
When scientists and engineers create a cost-effective and safe way to do something, it's not their fault if politicking and societal faults get in the way of its implementation.
Slashdot Mirror
But there has been a massive *decrease* in the amount of resources the US has to take care of itself. There is infrastructure to be built, research to be done, debt to be paid down, an education system to be fixed, and on and on ... and all of these things are being neglected because of the sheer cost of these wars.
If bin Laden's goal is to, by terrorist attacks, cause material damage to the USA, he doesn't have to attack us. The USA has an autoimmune disorder of the first degree -- we're doing more damage to ourselves than bin Laden could ever dream of doing.
So it's something you just dump something on?
My mother ran Mandrake 9 on a Celery 433 with (I think) 256MB RAM with no problem.
The space between letters on my screen generally has a lot of anti-alias grey pixels, and even subpixel-rendering-derived colored pixels, in it. It's not empty.
One approach would be to apply this sort of kerning logic to a font in a completely analog way (like one would in print), assuming an infinite-resolution display, and then use antialiasing and subpixel-level antialiasing to squeeze more resolution out of the screen.
Nonetheless, text looks better when lines fall evenly on a pixel boundary -- if a line is one pixel wide, for instance, I'd rather have column 10 illuminated fully than a mix of columns 10 and 11 dictated by the kerning algorithm and provided by the antialiasing code.
Zelaous application of the kerning rules would result in nearly all characters falling halfway between two pixels. Antialiasing makes diagonal lines look smooth, and it's wonderful for that, but I don't want all my text looking like it's displayed on an LCD at non-native resolution.
Interestingly, The GIMP has two modes for its text tool -- one that makes some compromises on "the exact shape and spacing dictated by the font" in order to *improve* readability once you quantize distance by sticking the characters in pixels. I find this mode is far more readable for small characters than the one that doesn't.
Is this cost per second of audio or cost per ounce of talent?
She healed herself in response to certain attack forms; I forget, but I found some way to damage her that wouldn't trigger the heal-in-response.
So, by the mass-energy equivalence law, I can sell 1 liter of water, and be taxed for the equivalent of 9*10^16 joules?
If we did that, Bush would have been executed a few years ago.
"vote to have a smaller government."
We keep trying.
Trains are communistic. Everyone has to use private cars in Bush's dystopia.
Yet Bush's approval ratings have been, for a protracted period, lower than Nixon's were at the height of Watergate.
I will listen to no argument by Republicans suggesting any spending cuts whatsoever, and will simply laugh in their face and secretly hope they get hit by a bus, until we stop wasting money in Iraq.
The amount of money wasted on an excessively powerful military (far beyond what is needed for national defense) and useless wars dwarfs any other bit of governmental waste.
Do we really need a PC gaming revolution? I dunno, but right now it seems like anything that developers can come up with, they can do already -- on WinXP, and on Linux if they cared enough.
It's not like there's some massive potential that can be unlocked by some new OS or related technology. The technology is fine -- now what we need is smart people writing good software. Arena.net's streaming software for Guild Wars? Now *that* is a revolution.
I think he was facing jail time and a fine for killing a possible grizzly, but see my comment below.
So it's apparently legal to shoot polar bears in Canada, despite the fact that they're considered one of the animals facing increasing threats in the future from withdrawing sea ice?
And it's also legal to shoot a half-grizzly, even though shooting grizzlies is illegal?
What a waste of a magnificent (and apparently rare) animal. I'm probably one of the more pro-hunting folk around here; I grew up eating deer and gamebirds shot by my father, and have a bunch of respect for people who know how to turn a shotgun shell or rifle bullet into dinner. But these wealthy big-game trophy hunters, who look for rare and wondrous animals only to shoot them and turn them into rugs or wall ornaments, make me sick.
Imagine if some guy wandering around the Antarctic finds a meteorite with evidence of Martian life in it, and whacks it with a sledgehammer...
Call me ignorant, but what's the Irish objection to nuclear power?
I don't get it. You'd think the Greens would be all over nuclear (fission) power. It's clean, and the only problems with it are ones that can be solved: meltdown and the production of waste are both manageable, and with a little effort and ingenuity. The risk of meltdown has basically been solved by new reactor designs, as I understand it.
The problems in coal and oil power are not solvable, namely the CO2 emission and the fact that we're going to run out of the stuff. It's feasible that with scrubbers and new technology it might be possible to reduce other emissions to manageable levels, but there's really not much that can be done with all that CO2. (Proposals like "stick it under the ocean" that I've heard floated don't seem practical.)
Hydro's tapped out, we're still waiting on the promised wind farms to be set up, etc. Nuclear power is proven to work; why don't we use it? It's not because I'm unconcerned about the environment that I advocate it; it's because I *am* concerned.
You want to go derive the prohibition against murder from Maxwell's equations?
Good luck.
That's hard, when their lobbying has more cash behind it than yours.
It's been known for a while that AMD's Opteron 165's ($330) will o/c to at or above the performance of an FX-60 ($1000).
All this article really says is that the ultra-high-end isn't worth it.
I'd like to see a comparison between this thing and the Opty-165 o/c. The Pentium may be a bit cheaper, but factor in the power and cooling bill and (I expect) the higher performance of the Opteron, and it's probably about even.
If I had to buy a machine with Windows, I'd rather buy it from John's Shady Computer Store and not have to pay for Windows.
Microsoft has already surrendered their right to get any ethical consideration for things like this. It's like the Scientologists' "Fair Game" policy -- piss them off and you become fair game for anything nasty. Same thing for MS: they consider themselves above the law, apparently, so they should be considered outside it. If anticompetition statutes don't apply to them, copyright doesn't either.
I've heard power consumption cited as one advantage of DDR-2 over DDR. On laptops that idle around a dozen watts, even a few hundred milliwatts in the memory subsystem can be a signficant change.
I think I've got some prior art on that that I found lying in a cotton field.
That's not a problem inherent in nuclear reactors, or a problem for the people who design them.
When scientists and engineers create a cost-effective and safe way to do something, it's not their fault if politicking and societal faults get in the way of its implementation.
You've also never watched good players play speed-chess... or, even better, bughouse-chess.
Oh, lots of computers can render all that in realtime, and many can offload it onto the GPU so it doesn't steal CPU cycles.
My concern is power use on laptops. Why should I power up all the 3D circuitry in my GPU just to animate menus?