Is it just me or is this a pretty typical left-wing kneejerk troll reaction whenever someone complains about taxes in any way, shape, or form, even if they just disagree with some particular use case? Had this complaint been voiced under the rule of Herr Bush, I doubt we would see this reaction.
Last I checked, all of those had potential life/death consequences if used incorrectly (and correctly for some of them). Hooking up rickb928 to the Internet2 would not. Nothing wrong with feeling a little bit cheated there.
The Navy owns the reactors. They bring in civilian contractors for the critical repair jobs and overhauls, supplemented by military workers. Navy Nuclear Power techs (of which I was one) receive a lot of training in two years, but a Bachelors / Masters / PhD it is not.
I love how anytime someone points out how any other government than the US government might be doing evil things, it's immediately assumed to be some attempt by Americans to make themselves look better, and compared to some similar American program. It's as if it is somehow more important that an insult be hurled at the US than attention be diverted to some other country's less-than-honorable behavior for a few moments.
Trust me, we are all well aware of the failings and bad behavior of the US government. I see about ten articles a day about it. But don't ignore the serial killer next door because a loud, obnoxious, schizophrenic drunk is making noise down the street.
If this will just force people who care about privacy to start using encryption. Considering how few people care about privacy, that means they will likely have reduced the set of people they 'should' be looking at by quite a bit (i.e., now just terrorists, subversives, and geeks instead of everybody). If the occasional security-concious geek gets caught up in the net and looked at a bit too closely, so be it, might still be a win so far as they are concerned.
Under these kinds of circumstances, hiding 'in plain sight' without using encrypted traffic (just use coded phrases and the like) would probably garner less attention. Maybe send your terrorist communications using unencrypted leet speak.
The other day I went and logged into a Counter-Strike server just for the hell of it, and made the mistake of leaving the voice chat feed on. It was as if someone took all the rage and stupid on the internet and turned it into a live audio stream that fed directly to my headset. At first it was amusing. It didn't last.
Basically, people are terrible. I'm amazed we kept it together long enough to get here.
The problem with broadcasting how the bad guy will behave before the bad guy does it is that when the bad guy gets around to doing it, he just does something slightly different from what you previously said and suddenly it's not the same thing and all is well.
I think Peter should probably have taken Time Travel 101 before writing Revelations and been a bit more vague.
I would argue that there is a significant number of people to whom 'payment' is a barrier. As in they don't want to pay for it, and there are plenty of ways to do so that are pretty easy to do and avoid any legal repurcussions, so they don't. Considering what we know about how some people tend to behave when they can do things anonymously, is this really surprising?
Well, perhaps if you had said what you said here in the first post, it wouldn't have seemed as off-topic. At first it just looked like one of those bots that goes around posting Bible Quotes absent context.
Something tells me this account has been hacked. Someone who posts material like this isn't exactly the first person I'd think of on a list of 'who could get to excellent karma on slashdot'.
Yes, but most people peruse porn in private, and friends can see your +1s, so I don't expect 'most' people would intentionally +1 their favorite pornstar..
I think you are forgetting that more people vote for American Idol than vote for the President; as such, any search term will probably just converge to Miley Cyrus, Justin Beiber, or equivalent.
I should point out that I was only referring to the 'computer graphics' part of Phong Shading, not the application mentioned in the article. I also find the result suspect - the Phong method is 'right' here only because it fits the data, which is interesting, but proves nothing until they can explain why.
Phong is only 'wrong' in graphics if it produces something other than what you expect as the result. Ah, computer graphics. It should be added to that old saying, 'Close only counts with horseshoes, hang grenades, and now, computer graphics.'
The technique for Phong Shading was introduced in 1973 as an improvement to Gouraud Shading, but was too computationally intensive to be used for graphics back then. This is no longer the case.
Slashdot Mirror
stupid tea bagging idiot!!
Is it just me or is this a pretty typical left-wing kneejerk troll reaction whenever someone complains about taxes in any way, shape, or form, even if they just disagree with some particular use case? Had this complaint been voiced under the rule of Herr Bush, I doubt we would see this reaction.
Last I checked, all of those had potential life/death consequences if used incorrectly (and correctly for some of them). Hooking up rickb928 to the Internet2 would not. Nothing wrong with feeling a little bit cheated there.
The Navy owns the reactors. They bring in civilian contractors for the critical repair jobs and overhauls, supplemented by military workers. Navy Nuclear Power techs (of which I was one) receive a lot of training in two years, but a Bachelors / Masters / PhD it is not.
I love how anytime someone points out how any other government than the US government might be doing evil things, it's immediately assumed to be some attempt by Americans to make themselves look better, and compared to some similar American program. It's as if it is somehow more important that an insult be hurled at the US than attention be diverted to some other country's less-than-honorable behavior for a few moments.
Trust me, we are all well aware of the failings and bad behavior of the US government. I see about ten articles a day about it. But don't ignore the serial killer next door because a loud, obnoxious, schizophrenic drunk is making noise down the street.
If this will just force people who care about privacy to start using encryption. Considering how few people care about privacy, that means they will likely have reduced the set of people they 'should' be looking at by quite a bit (i.e., now just terrorists, subversives, and geeks instead of everybody). If the occasional security-concious geek gets caught up in the net and looked at a bit too closely, so be it, might still be a win so far as they are concerned.
Under these kinds of circumstances, hiding 'in plain sight' without using encrypted traffic (just use coded phrases and the like) would probably garner less attention. Maybe send your terrorist communications using unencrypted leet speak.
The other day I went and logged into a Counter-Strike server just for the hell of it, and made the mistake of leaving the voice chat feed on. It was as if someone took all the rage and stupid on the internet and turned it into a live audio stream that fed directly to my headset. At first it was amusing. It didn't last.
Basically, people are terrible. I'm amazed we kept it together long enough to get here.
Well I'll consider you know nothing about the topic since the author of "Revelation" named himself as John (not Peter).
Eh, it's been over 15 years since Catholic School. I regret nothing.
The problem with broadcasting how the bad guy will behave before the bad guy does it is that when the bad guy gets around to doing it, he just does something slightly different from what you previously said and suddenly it's not the same thing and all is well.
I think Peter should probably have taken Time Travel 101 before writing Revelations and been a bit more vague.
I don't get it. How does shortening 'Life' to 'Lf' make it longer?
I would argue that there is a significant number of people to whom 'payment' is a barrier. As in they don't want to pay for it, and there are plenty of ways to do so that are pretty easy to do and avoid any legal repurcussions, so they don't. Considering what we know about how some people tend to behave when they can do things anonymously, is this really surprising?
Well, perhaps if you had said what you said here in the first post, it wouldn't have seemed as off-topic. At first it just looked like one of those bots that goes around posting Bible Quotes absent context.
I have never heard of anyone poor who managed to defend his patents.
... Therefore it has never happened?
Just making your work public domain does that, no?
Something tells me this account has been hacked. Someone who posts material like this isn't exactly the first person I'd think of on a list of 'who could get to excellent karma on slashdot'.
Is that both Bunsen and Franklin were already quite well-off when they decided not to patent their ideas. It helps.
In addition, Lucy is not in the sky and she does not posess diamonds.
Immediately think of Half-Life 2?
Those 'rituals' happen so we can keep goos flowing...
Wait, what 'ritual' are we talking about here?
These numbers really cant be real...
Then just multiply by the complex conjugate.
Yes, but most people peruse porn in private, and friends can see your +1s, so I don't expect 'most' people would intentionally +1 their favorite pornstar..
Wasn't saying they were, just that more people are entertainment focused than politically focused.
I think you are forgetting that more people vote for American Idol than vote for the President; as such, any search term will probably just converge to Miley Cyrus, Justin Beiber, or equivalent.
I should point out that I was only referring to the 'computer graphics' part of Phong Shading, not the application mentioned in the article. I also find the result suspect - the Phong method is 'right' here only because it fits the data, which is interesting, but proves nothing until they can explain why.
Phong is only 'wrong' in graphics if it produces something other than what you expect as the result. Ah, computer graphics. It should be added to that old saying, 'Close only counts with horseshoes, hang grenades, and now, computer graphics.'
The technique for Phong Shading was introduced in 1973 as an improvement to Gouraud Shading, but was too computationally intensive to be used for graphics back then. This is no longer the case.