EVERY bitmap image in the PDF is low-res and lousy in exactly the same way. This is an indicator of what DPI settings were used within Adobe Acrobat when creating the PDF, and not in any way telling of the quality of the original example photos.
The scanner itself uses a linear sensor that travels down one axis. Is there any compelling reason why the grid couldn't be projected similarly, one slice at a time, as the scanner moves?
Cuz, I mean: If the scanner can't see the whole grid at the same time, then there's no reason for it to all be present at the same time.
Troll, these days, is too common a moderation, and is often misused. It wasn't always that way around here.
I, for one, like Obama. I like many of his policies, and dislike many others, but I sure like him better than the last guy, overall. That's my opinion, of course, but it's important that I be allowed to state it -- even though I'm quite certain that others disagree.
Likewise, as an American, I support the right for anyone at all to call him a corrupt asshole, and be heard.
Sometimes, I think the mods just need to take a deep breath, and mod "Interesting" instead of "Troll" or "Flamebait," even though some less-than-savory discourse might ensue, for it is this very discourse that keeps us, as a nation, united.
But, hey, what do I know? I'm just a taxpayer. No no, that's not it -- I'm a consumer. Er, wait - that's not right either. Oh! I remember! I'm a citizen, and I own this place just like every other citizen! Even those citizens that I think are full of shit, or that I just disagree with by default -- they own this place, too!
Ok. Factor in spark plug replacement, air cleaner maintenance, emissions, mufflers, oil changes, fuel injector maintenance, and all the other bits of care-and-feeding that an internal combustion engine will require during 10 years of commutes.
Meanwhile, the Volt would need much less of this stuff in OP's scenario. Charged at work (for free), as OP suggests it would be, means that it'd only be run on gasoline for a few miles a day.
Now, sure: Batteries for the Volt are going to be expensive. But so is regular maintenance on any other car over 10 years. If you want to consider the financial impact of maintaining one, you really should put some time into thinking about the other as well.
Forget selling it -- they're spending great, heaping piles of cash on figuring out how to produce useful electric vehicles.
The government loan to them was, what, a bit more than $400 million? Sheesh. Where else is that cash to go? It's plain and obvious that the largest barrier for electric cars is battery tech, and it follows that they spend a huge amount of money on improving that aspect first.
(And don't say the government loan money will go toward "hookers and blow," since if that was their primary purpose they'd still be unprofitable today instead of being technically in the black.)
Because everyone knows that any Li-ion battery is just like any other Li-ion battery. It's a solved chemistry, and there's no improvements to be made anywhere. Right?
In the practical sense, it's a silly concept. Get rid of reboots for updates, and nobody will care if program state is maintained between cold boots (since various-and-sundry sleep modes easily pick up the rest of the slack).
I find that the prefetching stuff actually makes my systems slower, and habitually turn that part off on my own computers. It works fine on my wife's machine, though.
I can only guess that the disparity is that her usage is more predictable than mine.
My trusty old Dell Inspiron 6000d will shut itself off rather forcibly when things turn too hot, after a short series of very loud beeps (as if to say: Hey, I'm on fire over here!).
I did lose a hard drive in that machine once, but not due to heat. It was from routinely running the thing outside in -15F weather, without so much as even pre-heating it. That particular failure was totally unsurprising to me when it happened.
I've been wondering lately why it is that folks are so insistent on having their laptops sleep when the lid shuts, anyway.
My own laptops, upon closing the lid, only do one thing: Turn off the display. This way, whatever I'm doing (downloading, watching a streaming movie, working with ssh, whatever) isn't interrupted just because I've decided to move from one room to another.
If I do want the machine to sleep, I just push the power button. I have this configured to engage sleep mode. It works fine.
That's just like every other bloody product in that price range, except even more limited than most, and it just happens to have "Verizon" silkscreened on it.
My sarcasm detector is broken today, so I can't tell if your comment is serious or if it just made a big whooshing noise over my head.
But there's a lot of companies which (well, used to, mostly) make a living selling public domain software. The back pages of any computer rag in the 80s or early 90s were full of them.
Such alterations would be caused by either a coding issue, or a RAM/CPU issue, and would slip right through. Checksums in this context only work to protect (or at least advise upon) data once it is on disk.
If have reason to be paranoid enough to worry about such things, you should at least be using ECC RAM as well. CPU bugs (on stock clocks) almost never happen these days, and when they do, they're generally a fault which affects all CPUs of that type and are patched around pretty quickly in software.
I specified that it works fine with a DVD on my own computer. And that it works fine with Media Center, which is just another player (though rather more far-reaching than most).
If it's possible with some applications but not others, then it is plainly an application problem and not a Windows problem.
Are there any queers in the theater tonight? Get them up against the wall! There's one in the spotlight, he don't look right to me, Get him up against the wall! That one looks Jewish! And that one's a coon! Who let all of this riff-raff into the room? There's one smoking a joint, And another with spots! If I had my way, I'd have all of you shot!
Common "network extenders" are just bidirectional amplifiers. They boost the signal both ways so that existing infrastructure can work better, typically within a building (though not necessarily so).
At the $250 range, they include an on/off switch and nothing else. (And at the higher end of things from companies like Powerwave, they are a little more configurable, but are still pretty dumb in operation.)
So, you install such a thing and turn it on: Plonk! Everyone's got great cell reception. Turn it off: Everyone has the same reception they did before the system was installed. At no time are any actively detrimental effects introduced.
IIRC, proper interactive extension is being tested on airplanes. They have a system which communicates with the cell phones, informing them that the tower is close by, and to output minimum power. Stuff then gets beamed to Earth with microwave or somesuch, instead of with traditional cellular telephony. But I'm going to wager that such a thing almost certainly costs a lot more than $5k per aircraft, let alone per school building.
(Disclaimer: I've implemented a couple of large in-building distributed antenna systems for extending coverage of cell phones and two-way radios, including one for a seven-story hospital building. I don't claim to know everything about the concept, but I'm quite certain that I've got a bigger clue about it than most folks do. On the scale of a school building, $5k won't even break the ice in cabling and installation, let alone hardware.)
...which speaks highly for an active system. Such a thing can be pretty trivially designed to generate noise (or more interactive jamming) only on the frequencies used by phones, while not making a peep outside of those bands.
That said: I think the issue here is more about whether anyone should be able to willfully interfere with a cell phone, than it is about the methodology.
Slashdot Mirror
I laughed.
My interpretation is different from that:
EVERY bitmap image in the PDF is low-res and lousy in exactly the same way. This is an indicator of what DPI settings were used within Adobe Acrobat when creating the PDF, and not in any way telling of the quality of the original example photos.
Can't? We not?
The scanner itself uses a linear sensor that travels down one axis. Is there any compelling reason why the grid couldn't be projected similarly, one slice at a time, as the scanner moves?
Cuz, I mean: If the scanner can't see the whole grid at the same time, then there's no reason for it to all be present at the same time.
Some of the carriage returns were useful. Some of them (ie, those resulting in short lines for the sole effect of having short lines) were not.
You both fail.
*sigh*
Troll, these days, is too common a moderation, and is often misused. It wasn't always that way around here.
I, for one, like Obama. I like many of his policies, and dislike many others, but I sure like him better than the last guy, overall. That's my opinion, of course, but it's important that I be allowed to state it -- even though I'm quite certain that others disagree.
Likewise, as an American, I support the right for anyone at all to call him a corrupt asshole, and be heard.
Sometimes, I think the mods just need to take a deep breath, and mod "Interesting" instead of "Troll" or "Flamebait," even though some less-than-savory discourse might ensue, for it is this very discourse that keeps us, as a nation, united.
But, hey, what do I know? I'm just a taxpayer. No no, that's not it -- I'm a consumer. Er, wait - that's not right either. Oh! I remember! I'm a citizen, and I own this place just like every other citizen! Even those citizens that I think are full of shit, or that I just disagree with by default -- they own this place, too!
(I think my sig sums the rest of this up neatly.)
Ok. Factor in spark plug replacement, air cleaner maintenance, emissions, mufflers, oil changes, fuel injector maintenance, and all the other bits of care-and-feeding that an internal combustion engine will require during 10 years of commutes.
Meanwhile, the Volt would need much less of this stuff in OP's scenario. Charged at work (for free), as OP suggests it would be, means that it'd only be run on gasoline for a few miles a day.
Now, sure: Batteries for the Volt are going to be expensive. But so is regular maintenance on any other car over 10 years. If you want to consider the financial impact of maintaining one, you really should put some time into thinking about the other as well.
Forget selling it -- they're spending great, heaping piles of cash on figuring out how to produce useful electric vehicles.
The government loan to them was, what, a bit more than $400 million? Sheesh. Where else is that cash to go? It's plain and obvious that the largest barrier for electric cars is battery tech, and it follows that they spend a huge amount of money on improving that aspect first.
(And don't say the government loan money will go toward "hookers and blow," since if that was their primary purpose they'd still be unprofitable today instead of being technically in the black.)
So what?
Because everyone knows that any Li-ion battery is just like any other Li-ion battery. It's a solved chemistry, and there's no improvements to be made anywhere. Right?
Other vehicles which change lanes smoothly: A Honda, a Kia, a Hyundai, a Vespa, a moped...
"Gosh, look at that Tesla! See how smoothly it changes lanes?"
*sigh*
If dense is what I portray, then dense is what I am.
[citation needed], and a PR blurb from Verizon doesn't count.
As long as we're thinking out of the box...
Why is a shutdown/reboot ever necessary at all?
In the practical sense, it's a silly concept. Get rid of reboots for updates, and nobody will care if program state is maintained between cold boots (since various-and-sundry sleep modes easily pick up the rest of the slack).
I find that the prefetching stuff actually makes my systems slower, and habitually turn that part off on my own computers. It works fine on my wife's machine, though.
I can only guess that the disparity is that her usage is more predictable than mine.
Bad laptop, I guess.
My trusty old Dell Inspiron 6000d will shut itself off rather forcibly when things turn too hot, after a short series of very loud beeps (as if to say: Hey, I'm on fire over here!).
I did lose a hard drive in that machine once, but not due to heat. It was from routinely running the thing outside in -15F weather, without so much as even pre-heating it. That particular failure was totally unsurprising to me when it happened.
I've been wondering lately why it is that folks are so insistent on having their laptops sleep when the lid shuts, anyway.
My own laptops, upon closing the lid, only do one thing: Turn off the display. This way, whatever I'm doing (downloading, watching a streaming movie, working with ssh, whatever) isn't interrupted just because I've decided to move from one room to another.
If I do want the machine to sleep, I just push the power button. I have this configured to engage sleep mode. It works fine.
*shrug*
That's just like every other bloody product in that price range, except even more limited than most, and it just happens to have "Verizon" silkscreened on it.
So, uh: Fucking woop.
I, for one, have configured Slashdot so that domains are never shown.
I advise everyone who cares to live adventurously to do the same.
My sarcasm detector is broken today, so I can't tell if your comment is serious or if it just made a big whooshing noise over my head.
But there's a lot of companies which (well, used to, mostly) make a living selling public domain software. The back pages of any computer rag in the 80s or early 90s were full of them.
Wow. The mods sure do have a peculiar sense of humor when it comes to anything Apple.
This saddens me.
Such alterations would be caused by either a coding issue, or a RAM/CPU issue, and would slip right through. Checksums in this context only work to protect (or at least advise upon) data once it is on disk.
If have reason to be paranoid enough to worry about such things, you should at least be using ECC RAM as well. CPU bugs (on stock clocks) almost never happen these days, and when they do, they're generally a fault which affects all CPUs of that type and are patched around pretty quickly in software.
You read poorly.
I specified that it works fine with a DVD on my own computer. And that it works fine with Media Center, which is just another player (though rather more far-reaching than most).
If it's possible with some applications but not others, then it is plainly an application problem and not a Windows problem.
Are there any queers in the theater tonight?
Get them up against the wall!
There's one in the spotlight, he don't look right to me,
Get him up against the wall!
That one looks Jewish!
And that one's a coon!
Who let all of this riff-raff into the room?
There's one smoking a joint,
And another with spots!
If I had my way,
I'd have all of you shot!
--Pink Floyd, In the Flesh
Mac user: "What's a shell account?"
Linux user explains the whole thing.
Mac user: *head explodes*
No.
Doesn't work that way.
Common "network extenders" are just bidirectional amplifiers. They boost the signal both ways so that existing infrastructure can work better, typically within a building (though not necessarily so).
At the $250 range, they include an on/off switch and nothing else. (And at the higher end of things from companies like Powerwave, they are a little more configurable, but are still pretty dumb in operation.)
So, you install such a thing and turn it on: Plonk! Everyone's got great cell reception. Turn it off: Everyone has the same reception they did before the system was installed. At no time are any actively detrimental effects introduced.
IIRC, proper interactive extension is being tested on airplanes. They have a system which communicates with the cell phones, informing them that the tower is close by, and to output minimum power. Stuff then gets beamed to Earth with microwave or somesuch, instead of with traditional cellular telephony. But I'm going to wager that such a thing almost certainly costs a lot more than $5k per aircraft, let alone per school building.
(Disclaimer: I've implemented a couple of large in-building distributed antenna systems for extending coverage of cell phones and two-way radios, including one for a seven-story hospital building. I don't claim to know everything about the concept, but I'm quite certain that I've got a bigger clue about it than most folks do. On the scale of a school building, $5k won't even break the ice in cabling and installation, let alone hardware.)
...which speaks highly for an active system. Such a thing can be pretty trivially designed to generate noise (or more interactive jamming) only on the frequencies used by phones, while not making a peep outside of those bands.
That said: I think the issue here is more about whether anyone should be able to willfully interfere with a cell phone, than it is about the methodology.