A motion picture or television film consisting of a photographed series of drawings, objects, or computer graphics that simulates motion by recording very slight, continuous changes in the images, frame by frame.
Now, go back and re-read my post. Anime still qualifies. Try again.
Sorry to rain crap on your parade...
on
Fansubbers Under Fire
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
No matter how much additional style or substance is added to it, anime still qualifies as an animated cartoon. Apparently, CNET is aware that they are speaking to a general audience that is not as refined in their... well, cartoon-watching.
I've always wondered about the untapped potential of video cards.
Take a walk through the Internet. How many animated gifs of flaming cauldrons have you seen? How many of those sites had anything to do with fire or metal cookware? They do nothing for the page, but add to the download time.
Is there a need for a lens flare being rendered as I scroll through a spreadsheet? I'm not knocking 3D acceleration, but most technology is invented to solve a problem and I don't see how any potential problems with Word or Excel are solved by adding DirectX. In the case of the DV editing software in the article, the wildly different interface actually detracts from the usability.
Pay them only upon successful completion of a predefined stage of the project. Let them know that the next stage hasn't been awarded (i.e. they don't get compensation) until the previous stage has been approved. Be firm.
This allows you to verify that they are adhering to the timeline, you can evaluate the work-in-progress, and your risk is minimized. It should be immediately clear to them that they benefit by your adherence to a payment schedule, they can make sure you give reasonable evaluations (minimizing project creep), and their risk is minimized.
Of course, these are the ground rules you set at the beginning of the project.
A six figure salary and a supercomputer? Re-watch the end of "Catch Me if You Can"; he'll get a low-grade government salary, half of what the guy whose paid to watch everything he does gets, he won't be allowed computers at home, not even a game console or Internet enabled refrigerator.
I hate to break it to you, but that's a movie. It is, however, based on a true story. You might want to see how the real Frank Abagnale has been doing lately, though:
You must have some of these guys in your pocket to really have a chance. Can you trust them? Probably not completely... but if they bring you some knowledge, skills, and some of the most damaging players, then it's worth it.
Try telling the old lady whose credit card was swiped that you just gave the thief a six-figure salary and a supercomputer. We neutered our intelligence community a while back because it wasn't politically correct to work with bad people. Of course, you have to associate with unsavory types, but don't think for a second that average joe is going to embrace the idea.
A manager had done the ping-pong ball avalanche and, afterwards, he asked where all the balls went. The response was, "in a safe place." He spent the following days opening his cabinets... ever... so... slowly...
Of course, we had much more elaborate plans...
We took several bungee cords from one guy's truck and attached them to the doorknob on the back of his door. The other ends were attached to a large file cabinet behind the door and the cords were stretched to the limit (and I mean it) as the door was shut and latched. Between the door and the cabinet, we placed two large, hardware-grade, garbage bags. The bags' openings were taped to a series of 15-20 cardboard tubes, cut and joined to create several angles, with the openings pointed at the doorway. The tubes were filled with the balls, the bags inflated, and the openings were lightly taped.
When he opened the door, there was an ungodly bang and a volley of ping pong balls went flying everywhere. It was over before he even had a chance to react. He said that the extra resistance in the doorknob didn't tip him off until it was too late.
The kicker... when he unlocked the door, his keys were on a small chain to his belt. If the keychain hadn't broke, it could have only been better had his pants been ripped off in the process.
I think you missed my point. By implying that watching television is an activity that people should strive to avoid, they're saying that my values are misplaced. If someone said, "Come to our picnic," I'd be gratefful for the invitation and wouldn't have an issue. The fact that they say, "Television is bad, so turn it off and come to our picnic," annoys me. There is a significant difference.
I overwhelmingly agree that there are activities that are much more valuable than watching your typical television program. I think it's great that they are putting on activities that exist as alternatives. Still, an opinion that the other activities are more valuable is exactly that... an opinion.
Let me get this straight. These people claim that the typical American is chained to their television and has somehow become incapable of scheduling meaningful activities? So, instead of the television having control, they are going to take it upon themselves to determine what my value structure should be and make those decisions for me?
If I feel that my time spent watching a television program is worthwhile and that somehow has less intrinsic value to you... well, piss off. I don't care what you do on your time. If it's my time, I'm perfectly capable of allocating it to activities, including watching my television, without your input.
I'd do it if I were allowed to get the source, then compile myself.
I love this argument. I hear it from more than a couple people who "want to know exactly what that programmer is up to" before they run it on their own machine. None of them actually read the code. In reality, they want people to think that they can comprehend someone else's code, while truly only proving that they can run a makefile.
I write clear, organized code and I place clear, concise comments where needed. I work with some intelligent, organized people who do the same. The reality is that, even being fully comfortable with their coding styles, I find it very tedious to read their code... even when I know exactly what they're attempting to do. Somehow, I doubt that most people, even programmers, could comprehend the math that goes into the typical raytracing program, let alone one developed by a complete stranger.
Imagine the kids opening up a generic, burned CD from CompUSA instead of the flashy box with screenshots. You can forget riding home in the backseat of the car and ripping the plastic off to scour the manual. I guess you can stare at the white CD sleeve and get lost in the Times New Roman font displaying the name of the software printed on the front.
MTV, for instance, might take note if 50% of their viewers dropped MTV and MTV2 picked up.
Except, MTV is mostly viewed by the people in a household who are not the ones paying the cable bill. A sudden drop in subscribers could just as easily be explained by parents angrily dropping the channel, giving MTV back its "rebel" status and making it even more appealing to the younger crowd... you know, the ones with the disposable income.
If you don't believe me, look at VH1, a channel that plays much more music, appeals to an older crowd, lives under the same umbrella... and doesn't come close in ratings or revenue.
Security issues can be completely ignored...
on
Mobile Wifi Backpack
·
· Score: 4, Funny
there is no such thing as a 40+ year old software engineer in the United States
Simply, not true. Besides the fact that, as you mature and grow in your career in IT, you acquire buisiness and management skills outside of straight software development (leading to expanded roles), the 40+ year old software engineers who are still coding are generally in one of two sub-types:
1) remarkably well-versed and content in their positions (read as: valuable and secure)
2) pidgeon-holed because they haven't kept up on the latest technology (read as: expensive and increasingly obsolete).
Instead of everyone whining about how they can't find an IT position, find a problem that you can solve with your IT skills and create the job for yourself. It's hard for an employer to outsource a position (or give it to an unqualified candidate) if that position hasn't been created, yet.
It comes back to a great number of people wanting things handed to them on a silver platter and it's that mindset that caused these problems in the first place.
The problem is that people do stupid shit with their computers (that they don't know is stupid shit), and then IT professionals have to fix it (for free, every time, because they're on contract). That's not an IT problem or even a customer problem. The problem is that IT people generally have little or no business training and, by the time they find themselves in that situation, it's too late to change it. Basically, it comes down to this... the customer will try to get as much as they can for as little compensation as they can. You have to define the scope of your job, in writing, with the customer signing off on the requirements, before you agree to complete it. When the customer comes back with changes after the job is done, you say, "That wasn't part of the original contract, but we would be happy to discuss another contract for additional work or changes."
Incidentally, that same approach isn't limited to contract work. When my boss gives me vague requirements, I talk with him, hammer out the details, then get his approval. I came off as a hard-ass at first, but at the end of the day, we both know what's expected of me and it's saved us both a lot of grief.
Re:There's a good reason
on
TiVo Will Die
·
· Score: 1
You still can do whatever you want with it and there's no requirement to buy their service. You can hack it. You could seal it, fill it with water, and put goldfish in it. You could use a different content provider if you knew how to hack the device. Just because they don't make it easy for you doesn't mean they're cheating you.
To use your car example, manufacturers don't make it easy for the average person to get to the engine internals and they don't provide the code used in the CPUs in the computer-controlled parts. You still can if you know how, but they don't provide an easy route.
MS has to deal with a daily onslaught from the hackers and virus coders that attempt to vandalize and/or abuse Windows boxes. It isn't because they have an inferior OS. It's because they're a big company, they're all over the place, and they make an appealing target.
When TiVo came out, the company was unknown and the service was a fairly new idea. Hacking allowed the system to grow in popularity with the geeks. Now, they have enough popularity and they've grown fairly well, predominantly through word-of-mouth. Taking away the ability to modify the TiVo helps protects them from eventual theft of service and the host of other problems that comes along with an increase in popularity.
Slashdot Mirror
Further, dictionary.com lists "animated cartoon" as:
Now, go back and re-read my post. Anime still qualifies. Try again.
No matter how much additional style or substance is added to it, anime still qualifies as an animated cartoon. Apparently, CNET is aware that they are speaking to a general audience that is not as refined in their... well, cartoon-watching.
"We can thrown more polygons around and have better AI but if it doesn't make for a better game then that's not very useful."
I've always wondered about the untapped potential of video cards.
Take a walk through the Internet. How many animated gifs of flaming cauldrons have you seen? How many of those sites had anything to do with fire or metal cookware? They do nothing for the page, but add to the download time.
Is there a need for a lens flare being rendered as I scroll through a spreadsheet? I'm not knocking 3D acceleration, but most technology is invented to solve a problem and I don't see how any potential problems with Word or Excel are solved by adding DirectX. In the case of the DV editing software in the article, the wildly different interface actually detracts from the usability.
Pay them only upon successful completion of a predefined stage of the project. Let them know that the next stage hasn't been awarded (i.e. they don't get compensation) until the previous stage has been approved. Be firm.
This allows you to verify that they are adhering to the timeline, you can evaluate the work-in-progress, and your risk is minimized. It should be immediately clear to them that they benefit by your adherence to a payment schedule, they can make sure you give reasonable evaluations (minimizing project creep), and their risk is minimized.
Of course, these are the ground rules you set at the beginning of the project.
I hate to break it to you, but that's a movie. It is, however, based on a true story. You might want to see how the real Frank Abagnale has been doing lately, though:
http://www.abagnale.com/index2.asp
Try telling the old lady whose credit card was swiped that you just gave the thief a six-figure salary and a supercomputer. We neutered our intelligence community a while back because it wasn't politically correct to work with bad people. Of course, you have to associate with unsavory types, but don't think for a second that average joe is going to embrace the idea.
Then the Stonecutter's secret traffic tunnel wouldn't have done him much good. Duh.
A manager had done the ping-pong ball avalanche and, afterwards, he asked where all the balls went. The response was, "in a safe place." He spent the following days opening his cabinets... ever... so... slowly...
Of course, we had much more elaborate plans...
We took several bungee cords from one guy's truck and attached them to the doorknob on the back of his door. The other ends were attached to a large file cabinet behind the door and the cords were stretched to the limit (and I mean it) as the door was shut and latched. Between the door and the cabinet, we placed two large, hardware-grade, garbage bags. The bags' openings were taped to a series of 15-20 cardboard tubes, cut and joined to create several angles, with the openings pointed at the doorway. The tubes were filled with the balls, the bags inflated, and the openings were lightly taped.
When he opened the door, there was an ungodly bang and a volley of ping pong balls went flying everywhere. It was over before he even had a chance to react. He said that the extra resistance in the doorknob didn't tip him off until it was too late.
The kicker... when he unlocked the door, his keys were on a small chain to his belt. If the keychain hadn't broke, it could have only been better had his pants been ripped off in the process.
True, but does turning a key force you to remember a complex stored memory? Nope.
Apparently, you've never lost your keys.
I think you missed my point. By implying that watching television is an activity that people should strive to avoid, they're saying that my values are misplaced. If someone said, "Come to our picnic," I'd be gratefful for the invitation and wouldn't have an issue. The fact that they say, "Television is bad, so turn it off and come to our picnic," annoys me. There is a significant difference.
I overwhelmingly agree that there are activities that are much more valuable than watching your typical television program. I think it's great that they are putting on activities that exist as alternatives. Still, an opinion that the other activities are more valuable is exactly that... an opinion.
Let me get this straight. These people claim that the typical American is chained to their television and has somehow become incapable of scheduling meaningful activities? So, instead of the television having control, they are going to take it upon themselves to determine what my value structure should be and make those decisions for me?
If I feel that my time spent watching a television program is worthwhile and that somehow has less intrinsic value to you... well, piss off. I don't care what you do on your time. If it's my time, I'm perfectly capable of allocating it to activities, including watching my television, without your input.
I'd do it if I were allowed to get the source, then compile myself.
I love this argument. I hear it from more than a couple people who "want to know exactly what that programmer is up to" before they run it on their own machine. None of them actually read the code. In reality, they want people to think that they can comprehend someone else's code, while truly only proving that they can run a makefile.
I write clear, organized code and I place clear, concise comments where needed. I work with some intelligent, organized people who do the same. The reality is that, even being fully comfortable with their coding styles, I find it very tedious to read their code... even when I know exactly what they're attempting to do. Somehow, I doubt that most people, even programmers, could comprehend the math that goes into the typical raytracing program, let alone one developed by a complete stranger.
Why are you posting? The sun is shining! Get outside, hypocrite!
Imagine the kids opening up a generic, burned CD from CompUSA instead of the flashy box with screenshots. You can forget riding home in the backseat of the car and ripping the plastic off to scour the manual. I guess you can stare at the white CD sleeve and get lost in the Times New Roman font displaying the name of the software printed on the front.
"that's not a moon..."
"That's no moon."
If you're gonna try a Star Wars quote -- No! Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try.
By far, one of the best links I've clicked on in the last few months. Thanks.
Microsoft just sampled the press relesase of a more talented game console company.
MTV, for instance, might take note if 50% of their viewers dropped MTV and MTV2 picked up.
Except, MTV is mostly viewed by the people in a household who are not the ones paying the cable bill. A sudden drop in subscribers could just as easily be explained by parents angrily dropping the channel, giving MTV back its "rebel" status and making it even more appealing to the younger crowd... you know, the ones with the disposable income.
If you don't believe me, look at VH1, a channel that plays much more music, appeals to an older crowd, lives under the same umbrella... and doesn't come close in ratings or revenue.
if you can run faster than your opponent.
there is no such thing as a 40+ year old software engineer in the United States
Simply, not true. Besides the fact that, as you mature and grow in your career in IT, you acquire buisiness and management skills outside of straight software development (leading to expanded roles), the 40+ year old software engineers who are still coding are generally in one of two sub-types:
1) remarkably well-versed and content in their positions (read as: valuable and secure)
2) pidgeon-holed because they haven't kept up on the latest technology (read as: expensive and increasingly obsolete).
Obviously, one of those is destined to be punted.
Instead of everyone whining about how they can't find an IT position, find a problem that you can solve with your IT skills and create the job for yourself. It's hard for an employer to outsource a position (or give it to an unqualified candidate) if that position hasn't been created, yet.
It comes back to a great number of people wanting things handed to them on a silver platter and it's that mindset that caused these problems in the first place.
The problem is that people do stupid shit with their computers (that they don't know is stupid shit), and then IT professionals have to fix it (for free, every time, because they're on contract).
That's not an IT problem or even a customer problem. The problem is that IT people generally have little or no business training and, by the time they find themselves in that situation, it's too late to change it. Basically, it comes down to this... the customer will try to get as much as they can for as little compensation as they can. You have to define the scope of your job, in writing, with the customer signing off on the requirements, before you agree to complete it. When the customer comes back with changes after the job is done, you say, "That wasn't part of the original contract, but we would be happy to discuss another contract for additional work or changes."
Incidentally, that same approach isn't limited to contract work. When my boss gives me vague requirements, I talk with him, hammer out the details, then get his approval. I came off as a hard-ass at first, but at the end of the day, we both know what's expected of me and it's saved us both a lot of grief.
You still can do whatever you want with it and there's no requirement to buy their service. You can hack it. You could seal it, fill it with water, and put goldfish in it. You could use a different content provider if you knew how to hack the device. Just because they don't make it easy for you doesn't mean they're cheating you.
To use your car example, manufacturers don't make it easy for the average person to get to the engine internals and they don't provide the code used in the CPUs in the computer-controlled parts. You still can if you know how, but they don't provide an easy route.
MS has to deal with a daily onslaught from the hackers and virus coders that attempt to vandalize and/or abuse Windows boxes. It isn't because they have an inferior OS. It's because they're a big company, they're all over the place, and they make an appealing target.
When TiVo came out, the company was unknown and the service was a fairly new idea. Hacking allowed the system to grow in popularity with the geeks. Now, they have enough popularity and they've grown fairly well, predominantly through word-of-mouth. Taking away the ability to modify the TiVo helps protects them from eventual theft of service and the host of other problems that comes along with an increase in popularity.