Can I assume that they will be porting games like Left 4 Dead, Halflife and Team Fortress to mac was well?
Will linux get any love as well? With an OpenGL implementation, most of the heavy lifting should hopefully be taken care of. If it does, I will go out of my way to buy each and every one of their games.
I actually was working on it for a while. I was putting together an XHTML2 Content Management System and code generation toolset until it was announced that the XHTML2 group charter wasn't to be renewed. It was pointless to continue since there will never be a compatible browser to use it with.
Re:...Now help standardize on non-proprietary code
on
What To Expect From HTML5
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It is not significantly worse either. h.264 has a deadline set for when free use ends. That deadline may or may not be pushed back and the royalties may or may not be extortionate. By using Theora, you don't have to worry about that.
Unless html 5 has made a radical departure from its goals in the last six months since I dropped out out the standards war, XHTML 2 is still vastly superior in its design than html 5.
HTML 5 is a half-ass hacked attempt to fix the web without breaking backwards compatibility. XHTML 2 was a better specification going forwards, one of the big reasons for that was the specification requires a consistent DOM model.
In practice the only way to gain access to the locations secured by physical keys is to steal them, doing it without the persons knowledge means stealing them, copying them and returning them without the persons knowledge.
It may be possible to crack the encryption (if there is any, many such secure systems claim to have encryption but do not) on this RFID technology at range with an antenna that can not be seen.
In that case, my point stands. There is only 1 hole and not 5 because all the orifices eventually lead to the same place.
Left nostril drains to throat, right nostril drains to throat, left tear duct drains to throat, right tearduct drains to throat, mouth drains to throat, throat drains to sphincter.
I see a ridiculous number of people bringing up the halting problem as if it actually contradicts what I said. It doesn't.
Just because any program can be expressed as a Turing machine does not mean that they all are expressed as Turing machines. Nor does it mean that you can not prove that SOME SPECIFIC Turing machines will halt. The halting problem is that it is impossible to prove that EVERY Turing machine will halt.
Some problems can be intractable, that no matter how you express them, they can not be proven. But they are in the minority.
The assertion made by the Toyota representative was that it was impossible for software to ever be proven scientifically. This is unquestionably false. Most algorithms solved by computers can be mathematically proven. Software can be proven to conform to any algorithm. Do both and software is proven.
Negative kelvin temperature isn't a way to express temperatures that are less than 0. It is a way to express temperatures that are locally more that infinite because the system is approaching its maximum energy state and entropy begins to decrease. Read your own god damn link.
people have 4 entry and exit points, all linked. Each nostril connects to each other, and that connects to the mouth, and that connects to the sphincter. A person is more like a 4 way tube intersection with asymmetrical tubes. I have no idea what to call that geometric configuration though.
The US telecom companies were also granted billions of dollars by the US government to pay for a roll out of broadband infrastructure to nearly every American. Unfortunately non-compliance consequences were not specified, and the telecoms provided fat bonuses to shareholders instead of infrastructure investment.
No. That is the great thing about faith, it can not be proven wrong. Evidence will be ignored by certain groups, some more than others, we still have flat earthers, people who claim that cell phones make them ill and vegans. I could claim 1 + 1 != 2 all day long and still believe it even if you whip out page 379 of Principia Mathematica.
Unlimited recursion is not possible without unlimited memory and that does not exist.
I am aware of the halting problem and it is something that may prevent provability. I didn't mean to imply that you could prove ALL software, or even that most software can be proven as written or in a reasonable time-frame, just that you can in fact prove software to be correct.
"It is well-known in our community that there is no scientific, firm way of actually completely verifying and validating software."
How wrong can you be? Yes there is. Software is fundamentally the composition of many mathematical functions. Its results can be formally proven if the hardware it is running on is assumed (or preferably also proven) to be error free. Don't get me wrong, it would be incredibly cost, labor and time expensive, and require real computer scientists, but it is certainly possible.
This is exactly what I do. If they went back to the old days of displaying a jpg in a banner at the top of a page, I would see it (and most likely ignore it). The only place I really click through on ads in on enworld where they have very on topic ads and I go there looking for info on things I might buy.
right. and the average of my speed tests is less than 5% of the advertised 8mb connection I am supposed to be getting.
The summary is dumb. Mr "anonymous reader" is basically saying that North America's internet is better because it is saturated by having higher use with a lower cap.
I'll read the article, but only after posting in accordance with slashdot tradition.
Lets look at marriage to an "inanimate object"(referred to as obj from here out).
Can obj visits you in the hospital? Can obj make end of life decisions for you? Can obj inherit your estate? Can obj have an income, require support and/or file joint taxes with you. Can obj adopt/bear/raise children together with you? Can obj love you?
The answer is fuck no to each of these. And for a traditional marriage the answer is fuck yes for each of these. These are the rights/responsibilities that same sex couples want/need to have. This is completely rational, in every respect a same sex relationship is identical to a traditional relationship (where one of the partners is infertile). The only thing irrational here is you mister coward.
Slashdot Mirror
Can I assume that they will be porting games like Left 4 Dead, Halflife and Team Fortress to mac was well?
Will linux get any love as well? With an OpenGL implementation, most of the heavy lifting should hopefully be taken care of. If it does, I will go out of my way to buy each and every one of their games.
I actually was working on it for a while. I was putting together an XHTML2 Content Management System and code generation toolset until it was announced that the XHTML2 group charter wasn't to be renewed. It was pointless to continue since there will never be a compatible browser to use it with.
It is not significantly worse either. h.264 has a deadline set for when free use ends. That deadline may or may not be pushed back and the royalties may or may not be extortionate. By using Theora, you don't have to worry about that.
http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2010/02/royalty-free-codec-still-needed-despite-no-cost-h264-license.ars
Unless html 5 has made a radical departure from its goals in the last six months since I dropped out out the standards war, XHTML 2 is still vastly superior in its design than html 5.
This IS a combustion engine. Or more accurately a combustion generator.
right.
HTML 5 is a half-ass hacked attempt to fix the web without breaking backwards compatibility. XHTML 2 was a better specification going forwards, one of the big reasons for that was the specification requires a consistent DOM model.
Hint...
This was in fact a juvenile joke.
I wasn't being serious.
Do I need to use smileys or [/joke] ubbcodes in every post?
Especially when dealing with entangled triplets.
Applying the standard naming conventions would result in qutits. I much prefer qutits.
It could be more secure, or less.
In practice the only way to gain access to the locations secured by physical keys is to steal them, doing it without the persons knowledge means stealing them, copying them and returning them without the persons knowledge.
It may be possible to crack the encryption (if there is any, many such secure systems claim to have encryption but do not) on this RFID technology at range with an antenna that can not be seen.
In that case, my point stands. There is only 1 hole and not 5 because all the orifices eventually lead to the same place.
Left nostril drains to throat, right nostril drains to throat, left tear duct drains to throat, right tearduct drains to throat, mouth drains to throat, throat drains to sphincter.
Not off the top of my head, I believe they at least define addition. But its not exactly what I would call light reading.
I see a ridiculous number of people bringing up the halting problem as if it actually contradicts what I said. It doesn't.
Just because any program can be expressed as a Turing machine does not mean that they all are expressed as Turing machines. Nor does it mean that you can not prove that SOME SPECIFIC Turing machines will halt. The halting problem is that it is impossible to prove that EVERY Turing machine will halt.
Some problems can be intractable, that no matter how you express them, they can not be proven. But they are in the minority.
The assertion made by the Toyota representative was that it was impossible for software to ever be proven scientifically. This is unquestionably false. Most algorithms solved by computers can be mathematically proven. Software can be proven to conform to any algorithm. Do both and software is proven.
Negative kelvin temperature isn't a way to express temperatures that are less than 0. It is a way to express temperatures that are locally more that infinite because the system is approaching its maximum energy state and entropy begins to decrease. Read your own god damn link.
I don't think I follow.
2 nostrils.
2 tear ducts.
1 mouth.
1 sphincter.
I count 6 orifice if you count the tear-ducts (i didn't consider them earlier).
But to state that the mouth-> sphincter is one hole? Then wouldn't it be one hole with 6 openings for the whole thing and not 5 holes?
people have 4 entry and exit points, all linked. Each nostril connects to each other, and that connects to the mouth, and that connects to the sphincter. A person is more like a 4 way tube intersection with asymmetrical tubes. I have no idea what to call that geometric configuration though.
The US telecom companies were also granted billions of dollars by the US government to pay for a roll out of broadband infrastructure to nearly every American. Unfortunately non-compliance consequences were not specified, and the telecoms provided fat bonuses to shareholders instead of infrastructure investment.
No. That is the great thing about faith, it can not be proven wrong. Evidence will be ignored by certain groups, some more than others, we still have flat earthers, people who claim that cell phones make them ill and vegans. I could claim 1 + 1 != 2 all day long and still believe it even if you whip out page 379 of Principia Mathematica.
You are assuming an even distribution of people. You can toss out the north 80% of Canada's land area and only loose 5% of their population.
Wiring a major US city shouldn't be any more complicated than wiring a major EU city, and we still fall behind in nearly every case.
Unlimited recursion is not possible without unlimited memory and that does not exist.
I am aware of the halting problem and it is something that may prevent provability. I didn't mean to imply that you could prove ALL software, or even that most software can be proven as written or in a reasonable time-frame, just that you can in fact prove software to be correct.
"It is well-known in our community that there is no scientific, firm way of actually completely verifying and validating software."
How wrong can you be? Yes there is. Software is fundamentally the composition of many mathematical functions. Its results can be formally proven if the hardware it is running on is assumed (or preferably also proven) to be error free. Don't get me wrong, it would be incredibly cost, labor and time expensive, and require real computer scientists, but it is certainly possible.
This is exactly what I do.
If they went back to the old days of displaying a jpg in a banner at the top of a page,
I would see it (and most likely ignore it).
The only place I really click through on ads in on enworld where they have very on topic ads and I go there looking for info on things I might buy.
right. and the average of my speed tests is less than 5% of the advertised 8mb connection I am supposed to be getting.
The summary is dumb. Mr "anonymous reader" is basically saying that North America's internet is better because it is saturated by having higher use with a lower cap.
I'll read the article, but only after posting in accordance with slashdot tradition.
... whereas if someone is killed in improbable circumstances, few religious types will give God the credit for that one.
Sure they will. "It was his time".
You are an idiot.
Lets look at marriage to an "inanimate object"(referred to as obj from here out).
Can obj visits you in the hospital?
Can obj make end of life decisions for you?
Can obj inherit your estate?
Can obj have an income, require support and/or file joint taxes with you.
Can obj adopt/bear/raise children together with you?
Can obj love you?
The answer is fuck no to each of these. And for a traditional marriage the answer is fuck yes for each of these. These are the rights/responsibilities that same sex couples want/need to have. This is completely rational, in every respect a same sex relationship is identical to a traditional relationship (where one of the partners is infertile). The only thing irrational here is you mister coward.