Speaking of Forza 2. It's a great game but the physics seem a little lacking with some cars. They just skid all over the place like on ice. Even with traction control etc. Anybody can explain this? I doubt Forza 3 will correct this, they seem to have concentrated on graphics and track/car amounts. Don't get me wrong, still a great game.
Yes well if you believe exponential growth is sustainable for ever... By the time we have the technology and will to colonize multiple planets the people will have "degenerated" to the western breeding rate and the birthrate will be negative. I don' think anybody would care to ship of the starving masses of the world to other planets, they can continue to die where they are doing it today.
A quick addition: Right clicking on the video offers a link "save video". How neat is that? I know again that companies DRM-crap and 100+ years copyrighted PROPERTY won't be pleased with this, but so what. Youtube, vimeo et.al. are full of amateur videos etc that would benefit from this. And again from a users perspective this option is a godsend. Shame that the copyright-craze has gone too far:(
Just tested firefox 3.5 (or actually started using), and the video mode seems excellent. No flash or anything else and seems to work splendidly. I can't imagine why anybody would be against this (I mean users, I know several companies that of course oppose anything they can't control).
I must say that I bought a creative zen because I hate using ipods. You can't just copy files over to them and back to your computer. Oh no no, you must use itunes and authorize machines etc., and if you screw up there goes your collection. Of course the zen isn't as "sexy" as the ipod, but SFW? It's in my pocket playing music, and astonishingly it works! And I can freely copy music here and there, and share with friends (which is legal where I live, thank you very much cd/dcd/mp3 player taxes).
- NIST proved that according to our current understanding of physics its was possible for the building to come down without explosives due to the fires. This doesn't mean that this is 100% sure what happened, but it is dumb to scream "no way was it possible" after this if you have any belief in out physics. So, it was physically possible - NIST showed that using explosives to bring the building down would not have matched what we saw when the building collapsed. No broken windows from the pressure wave, no explosive sounds of the required magnitude (before the fall)
Some points about "truther" theories - The collapse didn't look anything like a CD. Sure from the moment the building started to collapse it did, but that's becuase in CD:s gravity also brings down the building. But no CD like explosions and flying debris and "squibs" were seen (before the collapse). Check this video (watch it fully or after about 2:30 you see CD:s). Tell me in what way is this similar to the WTC7 collapse: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2873871255585611926 - I haven't seen anywhere any calculations, models, tests or anything about how explosives would have been used. That is only now by NIST, but the truther side hasn't provided these. How muchch explosives? Where and how were they placed? - Then there is thermite/thermate. I don't know why the truth-movement has clinged to this stuff. Anyways, show me some models or tests how you would cut vertical steel beams with this stuff. No such info has yet been produced. And these guys ridicule NIST for being slow? Yes, sulphur was found at the site, big surprise...
So the truhter side only likes to try to shred to pieces other people's work, but they have yet to produce one single scientific publication, or any other paper which hasn't been thoroughly dismissed by the scientific community. Why is this? If they have all the answers why is it so hard to produce anything? No papers, tests, models, nothing. Just shouting "false flag!" like that proves eveyrthing. Oh I forgot, they only have questions... One fool can ask more questions than 100 people can answer.
As I said I already have that book, but it didn't in my opinion describe how to start designing stuff. It just describes how everything works (very thoroughly). For example: where would you start designing the circuit I mentioned above (a simple blinking LED) using stuff from this book? I don't mean searching for ready circuits online or something like that, but doing this yourself with stuff you learned from the book.
I too was interested in learning electronics basics and picked up AoE. The book seems comprehensive and good, but for getting a basic understanding and feel for building circuits it's not so good. Is there any book that describes how you actually design your own circuits? I mean starting with basic stuff like getting a diode to blink (using just transistors etc, not any timing circuits eg.)? I mean how to pick the needed resistors and figuring out their values and what components you'll need etc. I know the math for this and all about kirchovs laws etc but these don't help much when you just have a blank piece of circuitboard and an idea...
I have to completely agree. Especially excession and eg. player of games, use of weapons are much better books. This book just seemed long winded and boring in places, and the ending was a bit sudden and boring as well. I mean come on, I didn't buy a Banks book to read about some feudal kingdoms fighting. And all the characters are a bit annoying as well, and the fun drone/ship stuff is quite absent.
I was finally thinking about actually buying (vs. pirating) windows, but the price is ridiculous. I need the ultimate version, and as a full version (not oem or upgrade). The price: 494.90 (=$750) (guess they didn't cut the price here yet...). Guess I'm sticking with XP for now, read and heard so bad reviews and experiences that why should I bother...
Well that's what you get when buying a cheap HP or other shitty printer. If you really want to print (nice looking) photos buy an epson. An R360 probably costs ~$150, and I have printed about 5 A4 sized photos, tens of "normal" small photographs and 20-30 larger photos with the original inks, and they still haven't run out! The printer started complaining about low ink about 20 photos ago. And I don't recommend buying non-brand inks, have broke too many printers with them. Hard to believe but it's true. And about 20% of the no-brand ink cartridges weren't recognized by the printer. And clogging and striping was also problematic with them.
Slashdot Mirror
It should probably be called NoMysql instead of NoSQL...
Here are some good posts. Seems NoSQL is just the new xml. Sure, great for some things, but not really worth the hype...
http://www.yafla.com/dforbes/Responding_to_Joe_Stump_on_the_NoSQL_Debate/
http://www.yafla.com/dforbes/Getting_Real_about_NoSQL_and_the_SQL_Isnt_Scalable_Lie/
http://www.yafla.com/dforbes/Getting_Real_about_NoSQL_and_the_SQL_Performance_Lie/
I see no problem with bing, it is actually quite good.
Used it because it was the default in windows 7 at least.
Bing maps also was much better for my town (the aerial views). They apparently used Navtec data which was superior to googles blurry views.
Luckily it's easy to use whatever search engine you like, no costs in changing between them or using both or whatever.
I normally use Google because bing search doesn't offer anything better, just out of habit I guess.
Speaking of Forza 2. It's a great game but the physics seem a little lacking with some cars. They just skid all over the place like on ice. Even with traction control etc. Anybody can explain this?
I doubt Forza 3 will correct this, they seem to have concentrated on graphics and track/car amounts.
Don't get me wrong, still a great game.
Yes well if you believe exponential growth is sustainable for ever...
By the time we have the technology and will to colonize multiple planets the people will have "degenerated" to the western breeding rate and the birthrate will be negative.
I don' think anybody would care to ship of the starving masses of the world to other planets, they can continue to die where they are doing it today.
A quick addition: Right clicking on the video offers a link "save video". How neat is that? :(
I know again that companies DRM-crap and 100+ years copyrighted PROPERTY won't be pleased with this, but so what. Youtube, vimeo et.al. are full of amateur videos etc that would benefit from this.
And again from a users perspective this option is a godsend. Shame that the copyright-craze has gone too far
Just tested firefox 3.5 (or actually started using), and the video mode seems excellent.
No flash or anything else and seems to work splendidly. I can't imagine why anybody would be against this (I mean users, I know several companies that of course oppose anything they can't control).
Here's some scientists view on the matter. Apparently this report is typical for AGW deniers stuff in every way. You decide:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/06/bubkes/
According to the article a few votes could have changed the results (different persons elected).
I must say that I bought a creative zen because I hate using ipods. You can't just copy files over to them and back to your computer. Oh no no, you must use itunes and authorize machines etc., and if you screw up there goes your collection.
Of course the zen isn't as "sexy" as the ipod, but SFW? It's in my pocket playing music, and astonishingly it works! And I can freely copy music here and there, and share with friends (which is legal where I live, thank you very much cd/dcd/mp3 player taxes).
What's the problem? You don't do it instantly but take some time. Duh...
Some points about WTC7:
- NIST proved that according to our current understanding of physics its was possible for the building to come down without explosives due to the fires. This doesn't mean that this is 100% sure what happened, but it is dumb to scream "no way was it possible" after this if you have any belief in out physics. So, it was physically possible
- NIST showed that using explosives to bring the building down would not have matched what we saw when the building collapsed. No broken windows from the pressure wave, no explosive sounds of the required magnitude (before the fall)
Some points about "truther" theories
- The collapse didn't look anything like a CD. Sure from the moment the building started to collapse it did, but that's becuase in CD:s gravity also brings down the building. But no CD like explosions and flying debris and "squibs" were seen (before the collapse). Check this video (watch it fully or after about 2:30 you see CD:s). Tell me in what way is this similar to the WTC7 collapse: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2873871255585611926
- I haven't seen anywhere any calculations, models, tests or anything about how explosives would have been used. That is only now by NIST, but the truther side hasn't provided these. How muchch explosives? Where and how were they placed?
- Then there is thermite/thermate. I don't know why the truth-movement has clinged to this stuff. Anyways, show me some models or tests how you would cut vertical steel beams with this stuff. No such info has yet been produced. And these guys ridicule NIST for being slow? Yes, sulphur was found at the site, big surprise...
So the truhter side only likes to try to shred to pieces other people's work, but they have yet to produce one single scientific publication, or any other paper which hasn't been thoroughly dismissed by the scientific community.
Why is this? If they have all the answers why is it so hard to produce anything? No papers, tests, models, nothing. Just shouting "false flag!" like that proves eveyrthing. Oh I forgot, they only have questions...
One fool can ask more questions than 100 people can answer.
As I said I already have that book, but it didn't in my opinion describe how to start designing stuff. It just describes how everything works (very thoroughly).
For example: where would you start designing the circuit I mentioned above (a simple blinking LED) using stuff from this book? I don't mean searching for ready circuits online or something like that, but doing this yourself with stuff you learned from the book.
I too was interested in learning electronics basics and picked up AoE. The book seems comprehensive and good, but for getting a basic understanding and feel for building circuits it's not so good.
Is there any book that describes how you actually design your own circuits? I mean starting with basic stuff like getting a diode to blink (using just transistors etc, not any timing circuits eg.)? I mean how to pick the needed resistors and figuring out their values and what components you'll need etc. I know the math for this and all about kirchovs laws etc but these don't help much when you just have a blank piece of circuitboard and an idea...
Here are apperently some links:
http://www1.gly.bris.ac.uk/~george/noises/text.html
Doesn't sound like rocks grinding to me...
I have to completely agree. Especially excession and eg. player of games, use of weapons are much better books.
This book just seemed long winded and boring in places, and the ending was a bit sudden and boring as well.
I mean come on, I didn't buy a Banks book to read about some feudal kingdoms fighting.
And all the characters are a bit annoying as well, and the fun drone/ship stuff is quite absent.
I was finally thinking about actually buying (vs. pirating) windows, but the price is ridiculous.
I need the ultimate version, and as a full version (not oem or upgrade).
The price: 494.90 (=$750) (guess they didn't cut the price here yet...).
Guess I'm sticking with XP for now, read and heard so bad reviews and experiences that why should I bother...
Well that's what you get when buying a cheap HP or other shitty printer. If you really want to print (nice looking) photos buy an epson. An R360 probably costs ~$150, and I have printed about 5 A4 sized photos, tens of "normal" small photographs and 20-30 larger photos with the original inks, and they still haven't run out! The printer started complaining about low ink about 20 photos ago.
And I don't recommend buying non-brand inks, have broke too many printers with them. Hard to believe but it's true. And about 20% of the no-brand ink cartridges weren't recognized by the printer. And clogging and striping was also problematic with them.