The point, numbnuts, is simple: how has bilocation only recently became a real talent? Sure it might be a real talent now, but what was it before?
You have twice missed this point. Once when you failed to proofread your post for clarity and readability (lazy fuck). Twice when asked tongue-in-cheek whether bilocation didn't used to be a talent. Will you fail a third time to grasp a really simple concept?
Think about real estate...same house in two different cities could be $100k vs. $650k for the same thing.
They're not the same thing. The difference is that if you lived in the $100k house you'd have to commute hours both ways to get to a job that could support the mortgage payments on a $650k house (and some people do in fact do this), or you'd have to basically live in hotels and only go home on weekends and holidays (some people do this too). You'd also miss out on a whole host of other advantages that come with living in a larger, more affluent city.
Granted the possibility of working online might make it possible to earn a salary like the guys living in $650k houses while living in a house that cost $100k while being, apart from the location, no different. However that's just because companies haven't yet figured out that telecommuting allows them to selectively price their employment, too. I mean, if you're a telecommuting employee who lives in a city where a nice house costs $100k, what makes you think that you should make the same salary as an employee who lives in a city where a house like yours would cost $650k? Any more than a guy living in a third-world country should have to pay the same amount for a DVD that we have to pay in the US? That logic works in either direction.
Etymology 1 From Norwegian, Danish or Swedish troll, from Old Norse troll, possibly related to the Middle High German trolle (“spook, wraith, monster, ogre”) 2. (slang) An ugly person of either sex; (internet) a troublemaker
Etymology 2 From Middle English troll (“to go about", "to stroll", "to roll from side to side”), from Old French troller (French trôler) and Middle High German trollen (“to stroll”); fishing sense possibly influenced by trawl 6. (intransitive) To disrupt the operation of an online community, particularly by luring others into combative argument.
I doubt that it's really possible to say which of the origins of "troll" resulted in its use to describe internet troublemakers, particularly since it's had both definitions long before the internet was ever conceived of. Most likely it was a combination of both of them.
Sites which recompress your pictures *usually* strip out EXIF data, I assume simply because it takes up space and they're trying to pack the image into as small a filesize as possible.
To verify, you could use one of a couple of EXIF viewers that can be installed as Firefox plugins (Exif Viewer, FxIF). Note that if a site offers multiple versions of the same image, you should check all of them (i.e. I'd check both the standard-resolution image that Facebook displays, and the high quality version that's available to download).
No, what's truly amazing is that even after they print one and it does look like utter crap, they still don't realise it. I'm talking cover art on self-produced CDs at 72 DPI and that sort of thing... even worse when it's an advertisement that was obviously a low-resolution JPEG (anyone paying good money for an advertisement should be able to make it look halfway professional)... if I can see the pixels, it looks bad. But not to them. I'm talking prints-out-facebook-photos after I offered to e-mail the high-quality originals... and thinks they're fine, and what's the problem?
Not when they set it, it was a reasonable period of time to allow a creator to benefit from his invention with a mandated monopoly while still being short enough to benefit the public with it's eventual ending and spur the inventor to continue inventing because he won't be raking in the bucks for the rest, or even most of his life.
IOW some people got their heads together and one of them pulled a number out of his ass and they all finally said "yeah, that sounds fair enough".
Note that a generation (not a lifespan) is considered to be 20 years. Do you see the relevance?
No, I don't see the relevance. The length of one's career seems more relevant than the length of a generation, and most people work 40 or 50 years.
Any inventor would want, at the very least, to be allowed to profit from his invention until he was able to retire. Note that a patent isn't even directly profitable: to profit from it you have to actually produce and sell the product, or license the invention to people who will. So it's not like having a patent just allows you to sit on your laurels and watch the money rolling in. Unless, of course, you're a patent troll and your profit comes entirely from suing people who had the same bleedingly obvious idea, but instead of sitting around they actually made it profitable.
Finally, even once the patent expires, that doesn't mean you can't get rich off the idea anymore. The patent is just to give you a monopoly on the idea long enough to give you an opportunity to establish a monopoly in the market. An up-start who's trying to copy you will have to be either much better or much cheaper to make any headway against your monopoly, once you have 20 years under your belt as the only player in the game. If in those first 20 years you made a profitable business off the idea, you'll likely still be raking in the profits even after the patent has expired.
Other research suggests that something like 70% of PCs have critical remotely exploitable conditions (plugins in browsers mostly.)
...which is why I have Firefox configured to disable the Adobe PDF plugin and simply download PDF files. If I wanted to download a PDF file, I can open it, but a drive-by exploit can't just fire up the Adobe in-browser plugin without any permission.
I was trying to point out that there's nothing that makes a "leap century" February 29th any different than any other "leap year" February 29th. If you're celebrating her birthday only on February 29th, you should celebrate it approximately once every 4 years.
The guy who posted after me got modded up, though. Go figure.
It's only the one-line stories that were added by the auto update. When you hit F5, all of the stories have proper links. As a general rule I expand the one-line stories and middle-click the Comments link to make sure the right page loads.
I'm more annoyed at the links on the main-page randomly linking back to the main-page rather than the article. Something to do with the auto-update script(s), but not consistent/repeatable enough for a bug-report.
Those are the one-line stories... clicking them once expands them, and then the "Read the ___ comments" link always works correctly.
Slashdot Mirror
IIRC Smokescreen supports ActionScript.
GP obviously meant 3D graphics.
The point, numbnuts, is simple: how has bilocation only recently became a real talent? Sure it might be a real talent now, but what was it before?
You have twice missed this point. Once when you failed to proofread your post for clarity and readability (lazy fuck). Twice when asked tongue-in-cheek whether bilocation didn't used to be a talent. Will you fail a third time to grasp a really simple concept?
Bilocation: now that's a real talent!
It didn't used to be?
Think about real estate...same house in two different cities could be $100k vs. $650k for the same thing.
They're not the same thing. The difference is that if you lived in the $100k house you'd have to commute hours both ways to get to a job that could support the mortgage payments on a $650k house (and some people do in fact do this), or you'd have to basically live in hotels and only go home on weekends and holidays (some people do this too). You'd also miss out on a whole host of other advantages that come with living in a larger, more affluent city.
Granted the possibility of working online might make it possible to earn a salary like the guys living in $650k houses while living in a house that cost $100k while being, apart from the location, no different. However that's just because companies haven't yet figured out that telecommuting allows them to selectively price their employment, too. I mean, if you're a telecommuting employee who lives in a city where a nice house costs $100k, what makes you think that you should make the same salary as an employee who lives in a city where a house like yours would cost $650k? Any more than a guy living in a third-world country should have to pay the same amount for a DVD that we have to pay in the US? That logic works in either direction.
I wouldn't say it's definite either way; Wiktionary lists the "internet" definition of "troll" under both of its etymologies.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/troll
Etymology 1
From Norwegian, Danish or Swedish troll, from Old Norse troll, possibly related to the Middle High German trolle (“spook, wraith, monster, ogre”)
2. (slang) An ugly person of either sex; (internet) a troublemaker
Etymology 2
From Middle English troll (“to go about", "to stroll", "to roll from side to side”), from Old French troller (French trôler) and Middle High German trollen (“to stroll”); fishing sense possibly influenced by trawl
6. (intransitive) To disrupt the operation of an online community, particularly by luring others into combative argument.
I doubt that it's really possible to say which of the origins of "troll" resulted in its use to describe internet troublemakers, particularly since it's had both definitions long before the internet was ever conceived of. Most likely it was a combination of both of them.
That's easy enough to do with the privacy settings. You can even make something be visible to "Only me".
Electrically conductive particles, no less.
I really want to see transcripts of that.
Sites which recompress your pictures *usually* strip out EXIF data, I assume simply because it takes up space and they're trying to pack the image into as small a filesize as possible.
To verify, you could use one of a couple of EXIF viewers that can be installed as Firefox plugins (Exif Viewer, FxIF). Note that if a site offers multiple versions of the same image, you should check all of them (i.e. I'd check both the standard-resolution image that Facebook displays, and the high quality version that's available to download).
No, what's truly amazing is that even after they print one and it does look like utter crap, they still don't realise it. I'm talking cover art on self-produced CDs at 72 DPI and that sort of thing... even worse when it's an advertisement that was obviously a low-resolution JPEG (anyone paying good money for an advertisement should be able to make it look halfway professional)... if I can see the pixels, it looks bad. But not to them. I'm talking prints-out-facebook-photos after I offered to e-mail the high-quality originals... and thinks they're fine, and what's the problem?
Not when they set it, it was a reasonable period of time to allow a creator to benefit from his invention with a mandated monopoly while still being short enough to benefit the public with it's eventual ending and spur the inventor to continue inventing because he won't be raking in the bucks for the rest, or even most of his life.
IOW some people got their heads together and one of them pulled a number out of his ass and they all finally said "yeah, that sounds fair enough".
Note that a generation (not a lifespan) is considered to be 20 years. Do you see the relevance?
No, I don't see the relevance. The length of one's career seems more relevant than the length of a generation, and most people work 40 or 50 years.
Any inventor would want, at the very least, to be allowed to profit from his invention until he was able to retire. Note that a patent isn't even directly profitable: to profit from it you have to actually produce and sell the product, or license the invention to people who will. So it's not like having a patent just allows you to sit on your laurels and watch the money rolling in. Unless, of course, you're a patent troll and your profit comes entirely from suing people who had the same bleedingly obvious idea, but instead of sitting around they actually made it profitable.
Finally, even once the patent expires, that doesn't mean you can't get rich off the idea anymore. The patent is just to give you a monopoly on the idea long enough to give you an opportunity to establish a monopoly in the market. An up-start who's trying to copy you will have to be either much better or much cheaper to make any headway against your monopoly, once you have 20 years under your belt as the only player in the game. If in those first 20 years you made a profitable business off the idea, you'll likely still be raking in the profits even after the patent has expired.
A patent is as good for as long as a patent is legally good. 20 years. It's not an arbitrary number.
I'm pretty sure 20 years was an entirely arbitrary number.
Microsoft and Google working together for their own self-interest, which incidentally is beneficial to us too.
FTFY.
Other research suggests that something like 70% of PCs have critical remotely exploitable conditions (plugins in browsers mostly.)
...which is why I have Firefox configured to disable the Adobe PDF plugin and simply download PDF files. If I wanted to download a PDF file, I can open it, but a drive-by exploit can't just fire up the Adobe in-browser plugin without any permission.
There's sound in space?
Libration would apply to pictures taken from earth, not to pictures taken by an orbiting reconnaissance module.
How do you know he didn't assemble it by hand?
Take it from me: you're an arrogant douche.
"Professional": engaged in a profession or engaging in as a profession or means of livelihood
There is, by definition, no difference between a "professional" and someone who is paid to do something.
That said most bar drinking games I can think of 'punish' the loser.
I always thought of it more as a consolation prize.
You're right - I suppose I haven't noticed because I usually click the Comments link on stories that aren't one-lined.
Overrated? Really?
I was trying to point out that there's nothing that makes a "leap century" February 29th any different than any other "leap year" February 29th. If you're celebrating her birthday only on February 29th, you should celebrate it approximately once every 4 years.
The guy who posted after me got modded up, though. Go figure.
It's only the one-line stories that were added by the auto update. When you hit F5, all of the stories have proper links. As a general rule I expand the one-line stories and middle-click the Comments link to make sure the right page loads.
*sigh* I, too, am anxiously awaiting the moment when I'm safely in the confines of my room at home and don't have to worry about NSFW links...
I'm more annoyed at the links on the main-page randomly linking back to the main-page rather than the article. Something to do with the auto-update script(s), but not consistent/repeatable enough for a bug-report.
Those are the one-line stories... clicking them once expands them, and then the "Read the ___ comments" link always works correctly.