i wore contacts in afghanistan, never had any problems. kept a pair of glasses handy just in case though. i knew a few guys that had to pull their contacts out due to sand/dirt/dry air/etc during combat, didn't sound like it was a big deal.
How do they get past the sensory adaptation issue though? Having a contact lens with an image on it applied directly to the eye will work for about 30 seconds to a minute, and then the brain filters that image out. Our eyes are constantly making tiny movements meant to change the light hitting any particular spot on the retina. If the same light hits the same spot continuously, that spot becomes "fatigued" and stops sending information to the brain. The brain then fills in the empty spot with assumptions from the area surrounding that spot. Unless the image on the lens was in a constant state of change, we would stop seeing it. Really, research into displays on contact lenses is old news, this has been going on for years. As far as I can tell, no one has come up with a solution for sensory adaptation. Now, before a flame war starts - I may well be wrong about any part of this statement. I'm operating from memory, and my very well be incorrect. If I am, please let me know.
I'd disagree with you there, at least partially. It really depends on the type of prosthetic (arm, hand, leg, etc) and the application. A basic arm designed for regular, everyday use, minimal load bearing, could go for the better part of a day on current battery technology. However, you are correct for things like legs, that are in use often and are load bearing. If anything, power and interface are "the two sticking points".
the interfacing between the brain and a computer is still a sticking point. granted, science is currently making some good progress, but we're still a ways out. once that gets solved reliably, things should get fun. especially if the interface has standardized connections and a publicly available API - realistically, you'd be able to by "bolt-on", disposable prosthetics at best buy someday (but snobs like me will buy them from newegg)
but it bears repeating - WYSIWYG IS BAD. Learn to write HTML, it's very easy. I know, I know, I'm bordering on flamebait here, but I'm gonna say it anyway. And I'll readily admit that Dreamweaver's WYSIWYG helped me quite a bit when I was learning HTML, but most editors that use WYSIWYG have quirky implementations and don't render quite the way a real browser will. I ended up spending more time troubleshooting and digging through generated code trying to make things work than I would have it I had just sucked it up, put on my big boy pants and wrote my own code. It's fine for a beginner as a tool to help learn, but nothing more. If you have a dual monitor setup, open a browser on one screen and the editor (if you insist on open-source, I recommend Notepad++) in the other, and every time you make a change in the editor, hit refresh in the browser. I promise, if you take the time to learn HTML properly and invest a little time and energy up front, it will be well worth it in the end. --Potential DBag comment-- I own a small web dev shop, if you walked in and applied (even as a "designer") and you couldn't hand code basic HTML/CSS and needed a WYSIWYG editor to do your work, I would drop your resume in the trash on the spot. I don't expect designers to be code masters, but in this day and age, there is absolutely no reason why a designer shouldn't be able to take their images and turn them into decent HTML. --End DBag comment--
It was never worth it to begin with
on
Is E85 Dead Now?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Even though it cost less than standard gasoline, it came at a reduced gas milage. I did the math and at the cost in my area, it was more expensive per mile than regular. Maybe in other areas that was different, I dont know.
No really, it's going to get literally ugly. There will be a few TV manufacturers that will get onboard with good design for the interface, and take the time and money to study the most effective ways to present on and control smart TV's. And then there will be the other 99% of manufacturers that will slap on glossy, shiney, gaudy interfaces that are barely usable. Couple that with the inevitable "format wars" that will start - each manufacturer will insist on their own proprietary platform for apps and set up their own licensing deals with content suppliers (except the cheap ones, they'll just license the cheapest platform they can get from one of the big players and execute it poorly). They will all also try to mimic that "App store" model, creating dozens of "walled gardens", each just being a cheap knock off of Apple and Android. And, each of them will be rather understocked due to proprietary platforms and a lack of app developers willing to deal with the headache of porting apps to 3 dozen different setups. In time, there will be a few that will rise to the top and push the others out of the way, but the next few years is gonna be the wild wild west. And it's gonna be ugly.
if administered properly. As someone who has done hiring, my process is as follows: "Meet and Greet" - sit down and chat for a bit, see if I (and the people I work with) can stand to be around the person and have a reasonable conversation with them. If you don't have basic communication skills and can't carry on a basic conversation, you won't last here. Even in software dev, you need to be able to interact with the outside world in a meaningful way. So we weed those out first. "Show me the code" - show me some code that you've written. Bring me some examples of what you're capable of. I'm going to ask you questions about the logic flow, reasons why you laid things out the way you did, how long it took to write, etc. "Write me some code" - I'm going to give you a task that is related to what we do at this company (not some meaningless, trivial code exercise, but something that you will experience working here) and a timeframe, then review what you write. I will again ask about logic flow, code layout. If you don't finish, that's ok. But give me a good reason why. If it's something you were unfamiliar with, show me the steps you took to get up to speed. I don't honestly care whether or not you know how to use every arcane little function of a language, I care about how well you can get the resources you need, learn on the fly and adapt to new situations. Lastly, "Brain Teasers" - yeah, I use them. Not cause I care about how creative you are or cause their trendy and cool, but because I want to watch you think. I want to see how you handle pressure. Best answer I ever got was a guy told me he didn't know much about the topic of the teaser (it was engineering related), but he had a friend who was a engineering professor that he would talk to about it, but the consult with his friend would cost $500 and could he bill that to me? I laughed my ass of and hired the guy on the spot. Because, on top of all the skills he had and the ability to think on his feet and learn new things, he had some balls.
That's how I do it. And it works really well for me, but I know I'm not the norm. Most companies would never allow a process like this. It's to bad though, we've had a lot of success this way.
there may be nothing to hate, and IE9 may very well be a good, solid browser. however, microsoft has sullied the waters so badly over the past ~15 years that it's gonna take a whole lot more than one good browser before i get back on that horse. maybe when IE12 drops and 9-12 have all been really good, standards compliant, secure, pretty, etc., then i might consider using a microsoft browser again. meanwhile, FF has a decent track record (not great, but it's been alright and overall i like it), chrome has been rock solid, heck even opera has made a pretty respectable showing in the areas that count. no reason to change now, just cause microsoft got one right. i'll stick with consistent winners, thank you.
That'd be great except for a few minor details: Wheelchairs are easier to maintain (fewer moving parts, much larger network of parts and support providers), wheelchairs are easier to transport (they fold up nicely and fit easily in the backseat of a car), they are easy to use (no instruction required, it's very self explanatory), they don't require power (granted, some do, but the average wheelchair is "self powered"), and - here's the kicker - much much much cheaper (yes, i know that theyre very expensive, especially for the high end ones, but compared to the cost of an exoskeleton, they are much cheaper). Personally, I'm all for exoskeletons and I personally know people in wheelchairs who I would love to see up and walking, but the challenges of making this into a reality are massive. That being said, once those challenges are overcome, I will jump in line to purchase one and upgrade/weaponize/harden/repaint/awsome-ize it and proceed to be a nuisance to my neighborhood.
saw stuff like this years ago. cant find the exact tech demo that i originally saw that used 3 mics for triangulation, but this video is pretty close. even mocked up a rough version (low precision, slow response time, but pretty damn good for an afternoon worth of work and very little experience with arduino) tied to a projector in my shop. customers had a blast with it, thought it was the coolest thing in the world. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxDHiwheK8w&feature=related
if i had mod points, i would mod you up. i couldnt have said it better myself. i spent some time working for a company that sold educational supplies and was part of the product development group. i was amazed when i first started at how much hardware was available to teachers, but how little software there was. and most teachers didnt have a clue how to effectively use what they had. we spent more time helping teachers develop processes and effective ways to use the technology then we did developing software. it really was sad, i would go into a classroom and ask the teacher what they used their whiteboard for, or how they used technology in teaching and usually it amounted to showing power point. occasionally a teacher would show us something a little interactive (usually a science teacher), but most of it was very basic. worse yet, my boss had these grand ideas of turning the classroom into an "educational arcade" and thought that we needed to produce nothing but games. so it was an uphill battle from multiple sides. it wasn't until we developed some interactive textbooks and showed a few teachers how to use them that we got any decent results. really, the more we studied the situation, the more we found that the average teacher needs nothing more than a projector for some powerpoint, and (for the slightly more advanced ones) a "blackboard" style homework/assignment tracking system.
I think you all missed the point of what i was saying - I understand and appreciate function over form. I get that it was designed for a purpose. What I'm saying is that it's ugly. Not that it isn't capable of it's role, or that it's a bad design, just that it's ugly. It may be the best damn helicopter for the job, and if it is, then I give my full support (for what that's worth). But I will still stand by my opinion that it is and ugly aircraft. I think some of you took what I said way to seriously, it was nothing more than an opinion and a bit of humor. If I had wanted to talk about the merits of the design I would have commented on on the inherent stability of the twin rotor configuration or asked a question about the flight handling characteristics since it has no tail rotor. That being said, I still say it would have been way cooler if they had modified a 222 - disclaimer: this was not a serious statement intended to incite debate, it was nothing more than an attempt at humor.
I get the whole function over form thing, and I appreciate it most of the time. Heck, I was in the military, so I completely understand that function comes first. But that is one seriously stupid looking helicopter. Maybe other people like it, and if you do, that's fine. But I think it looks like it was designed by herp and derp. Couldn't they have modified a Bell 222 or something cool looking?
Good move on Apple's part- buy the developer and retain the patents for anything new and novel coming out of there, but continue to outsource the fabrication. It's everything that was good about vertical integration, minus the bad (costs of retooling, slow response times). Couple this with locked in deals with manufacturers and Apple is setting itself up for an even stronger market domination. Say what you want about them (evil, controlling, walled-garden, doo-doo heads), they're not stupid over there. And keep in mind, the company is now run by the guy who was in charge of the supply chain. We're gonna be hearing alot more stories like this in the near future. Love them or hate them, Apple is running their business very very right.
Couple of reasons from the office I work at - end of year deadlines means code gets rushed in Oct/Nov in order for testing and review before Christmas. Also, those of us who haven't taken all of our vacation time yet are forced to take time off, disrupting projects. Last minute client changes (to the projects due at the end of the year) add to the pile. And, the stress of the holidays plays a part as well (mostly because we're asocial geeks who are dreading the onslaught of family get-togethers and forced social situations). Usually by December, we've got our projects off for review and testing so there isn't much code being written, and the code that is being written is in response to problems and is a chance to take rushed, bad code and make it a little bit less bad. That's my little piece of anecdotal evidence.
but those aircraft have quite a bit more power than a Super Hornet. As someone who has worked on a carrier and operated catapults, I can tell you from experience that Hornets and Super Hornets couldn't get off the deck unassisted. They (especially the Hornets) are rather under-powered. A flat deck provides the versatility of aircraft the Navy requires, as well as helicopter landing space, and general aircraft parking space.
I've worked for a number of tech companies that dont actually delete anything, the simply mark the record "deleted" in the database. It's a pretty common practice that didn't really ever get talked about until it came to light that Facebook did it. Let's face it, once something is out there, it never ever really goes away, whether it be on Facebook or somewhere else,
Slashdot Mirror
i wore contacts in afghanistan, never had any problems. kept a pair of glasses handy just in case though. i knew a few guys that had to pull their contacts out due to sand/dirt/dry air/etc during combat, didn't sound like it was a big deal.
How do they get past the sensory adaptation issue though? Having a contact lens with an image on it applied directly to the eye will work for about 30 seconds to a minute, and then the brain filters that image out. Our eyes are constantly making tiny movements meant to change the light hitting any particular spot on the retina. If the same light hits the same spot continuously, that spot becomes "fatigued" and stops sending information to the brain. The brain then fills in the empty spot with assumptions from the area surrounding that spot. Unless the image on the lens was in a constant state of change, we would stop seeing it. Really, research into displays on contact lenses is old news, this has been going on for years. As far as I can tell, no one has come up with a solution for sensory adaptation. Now, before a flame war starts - I may well be wrong about any part of this statement. I'm operating from memory, and my very well be incorrect. If I am, please let me know.
That's a really valid argument. Im inclined to agree.
I'd disagree with you there, at least partially. It really depends on the type of prosthetic (arm, hand, leg, etc) and the application. A basic arm designed for regular, everyday use, minimal load bearing, could go for the better part of a day on current battery technology. However, you are correct for things like legs, that are in use often and are load bearing. If anything, power and interface are "the two sticking points".
the interfacing between the brain and a computer is still a sticking point. granted, science is currently making some good progress, but we're still a ways out. once that gets solved reliably, things should get fun. especially if the interface has standardized connections and a publicly available API - realistically, you'd be able to by "bolt-on", disposable prosthetics at best buy someday (but snobs like me will buy them from newegg)
Also add Adobe AIR
but it bears repeating - WYSIWYG IS BAD. Learn to write HTML, it's very easy. I know, I know, I'm bordering on flamebait here, but I'm gonna say it anyway. And I'll readily admit that Dreamweaver's WYSIWYG helped me quite a bit when I was learning HTML, but most editors that use WYSIWYG have quirky implementations and don't render quite the way a real browser will. I ended up spending more time troubleshooting and digging through generated code trying to make things work than I would have it I had just sucked it up, put on my big boy pants and wrote my own code. It's fine for a beginner as a tool to help learn, but nothing more. If you have a dual monitor setup, open a browser on one screen and the editor (if you insist on open-source, I recommend Notepad++) in the other, and every time you make a change in the editor, hit refresh in the browser. I promise, if you take the time to learn HTML properly and invest a little time and energy up front, it will be well worth it in the end. --Potential DBag comment-- I own a small web dev shop, if you walked in and applied (even as a "designer") and you couldn't hand code basic HTML/CSS and needed a WYSIWYG editor to do your work, I would drop your resume in the trash on the spot. I don't expect designers to be code masters, but in this day and age, there is absolutely no reason why a designer shouldn't be able to take their images and turn them into decent HTML. --End DBag comment--
Even though it cost less than standard gasoline, it came at a reduced gas milage. I did the math and at the cost in my area, it was more expensive per mile than regular. Maybe in other areas that was different, I dont know.
No really, it's going to get literally ugly. There will be a few TV manufacturers that will get onboard with good design for the interface, and take the time and money to study the most effective ways to present on and control smart TV's. And then there will be the other 99% of manufacturers that will slap on glossy, shiney, gaudy interfaces that are barely usable. Couple that with the inevitable "format wars" that will start - each manufacturer will insist on their own proprietary platform for apps and set up their own licensing deals with content suppliers (except the cheap ones, they'll just license the cheapest platform they can get from one of the big players and execute it poorly). They will all also try to mimic that "App store" model, creating dozens of "walled gardens", each just being a cheap knock off of Apple and Android. And, each of them will be rather understocked due to proprietary platforms and a lack of app developers willing to deal with the headache of porting apps to 3 dozen different setups. In time, there will be a few that will rise to the top and push the others out of the way, but the next few years is gonna be the wild wild west. And it's gonna be ugly.
im so sorry for your loss, that would be devastating
if administered properly. As someone who has done hiring, my process is as follows: "Meet and Greet" - sit down and chat for a bit, see if I (and the people I work with) can stand to be around the person and have a reasonable conversation with them. If you don't have basic communication skills and can't carry on a basic conversation, you won't last here. Even in software dev, you need to be able to interact with the outside world in a meaningful way. So we weed those out first. "Show me the code" - show me some code that you've written. Bring me some examples of what you're capable of. I'm going to ask you questions about the logic flow, reasons why you laid things out the way you did, how long it took to write, etc. "Write me some code" - I'm going to give you a task that is related to what we do at this company (not some meaningless, trivial code exercise, but something that you will experience working here) and a timeframe, then review what you write. I will again ask about logic flow, code layout. If you don't finish, that's ok. But give me a good reason why. If it's something you were unfamiliar with, show me the steps you took to get up to speed. I don't honestly care whether or not you know how to use every arcane little function of a language, I care about how well you can get the resources you need, learn on the fly and adapt to new situations. Lastly, "Brain Teasers" - yeah, I use them. Not cause I care about how creative you are or cause their trendy and cool, but because I want to watch you think. I want to see how you handle pressure. Best answer I ever got was a guy told me he didn't know much about the topic of the teaser (it was engineering related), but he had a friend who was a engineering professor that he would talk to about it, but the consult with his friend would cost $500 and could he bill that to me? I laughed my ass of and hired the guy on the spot. Because, on top of all the skills he had and the ability to think on his feet and learn new things, he had some balls. That's how I do it. And it works really well for me, but I know I'm not the norm. Most companies would never allow a process like this. It's to bad though, we've had a lot of success this way.
Sounds like an indie chick band.
there may be nothing to hate, and IE9 may very well be a good, solid browser. however, microsoft has sullied the waters so badly over the past ~15 years that it's gonna take a whole lot more than one good browser before i get back on that horse. maybe when IE12 drops and 9-12 have all been really good, standards compliant, secure, pretty, etc., then i might consider using a microsoft browser again. meanwhile, FF has a decent track record (not great, but it's been alright and overall i like it), chrome has been rock solid, heck even opera has made a pretty respectable showing in the areas that count. no reason to change now, just cause microsoft got one right. i'll stick with consistent winners, thank you.
That'd be great except for a few minor details: Wheelchairs are easier to maintain (fewer moving parts, much larger network of parts and support providers), wheelchairs are easier to transport (they fold up nicely and fit easily in the backseat of a car), they are easy to use (no instruction required, it's very self explanatory), they don't require power (granted, some do, but the average wheelchair is "self powered"), and - here's the kicker - much much much cheaper (yes, i know that theyre very expensive, especially for the high end ones, but compared to the cost of an exoskeleton, they are much cheaper). Personally, I'm all for exoskeletons and I personally know people in wheelchairs who I would love to see up and walking, but the challenges of making this into a reality are massive. That being said, once those challenges are overcome, I will jump in line to purchase one and upgrade/weaponize/harden/repaint/awsome-ize it and proceed to be a nuisance to my neighborhood.
saw stuff like this years ago. cant find the exact tech demo that i originally saw that used 3 mics for triangulation, but this video is pretty close. even mocked up a rough version (low precision, slow response time, but pretty damn good for an afternoon worth of work and very little experience with arduino) tied to a projector in my shop. customers had a blast with it, thought it was the coolest thing in the world. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxDHiwheK8w&feature=related
hey, dont give out my wife's email address!
if i had mod points, i would mod you up. i couldnt have said it better myself. i spent some time working for a company that sold educational supplies and was part of the product development group. i was amazed when i first started at how much hardware was available to teachers, but how little software there was. and most teachers didnt have a clue how to effectively use what they had. we spent more time helping teachers develop processes and effective ways to use the technology then we did developing software. it really was sad, i would go into a classroom and ask the teacher what they used their whiteboard for, or how they used technology in teaching and usually it amounted to showing power point. occasionally a teacher would show us something a little interactive (usually a science teacher), but most of it was very basic. worse yet, my boss had these grand ideas of turning the classroom into an "educational arcade" and thought that we needed to produce nothing but games. so it was an uphill battle from multiple sides. it wasn't until we developed some interactive textbooks and showed a few teachers how to use them that we got any decent results. really, the more we studied the situation, the more we found that the average teacher needs nothing more than a projector for some powerpoint, and (for the slightly more advanced ones) a "blackboard" style homework/assignment tracking system.
I think you all missed the point of what i was saying - I understand and appreciate function over form. I get that it was designed for a purpose. What I'm saying is that it's ugly. Not that it isn't capable of it's role, or that it's a bad design, just that it's ugly. It may be the best damn helicopter for the job, and if it is, then I give my full support (for what that's worth). But I will still stand by my opinion that it is and ugly aircraft. I think some of you took what I said way to seriously, it was nothing more than an opinion and a bit of humor. If I had wanted to talk about the merits of the design I would have commented on on the inherent stability of the twin rotor configuration or asked a question about the flight handling characteristics since it has no tail rotor. That being said, I still say it would have been way cooler if they had modified a 222 - disclaimer: this was not a serious statement intended to incite debate, it was nothing more than an attempt at humor.
I get the whole function over form thing, and I appreciate it most of the time. Heck, I was in the military, so I completely understand that function comes first. But that is one seriously stupid looking helicopter. Maybe other people like it, and if you do, that's fine. But I think it looks like it was designed by herp and derp. Couldn't they have modified a Bell 222 or something cool looking?
you talking about china or isreal?
Good move on Apple's part- buy the developer and retain the patents for anything new and novel coming out of there, but continue to outsource the fabrication. It's everything that was good about vertical integration, minus the bad (costs of retooling, slow response times). Couple this with locked in deals with manufacturers and Apple is setting itself up for an even stronger market domination. Say what you want about them (evil, controlling, walled-garden, doo-doo heads), they're not stupid over there. And keep in mind, the company is now run by the guy who was in charge of the supply chain. We're gonna be hearing alot more stories like this in the near future. Love them or hate them, Apple is running their business very very right.
Couple of reasons from the office I work at - end of year deadlines means code gets rushed in Oct/Nov in order for testing and review before Christmas. Also, those of us who haven't taken all of our vacation time yet are forced to take time off, disrupting projects. Last minute client changes (to the projects due at the end of the year) add to the pile. And, the stress of the holidays plays a part as well (mostly because we're asocial geeks who are dreading the onslaught of family get-togethers and forced social situations). Usually by December, we've got our projects off for review and testing so there isn't much code being written, and the code that is being written is in response to problems and is a chance to take rushed, bad code and make it a little bit less bad. That's my little piece of anecdotal evidence.
he wrote vista? that explains a lot
but those aircraft have quite a bit more power than a Super Hornet. As someone who has worked on a carrier and operated catapults, I can tell you from experience that Hornets and Super Hornets couldn't get off the deck unassisted. They (especially the Hornets) are rather under-powered. A flat deck provides the versatility of aircraft the Navy requires, as well as helicopter landing space, and general aircraft parking space.
I've worked for a number of tech companies that dont actually delete anything, the simply mark the record "deleted" in the database. It's a pretty common practice that didn't really ever get talked about until it came to light that Facebook did it. Let's face it, once something is out there, it never ever really goes away, whether it be on Facebook or somewhere else,