Now if they really want to make it usefull, have it detect cars coming up from behind and speed up.
That way the next time some pulls into the passing lane with their cruise control set 0.1 m.p.h. faster than the car in the other lane I can give them a little "push".
No they can't. Even a skilled driver can't compensate for a loss of traction on one side of the vehicle vs. another (say if one side drops onto the gravel shoulder). An ABS system can.
Another scenario is if you pass over a slippery spot (say some sand on the road). Once that wheel locks up going over the sand, it may not start rolling again once it gets to "clear" pavement. ABS can instantly compensate. A skilled driver has to decide wether one or more skidding tires is worth backing off the breaks to get them under control. Either way the ABS system will be better.
The problem is no driver can continuously apply different amounts of breaking force to each wheel individually.
The only scenario I know of where a skilled driver may be able to "beat" an ABS is on a stretch of straight, flat pavement in a well designed car (properly balanced front vs. rear breaking).
Motion is relative -we're talking tire surface relative to road surface during the time that any given part of the tire is in contact with the road.
If you lock of the wheels, the tire is sliding across the road -> coefficient of friction is decreased.
Another example of this phenomenon people may be more familiar with is pushing a heavy object across the floor. You'll notice you have to push really hard to get the object to start moving, but you don't have to push nearly as hard to keep it moving once it starts -you're skidding across the floor much like a car with its wheels locked.
This phenomenon is even more important to be aware of when driving in slippery conditions (ice, snow...).
The computer can do a much better job of controlling a skid than all but the best driver.
The computer can do a better job of breaking than even the best driver. Unless someone knows of a driver who can simultanously monitor all wheels and continuously adjust breaking force on each individually.
I love it when the news media expecially on the internet writes articles and title's them differently everytime they add a paragraph and update the report.
Too bad we can't get them to do it the right way, with version numbers and ReadMe's stating changes since the previous version.
Problem (?) is, they will be treated wether insured or not. Its pretty much illegal (at least in the US) to withold critical care, irregardless of the circumstances.
That means you and I get to foot the bill for their "freedom".
Maybe I'm just interpreting differently than you, but none of examples (save the sales person) state OS X is UNIX, only that it is based on (or a derivative of, or contains parts of) UNIX. And isn't stating that its as reliable as UNIX something even MS says about their OS?
Unless Wal-Mart can do something a lot better than Netflix, I'd be reluctant to switch.
What I'm waiting for is that monthly subscription price to cover both rental models. That way I can either use the online order/deliver/return model or just stop by the local store to pick up one of the more popular titles and just have them count it towards my online account. Being able to return movies at a local store and have them counted as returned immediately would also be a bonus.
What really surprised me is that the fastest CD players are apparently pushing 10k rpm, which is equivalent to a fast hard drive.
So, just like the hard drive, the only way to get faster (on a single platter) is to pack more data into the same space, which is essentially where the DVD line takes us.
Which, in the end, is the only benchmark that matters. I don't know if I should be ammused or depressed by the amount of "discussion" about one compression scheme vs. another when it all really depends on the hardware you're using for playback and personal preference.
IOW, MP3 may sound better on playback system X, but AAC may sound better when played back on system Y, but in any case "better" depends on personal preference, not what some "expert" or panel (or heaven forbid some poll takers on the internet) may think sounds better.
So until we're all using the same hardware and have identical preferences for how our music sounds, using these kinds of comparisons to say one codec is 'better" than the other is pretty much useless (IMO anyway).
But the big question is how much of this is actually profit?
Remember, Apple has to pay for servers, storage and bandwidth. In the end, I don't know how much "profit" they actually make, or maybe to put it another way, how many songs they have to sell before they break even on the investment they've already made.
You're right, the information is publically available. IMO though that means the RIAA should have, at minimum, downloaded it and ensured it is infringing material before sending a nasty-gram. The fact they can't even be bothered to do that much really disturbs me. I don't think they should work with the presumption that every file that meets some broad criteria is infringing.
You're talking about two different levels of acceleration here. What Quartz Exteme does is the compositing/blending of windows that's one of the features to be included in Longhorn.
Take a look at the difference between "with" and "without" Quartz Extreme at http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/macosx-10.2/ma cosx-10.2-8.html .
In fact, often those redoing Shakespeare's plays belong to the same industry pushing for expansions on its ability to prevent others from doing anything similar with their own works.
The biggest culprit, IMO, being Disney. How many of their blockbuster movies are based on previous works? Everything from "The Jungle Book" to "The Little Mermaid".
But allow anyone to write a story or other work involving Mickey Mouse, and watch out!
Personally, I put some of the blame on over-commercialization. The goal isn't to create a compelling cartoon, its to create a marketing opportunity. Any more, a cartoon isn't a sucess unless it comes bundled with everything from action figures to its own cereal.
OK, so let's say you do invite me into your home and tell me to wait in the living room while you go get us something to drink. While you're gone, I realize I really have to take a leak, and go use your bathroom.
Slashdot Mirror
Question is, how much of that "attractiveness" is artificial vs. natural, thus won't be passed on?
What's the problem?
t ml
Please tell me you don't think bodies "explode" in near vacuum!
Hint: Its not air pressure that holds our bodies together.
For more info see http://www.badastronomy.com/mad/1999/space_feel.h
And don't forget the sunblock.
Now if they really want to make it usefull, have it detect cars coming up from behind and speed up.
That way the next time some pulls into the passing lane with their cruise control set 0.1 m.p.h. faster than the car in the other lane I can give them a little "push".
No they can't. Even a skilled driver can't compensate for a loss of traction on one side of the vehicle vs. another (say if one side drops onto the gravel shoulder). An ABS system can.
Another scenario is if you pass over a slippery spot (say some sand on the road). Once that wheel locks up going over the sand, it may not start rolling again once it gets to "clear" pavement. ABS can instantly compensate. A skilled driver has to decide wether one or more skidding tires is worth backing off the breaks to get them under control. Either way the ABS system will be better.
The problem is no driver can continuously apply different amounts of breaking force to each wheel individually.
The only scenario I know of where a skilled driver may be able to "beat" an ABS is on a stretch of straight, flat pavement in a well designed car (properly balanced front vs. rear breaking).
Motion is relative -we're talking tire surface relative to road surface during the time that any given part of the tire is in contact with the road.
If you lock of the wheels, the tire is sliding across the road -> coefficient of friction is decreased.
Another example of this phenomenon people may be more familiar with is pushing a heavy object across the floor. You'll notice you have to push really hard to get the object to start moving, but you don't have to push nearly as hard to keep it moving once it starts -you're skidding across the floor much like a car with its wheels locked.
This phenomenon is even more important to be aware of when driving in slippery conditions (ice, snow...).
The computer can do a much better job of controlling a skid than all but the best driver.
The computer can do a better job of breaking than even the best driver. Unless someone knows of a driver who can simultanously monitor all wheels and continuously adjust breaking force on each individually.
I love it when the news media expecially on the internet writes articles and title's them differently everytime they add a paragraph and update the report.
Too bad we can't get them to do it the right way, with version numbers and ReadMe's stating changes since the previous version.
Problem (?) is, they will be treated wether insured or not. Its pretty much illegal (at least in the US) to withold critical care, irregardless of the circumstances.
That means you and I get to foot the bill for their "freedom".
Of course "harvesting" like this would probably burn more energy than you collect.
OTH, when the commercial says their cleaner has "The power of pine," I don't expect it to acually contain a whole pine tree.
Maybe I'm just interpreting differently than you, but none of examples (save the sales person) state OS X is UNIX, only that it is based on (or a derivative of, or contains parts of) UNIX. And isn't stating that its as reliable as UNIX something even MS says about their OS?
IOW, it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, but that doesn't change the fact that they're both black.
they are = they're
But if that's true, then:
they're = they are
What's the point again?
I worked at Wal-Mart for eight months and based on the human detritus and mediocrities they hire
Careful how you word things, you might imply something about yourself you don't mean to!
Unless Wal-Mart can do something a lot better than Netflix, I'd be reluctant to switch.
What I'm waiting for is that monthly subscription price to cover both rental models. That way I can either use the online order/deliver/return model or just stop by the local store to pick up one of the more popular titles and just have them count it towards my online account. Being able to return movies at a local store and have them counted as returned immediately would also be a bonus.
What really surprised me is that the fastest CD players are apparently pushing 10k rpm, which is equivalent to a fast hard drive.
So, just like the hard drive, the only way to get faster (on a single platter) is to pack more data into the same space, which is essentially where the DVD line takes us.
Which, in the end, is the only benchmark that matters. I don't know if I should be ammused or depressed by the amount of "discussion" about one compression scheme vs. another when it all really depends on the hardware you're using for playback and personal preference.
IOW, MP3 may sound better on playback system X, but AAC may sound better when played back on system Y, but in any case "better" depends on personal preference, not what some "expert" or panel (or heaven forbid some poll takers on the internet) may think sounds better.
So until we're all using the same hardware and have identical preferences for how our music sounds, using these kinds of comparisons to say one codec is 'better" than the other is pretty much useless (IMO anyway).
The alternative explanation being that Mac users are honest people who will pay a fair price for music.
Call me an optimist (or an idiot), but I'm guessing the same is true for most PC users.
But the big question is how much of this is actually profit?
Remember, Apple has to pay for servers, storage and bandwidth. In the end, I don't know how much "profit" they actually make, or maybe to put it another way, how many songs they have to sell before they break even on the investment they've already made.
You're right, the information is publically available. IMO though that means the RIAA should have, at minimum, downloaded it and ensured it is infringing material before sending a nasty-gram. The fact they can't even be bothered to do that much really disturbs me. I don't think they should work with the presumption that every file that meets some broad criteria is infringing.
Just MO.
You're talking about two different levels of acceleration here. What Quartz Exteme does is the compositing/blending of windows that's one of the features to be included in Longhorn.
a cosx-10.2-8.html .
Take a look at the difference between "with" and "without" Quartz Extreme at http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/macosx-10.2/m
In fact, often those redoing Shakespeare's plays belong to the same industry pushing for expansions on its ability to prevent others from doing anything similar with their own works.
The biggest culprit, IMO, being Disney. How many of their blockbuster movies are based on previous works? Everything from "The Jungle Book" to "The Little Mermaid".
But allow anyone to write a story or other work involving Mickey Mouse, and watch out!
Personally, I put some of the blame on over-commercialization. The goal isn't to create a compelling cartoon, its to create a marketing opportunity. Any more, a cartoon isn't a sucess unless it comes bundled with everything from action figures to its own cereal.
OK, so let's say you do invite me into your home and tell me to wait in the living room while you go get us something to drink. While you're gone, I realize I really have to take a leak, and go use your bathroom.
Is that illegal access?
Back to the concept of original sin. Its all Eve's fault.