I would suggest ISO date format but that sadly doesn't work. Including the year is mandatory, so you need to wait for the year 3141, but even then, your options are would require either month 59, week 59 or day 592. None of which are likely to happen without some cataclysmic event in the next 1134 years or so.
I was referring specifically to the present British army. This would certainly not apply to all countries, expecially not those where the army is the government.
I'm also quite sure that parts of the UK army would be willing to go quite far in protecting the government against ordinary people.
I'm not so sure. Putting myself in the position of an ordinary soldier, ordered to open fire on my own countrymen (and myabe even my own family), and who I happen to agree with, my initial reaction would be "This is not what I signed up for". I expect a lot of officers would feel exactly the same way, and have the experience to know where this could end up. Their divisions would be quite pleased to be given a legal justification to ignore the government.
I wonder which government would be easier to tackle, given the severe restrictions of firearms in the UK versus the sheer inertia of the US population?
You know, I really don't think that would be a problem. If there's a popular uprising, the only weapon you need is an angry mob. The government can barricade themselves in The Houses of Parliament, but if they're corrupt enough to cause a major revolt, there's no way the army will go to their aid. The army doesn't serve the government. It serves the people.
Seeing as most people can't be bothered to vote, I can't see there ever being a violent uprising.
Well, the last couple of elections, there was essentially a choice between Conservatives, or a party emulating the Conservatives. Why bother? Previous elections, the turnout wasn't too bad.
I expect most organisations will get 64 bits and any public server will probably be at sub-address zero. But personally, I'd have gone for something a little different. Allocate the reserved IP addresses to different countries, and if we use one of these, we add a second packet header with subrouting information. Essentially make an IPv4 network of networks. It's a bit of a hack, but it will be largely compatible with the exisitng infrastructure. But of course, a 64 bit address would probably be quite adequate as long as nobody got more than 65536 IP addresses without some justification.
Nothing. People are entitled to their own opinions.
And it's true. The Wii is an underpowered console that for all practical purposes only has its controller to distinguish it from the previous generation. Personally, I quite like it but some people want CPU hungry games.
As far as I know, this was the first time we'd seen a suicide hijack. Previous hijacks have had some fairly cooperative hijackers who want to escape from an oppresive regime. People presumably didn't try to stop the terrorists because they assumed the same thing would happen and thought there was a good chance that they would just be held in a plane for a few days before being freed.
If they tried it again, people would know that they were going to die. They'd have nothing to lose by trying to stop the terrorists. A high risk of death is better than certain death, and there would be a lot more civilians than terrorists. More than enough to overpower men armed with boxcutters.
It's not illogical it makes perfect sense to anyone who programs, well anyone who dose lower level programming. If computers were to work in base 10... Sorry I can not even go there.
If we want to worry about that then use KiB and MiB. But that doesn't make a huge amount of sense. 1KiB = 400h bytes. 1MiB = 100000h bytes. Powers of 256 would make a lot more sense.
No. I'm quite happy to accept that a Terabyte is anywhere between 1,000,000,000,000 and 1,100,000,000,000 bytes for general use, simply because it doesn't matter. It gives an idea of the amount of storage, which is all we need. If I was specifying I'd use neither and just say 3.7*10^12 bytes or whatever.
I just get a bit fed up when people insist that the illogical, and deprecated usage of terminology is correct and a usage that has been accepted for quite some time (and long before marketting got involved) is incorrect.
Why is a Kilobyte 1024 bytes, if "Kilo" means 1000, both according to the SI and the greeks (Kilo is derived from khilioi). If 1 kg = 1000g, 1 kV = 1000V, 1 km = 1000m, why should hard disks break the pattern?
When we're talking about addressable computer memory, approximating the kilobyte to 1024 is a convenience, but since Terabyte gives such a huge error, and makes absolutely no sense for data transfer or disk sizes, it's really time we stopped this illogical naming convention just because some engineers found a term convenient 40 years ago.
While it's nice if the customer knows exactly what they want, the only people who can really do this well are usually software engineers. A lot of the time, working out specs takes me as long as writing the software.
People really really don't understand software. It's a form of magic to them. You need to find out what the inputs and outputs are, what the behaviour should be in specific cases, and gradually refine a spec from that.
This sort of problem has caused a lot of expensive IT white elephants. Some of the more successful companies seem to have an intermediary to operate as a translation layer between the developers and the customers. Or to put it into non programmer terminology, to translate the requirements into geek.
If you make a stink, the first time something goes wrong, you'll be the first guy they blame.
There are ways to handle this. It does require a lot of tact and diplomacy to make it sound like your entire concern is for the wellbeing of the company and the manager especially, and that it was your boss's idea in the first place. Unfortunately, tact and diplomacy are traits that Computer Science Majors tend not to have a lot of practice in... Computer Science is a culture where if you do something wrong, you want to be told about it as soon and as unambiguously as possible.
I think it's more likely that those with plumes of black smoke are done on effects machines because that's what people expect, rather than using gasoline.
Absolutely. This happens all the time. The crashes in David Cronenberg's Crash were criticised by someone because they "weren't realistic" when actually it was all the other Hollywood crashes that weren't realistic. Skeletons have a jerky stop motion look - even CG ones - because ever since Jason and the Argonauts, we know that that's how skeletons move.
Fast paced music doesn't really play when something exciting happens. Not everyone in real life looks like a hollywood actor. If people speak in a foreign language, you don't actually see an English language translation at the bottom of the screen. I tend to be pretty easy going on most non-realism since it is just there to tell a story. If the plot relies on a complete failure to grasp some basic fundamental of physics, (e.g. The Day After Tomorrow), I tend to be a lot more critical.
For the first time, they will actually be right, if theatrical 2K becomes the de-facto standard (which it already has to some extent, thanks to an overload of crappy 2K digital intermediates).
True. And film can be better than this (you'll need a good print but it's possible).
Another short-sighted mistake is that it defines the image as a constant width format, meaning you get fewer pixels for a scope image vs. non-scope. Does that seem backwards to anyone else? The 2K scope image only has 858 vertical pixels, for crying out loud! (page 14)
Agree here too. Why did they do this? I'm sure most projectionists are capable of swapping a lens to anisotorpic.
but considering most linear film work is done in a 16-bit space (see the GIMP spin-off "CinePaint), this doesn't seem like enough. All theatrical digital presentations I've seen so far have been severely lacking in dynamic range compared to film. This document totally fails to address that.
That's less of a problem. This gives 4096 greyscales. That's plenty to prevent any banding. The problem is maximum contrast. I don't think more levels will help here. 16 bit is usually used to compensate for rounding errors if a lot of filters are used. 12 bit is plenty for a final print.
There is also a data limitation of just over 1MB per frame, regardless of whether the image is 2K or 4K (page 25). That's just stupid (hopefully I don't have to explain why).
True. Especially if they feel the need to go up to 6K
They do need a per-frame limit at some point. No idea why they went for such a low value. Are they assuming that everyone will use 48fps? Even then, they're only looking at 384Mb/s. No idea what they're using for transfer, but Firewire 800 can manage twice that. SCSI can handle a lot more.
But to be fair, ATMs are pretty secure. There have only been a handful of cases of hacked ATMs, and the ones that were weren't Diebold machines. Nor were they the heavy duty bank ones.
Most computing platforms have not had the distinction between hardware and Operating system. The OS was simply part of the compelte system for almost every other succesful computer. E.g. The Apple ][, The Commodore Amiga, The playstation, and Silicon graphics workstations.
And having such a limited range does make choosing a computer a lot easier. Buying a PC is confusing even for the technically literate just because there are so many variables. Even many individual PC companies have a substantially wider range than Apple. Offering a simple range of products at sensible spaced prices will be seen as an attraction by many purchasers.
Surely an "extended tool chest" would imply the existence of a "tool chest". I'm always suspicious of acronyms as explanations for words anyway. Acronyms are usually pretty well known if they're used.
Seems strange that they didn't called it "conf", but maybe init scripts and the like weren't considered part of configuration at the time, so they just threw everything that wasn't user space, mountpoints, binary files, or libraries into etc.
Okay. I can see how it's generally bad to falseley claim direct involvement with the Olympics, but the Olympics have been getting more and more protective of their IP rights. I could understand this if it was a commercial concern, but the Olympics should be purer than that. It should be run for the benefit of the people, to encourage international cooperation and promote sport.
The point is simply that if you're being 100% accurate, from a legal point of view, it isn't a tax.
If you want to argue that it's basically/effectively/morally/ecuminically a tax, then fine. I'm with you. And I'll also submit that Microsoft's per CPU OEM licence was effectively a tax, but if you want to be pedantically accurate rather than emotive, then it's not.
Slashdot Mirror
I would suggest ISO date format but that sadly doesn't work. Including the year is mandatory, so you need to wait for the year 3141, but even then, your options are would require either month 59, week 59 or day 592. None of which are likely to happen without some cataclysmic event in the next 1134 years or so.
I was referring specifically to the present British army. This would certainly not apply to all countries, expecially not those where the army is the government.
I'm also quite sure that parts of the UK army would be willing to go quite far in protecting the government against ordinary people.
I'm not so sure. Putting myself in the position of an ordinary soldier, ordered to open fire on my own countrymen (and myabe even my own family), and who I happen to agree with, my initial reaction would be "This is not what I signed up for". I expect a lot of officers would feel exactly the same way, and have the experience to know where this could end up. Their divisions would be quite pleased to be given a legal justification to ignore the government.
I wonder which government would be easier to tackle, given the severe restrictions of firearms in the UK versus the sheer inertia of the US population?
You know, I really don't think that would be a problem. If there's a popular uprising, the only weapon you need is an angry mob. The government can barricade themselves in The Houses of Parliament, but if they're corrupt enough to cause a major revolt, there's no way the army will go to their aid. The army doesn't serve the government. It serves the people.
Seeing as most people can't be bothered to vote, I can't see there ever being a violent uprising.
Well, the last couple of elections, there was essentially a choice between Conservatives, or a party emulating the Conservatives. Why bother? Previous elections, the turnout wasn't too bad.
I expect most organisations will get 64 bits and any public server will probably be at sub-address zero. But personally, I'd have gone for something a little different. Allocate the reserved IP addresses to different countries, and if we use one of these, we add a second packet header with subrouting information. Essentially make an IPv4 network of networks. It's a bit of a hack, but it will be largely compatible with the exisitng infrastructure. But of course, a 64 bit address would probably be quite adequate as long as nobody got more than 65536 IP addresses without some justification.
Nothing. People are entitled to their own opinions.
And it's true. The Wii is an underpowered console that for all practical purposes only has its controller to distinguish it from the previous generation. Personally, I quite like it but some people want CPU hungry games.
As far as I know, this was the first time we'd seen a suicide hijack. Previous hijacks have had some fairly cooperative hijackers who want to escape from an oppresive regime. People presumably didn't try to stop the terrorists because they assumed the same thing would happen and thought there was a good chance that they would just be held in a plane for a few days before being freed.
If they tried it again, people would know that they were going to die. They'd have nothing to lose by trying to stop the terrorists. A high risk of death is better than certain death, and there would be a lot more civilians than terrorists. More than enough to overpower men armed with boxcutters.
Well, the IEC and IEEE as well as the CIPM and NIST all agree thatthere are 1000 bytes to a Kilobyte and 1024 bytes tothe kibibyte. So there:P
It's not illogical it makes perfect sense to anyone who programs, well anyone who dose lower level programming. If computers were to work in base 10... Sorry I can not even go there.
If we want to worry about that then use KiB and MiB. But that doesn't make a huge amount of sense. 1KiB = 400h bytes. 1MiB = 100000h bytes. Powers of 256 would make a lot more sense.
No. I'm quite happy to accept that a Terabyte is anywhere between 1,000,000,000,000 and 1,100,000,000,000 bytes for general use, simply because it doesn't matter. It gives an idea of the amount of storage, which is all we need. If I was specifying I'd use neither and just say 3.7*10^12 bytes or whatever.
I just get a bit fed up when people insist that the illogical, and deprecated usage of terminology is correct and a usage that has been accepted for quite some time (and long before marketting got involved) is incorrect.
Why?
Why is a Kilobyte 1024 bytes, if "Kilo" means 1000, both according to the SI and the greeks (Kilo is derived from khilioi). If 1 kg = 1000g, 1 kV = 1000V, 1 km = 1000m, why should hard disks break the pattern?
When we're talking about addressable computer memory, approximating the kilobyte to 1024 is a convenience, but since Terabyte gives such a huge error, and makes absolutely no sense for data transfer or disk sizes, it's really time we stopped this illogical naming convention just because some engineers found a term convenient 40 years ago.
While it's nice if the customer knows exactly what they want, the only people who can really do this well are usually software engineers. A lot of the time, working out specs takes me as long as writing the software.
People really really don't understand software. It's a form of magic to them. You need to find out what the inputs and outputs are, what the behaviour should be in specific cases, and gradually refine a spec from that.
This sort of problem has caused a lot of expensive IT white elephants. Some of the more successful companies seem to have an intermediary to operate as a translation layer between the developers and the customers. Or to put it into non programmer terminology, to translate the requirements into geek.
If you make a stink, the first time something goes wrong, you'll be the first guy they blame.
There are ways to handle this. It does require a lot of tact and diplomacy to make it sound like your entire concern is for the wellbeing of the company and the manager especially, and that it was your boss's idea in the first place. Unfortunately, tact and diplomacy are traits that Computer Science Majors tend not to have a lot of practice in... Computer Science is a culture where if you do something wrong, you want to be told about it as soon and as unambiguously as possible.
I think it's more likely that those with plumes of black smoke are done on effects machines because that's what people expect, rather than using gasoline.
Absolutely. This happens all the time. The crashes in David Cronenberg's Crash were criticised by someone because they "weren't realistic" when actually it was all the other Hollywood crashes that weren't realistic. Skeletons have a jerky stop motion look - even CG ones - because ever since Jason and the Argonauts, we know that that's how skeletons move.
Fast paced music doesn't really play when something exciting happens. Not everyone in real life looks like a hollywood actor. If people speak in a foreign language, you don't actually see an English language translation at the bottom of the screen. I tend to be pretty easy going on most non-realism since it is just there to tell a story. If the plot relies on a complete failure to grasp some basic fundamental of physics, (e.g. The Day After Tomorrow), I tend to be a lot more critical.
For the first time, they will actually be right, if theatrical 2K becomes the de-facto standard (which it already has to some extent, thanks to an overload of crappy 2K digital intermediates).
True. And film can be better than this (you'll need a good print but it's possible).
Another short-sighted mistake is that it defines the image as a constant width format, meaning you get fewer pixels for a scope image vs. non-scope. Does that seem backwards to anyone else? The 2K scope image only has 858 vertical pixels, for crying out loud! (page 14)
Agree here too. Why did they do this? I'm sure most projectionists are capable of swapping a lens to anisotorpic.
but considering most linear film work is done in a 16-bit space (see the GIMP spin-off "CinePaint), this doesn't seem like enough. All theatrical digital presentations I've seen so far have been severely lacking in dynamic range compared to film. This document totally fails to address that.
That's less of a problem. This gives 4096 greyscales. That's plenty to prevent any banding. The problem is maximum contrast. I don't think more levels will help here. 16 bit is usually used to compensate for rounding errors if a lot of filters are used. 12 bit is plenty for a final print.
There is also a data limitation of just over 1MB per frame, regardless of whether the image is 2K or 4K (page 25). That's just stupid (hopefully I don't have to explain why).
True. Especially if they feel the need to go up to 6K
They do need a per-frame limit at some point. No idea why they went for such a low value. Are they assuming that everyone will use 48fps? Even then, they're only looking at 384Mb/s. No idea what they're using for transfer, but Firewire 800 can manage twice that. SCSI can handle a lot more.
But to be fair, ATMs are pretty secure. There have only been a handful of cases of hacked ATMs, and the ones that were weren't Diebold machines. Nor were they the heavy duty bank ones.
Is this a misuse of copyright law in order to stifle dissent?
Yes.
CSI? De-centralized CPU? Where will they be located; Miami, New York or Las Vegas?
Well, clearly, they won't. They're decentralised.
New on NBC, "CSI: Wherever". We even have a song by The Who for the opening credits - "Anyway, Anyhow, Anywhere".
It's not the key. But it is a strength. I think if Apple had as many different basic models as Dell, they would lose out.
To be honest, I think people like you and me who appreciate freedom are the exception. I think most people want to be told exactly what they want.
Most computing platforms have not had the distinction between hardware and Operating system. The OS was simply part of the compelte system for almost every other succesful computer. E.g. The Apple ][, The Commodore Amiga, The playstation, and Silicon graphics workstations.
And having such a limited range does make choosing a computer a lot easier. Buying a PC is confusing even for the technically literate just because there are so many variables. Even many individual PC companies have a substantially wider range than Apple. Offering a simple range of products at sensible spaced prices will be seen as an attraction by many purchasers.
Surely an "extended tool chest" would imply the existence of a "tool chest". I'm always suspicious of acronyms as explanations for words anyway. Acronyms are usually pretty well known if they're used.
Seems strange that they didn't called it "conf", but maybe init scripts and the like weren't considered part of configuration at the time, so they just threw everything that wasn't user space, mountpoints, binary files, or libraries into etc.
Okay. I can see how it's generally bad to falseley claim direct involvement with the Olympics, but the Olympics have been getting more and more protective of their IP rights. I could understand this if it was a commercial concern, but the Olympics should be purer than that. It should be run for the benefit of the people, to encourage international cooperation and promote sport.
When did things change?
The point is simply that if you're being 100% accurate, from a legal point of view, it isn't a tax.
If you want to argue that it's basically/effectively/morally/ecuminically a tax, then fine. I'm with you. And I'll also submit that Microsoft's per CPU OEM licence was effectively a tax, but if you want to be pedantically accurate rather than emotive, then it's not.