I see Americans bragging left and right about the quality of Made in USA products without anyone ever questioning, but if I think about all the Made in USA products I've personally had which have been surprisingly many - and I make an exception for professional tools with which I've been satisfied but are not of a comparable category - I've found most of them to be sorely lacking in quality compared to similarly priced, sometimes even cheaper, alternatives made elsewhere. I have an American friend who is into guns (I'm not at all so excuse my lack of details) and has observed the same thing, he tells me everyone keeps bragging about $gunbrand that is Made in USA and not particularly cheap, but all the times he has tried it he has found it troublesome to operate while the "cheap Chinese ones" work just fine, and when he complains about this everyone shrugs him off as being "too inexperienced to appreciate the subtleties of $gunbrand". Admittedly the Made in USA things I've had are more of the "made of plastic"/"made of metal"/"made of ceramic"/"electrical-not-high-tech" kind of things but, while I'm sure Google has choosen much better partners for manufacturing, what happened with CircuitCo and the Pandora's PCB a few years back doesn't exactly put me at ease about this either. Hope to be proven wrong of course, but I, for one, have yet to see that "great American quality" everyone brags about in a consumer product.
No offense but, did you check that os-prober was actually installed? That one got me once in Debian. I've never seen autodetection fail other than that time os-prober was somehow not installed.
To paraphrase something I read somewhere: You don't have to support your own structure, you just have to implode less hard than the other guy. Unfortunately in this case it meant imploding less hard than Windows 7 which doesn't seem to have imploded at all and realistically most people will just stick to. I've not lost all hope though, I'm currently pretty happy with KDE to be honest, and both Cinnamon and Unity seem to be progressing at a decent pace and in the right direction (well, "right" in a bastardized sense in the case of Unity). I'd be worried if they were stuck in their current state.
On one hand, of course, we were just trolling. On the other hand I'm not really the right guy to tell that to, it was Vista that made me switch to Linux back in 2006. Then some would argue that Metro is a somewhat harder failure than Vista. Hey, it seems to have done it for Gabe Newell.
I'm also loving KDE here. Mind you until 4.6 it did have it's quirks and 4.7 was actually a step backwards, but I'm finding 4.8 pure bliss. Then again, I was one of those guys in favor of having the desktop folder be "just a small rectangle on top of the wallpaper", aesthetically speaking it only makes sense, leaves well defined room for other widgets, and frankly if you have so much crap in your desktop that it doesn't fit within the rectangle you're doing it wrong anyway. Love KDE Plasma. Wouldn't trade it for a Mac if it was free.
Well, now it's time to nitpick on YOUR post. First of all, the ISO 226 2003 revision curve shows the peak right at 3kHz: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lindos1.svg - the older version did use to have it at 4kHz, however... It doesn't really matter. at 60dB it's only a half-octave boost of about 3dB which is negligible as far as total loudness is concerned. Try it yourself: Get a parametric equalizer and boost any mid frequency 3dB with a "Q" of 2 and see how much louder it is (ie. almost negligibly so). Do also consider that real world sounds are broad spectrum, not particularly concentrated at their fundamental frequency. Finally, skull resonance doesn't have any significant effect on hearing as the meat it's filled with acts as a pretty good damper but, even if it did, "between 500Hz and 7.5kHz" means that a few frequencies in particular that happen to fall between those values will resonate, not everything between 500Hz and 7.5kHz, so yes, if skull resonances weren't damped, we probably *would* hear some particular frequencies significantly louder because of it. Now to wait for someone to nitpick on my post.
Well... Domestically available gear is going in that direction. Think four Kinects recording to a laptop with GPS. Unsuitable now, but it's going there.
For the early version: Bandpass hue and saturation signals, then gain, then mix. For the later version: Track values in the spatial domain with subsample accuracy (subsample accuracy widely used in audio for delays and metering), make differential signal out of that tracking, bandpass that signal, amplify, apply as distortion to the original signal (a simple audio dynamics processor essentially does all of that, except in the amplitude domain rather than the spatial domain). Yes, there's more to this than "audio amplifier, except for video". Then again, there's more to audio than amplifiers.:-)
Either your audio courses were really crappy or you misunderstood them. Sure the vertical positioning is both imprecise and uncertain relatively to the horizontal positioning, but it's there, and it works by the pinnae's vertically asymetric comb filtering and your brain's reference database of the spectrum patterns of known sounds with known positions. No head tilting/moving necessary. Not to mention that head movement reduces the uncertainty a lot. You will subconsciously make slight head movements while compensating by moving your eyeballs to keep the picture centered, and that's more than enough.
Been there, done that, no need for monstrous rack, just laptop and some Arduino-ish electronics. It's even available commercially if you don't mind the "niche tech" price premium: http://www.amazon.com/beyerdynamic-Headzone-Home-Head-Tracking/dp/B001BAJ09A/ -- it's still an inappropriate solution for watching movies with the family, though.
Uhm... I didn't RTFA or watch the video (good/.er and Flash disabled, respectively), but that sounds like an off-the-shelf bunch of audio effects pointed to a different array. Even TFS acknowledges this. "Applied to something no one else has" maybe, but hardly "invented". Really this is obvious stuff, but my guess is that everyone else just assumed a typical camera/video didn't have enough SNR for anything interesting to be amplifiable. I know I did when I had the idea of applying my audio filters to video a while ago (which consequently I never did).
This do mean diffuse reflection - which is not quite "non-existent reflection"
Well let's not forget the forest by looking too much at the leaves, for the purpose of looking at pictures on a screen such a diffuse reflection could indeed be described as "non-existent reflection". It's the subjective impression non-pedantic human observers (ie. most, thankfully) will have.
You both fail.
These would work, yes, as alternative titles to the article, but they have no trolling value so they're useless for the purpose of the OP AC's suggestion. OK the GP's version would admittedly still troll the more sensitive to linguistics people, but that'd be a comparatively incomplete subset.
Your gender is not the headline of your driver's license. It is the headline of these news. Yes, it would be wrong if your gender was the headline of your driver's license.
Role models? Why? So, you're teaching them to follow the model of someone instead of being themselves? And furthermore you're teaching them that somehow it's something significant that the model they're following is of the same gender as them?
(Also, what Nutria said in his first line. There's nothing wrong with letting your childhood have some fantasy.)
You know that the app you submit for the contest doesn't have to be free as in beer, right? The only requirement is that it's open source, but it can be paid-for (to be sold at the Ubuntu Software Centre). The rules explicitly say this.
Mind conservation: THAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM.
We need new minds - blank brains. Imagine having to live with old and rich people who has the MAFIAA mindset for indefitine time... You know they're the ones who have enough paper in their wallets to pay the bill for life extension treatments the day they're available, and while newer generations may seem fresh now I'm sure they will start presenting similar problems 60 years on.
We really should solve the social problems of the world before we start talking about solving the bioligical ones. All this stuff is like throwing hardware at the problem without ever bothering to look at the (sorry state of the) software. Sometimes it infuriates me.
Slashdot Mirror
I see Americans bragging left and right about the quality of Made in USA products without anyone ever questioning, but if I think about all the Made in USA products I've personally had which have been surprisingly many - and I make an exception for professional tools with which I've been satisfied but are not of a comparable category - I've found most of them to be sorely lacking in quality compared to similarly priced, sometimes even cheaper, alternatives made elsewhere. I have an American friend who is into guns (I'm not at all so excuse my lack of details) and has observed the same thing, he tells me everyone keeps bragging about $gunbrand that is Made in USA and not particularly cheap, but all the times he has tried it he has found it troublesome to operate while the "cheap Chinese ones" work just fine, and when he complains about this everyone shrugs him off as being "too inexperienced to appreciate the subtleties of $gunbrand". Admittedly the Made in USA things I've had are more of the "made of plastic"/"made of metal"/"made of ceramic"/"electrical-not-high-tech" kind of things but, while I'm sure Google has choosen much better partners for manufacturing, what happened with CircuitCo and the Pandora's PCB a few years back doesn't exactly put me at ease about this either. Hope to be proven wrong of course, but I, for one, have yet to see that "great American quality" everyone brags about in a consumer product.
No offense but, did you check that os-prober was actually installed? That one got me once in Debian. I've never seen autodetection fail other than that time os-prober was somehow not installed.
To paraphrase something I read somewhere: You don't have to support your own structure, you just have to implode less hard than the other guy. Unfortunately in this case it meant imploding less hard than Windows 7 which doesn't seem to have imploded at all and realistically most people will just stick to. I've not lost all hope though, I'm currently pretty happy with KDE to be honest, and both Cinnamon and Unity seem to be progressing at a decent pace and in the right direction (well, "right" in a bastardized sense in the case of Unity). I'd be worried if they were stuck in their current state.
On one hand, of course, we were just trolling. On the other hand I'm not really the right guy to tell that to, it was Vista that made me switch to Linux back in 2006. Then some would argue that Metro is a somewhat harder failure than Vista. Hey, it seems to have done it for Gabe Newell.
Year of the Linux desktop: This is how you make it happen.
I'm also loving KDE here. Mind you until 4.6 it did have it's quirks and 4.7 was actually a step backwards, but I'm finding 4.8 pure bliss. Then again, I was one of those guys in favor of having the desktop folder be "just a small rectangle on top of the wallpaper", aesthetically speaking it only makes sense, leaves well defined room for other widgets, and frankly if you have so much crap in your desktop that it doesn't fit within the rectangle you're doing it wrong anyway. Love KDE Plasma. Wouldn't trade it for a Mac if it was free.
Well, now it's time to nitpick on YOUR post. First of all, the ISO 226 2003 revision curve shows the peak right at 3kHz: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lindos1.svg - the older version did use to have it at 4kHz, however... It doesn't really matter. at 60dB it's only a half-octave boost of about 3dB which is negligible as far as total loudness is concerned. Try it yourself: Get a parametric equalizer and boost any mid frequency 3dB with a "Q" of 2 and see how much louder it is (ie. almost negligibly so). Do also consider that real world sounds are broad spectrum, not particularly concentrated at their fundamental frequency. Finally, skull resonance doesn't have any significant effect on hearing as the meat it's filled with acts as a pretty good damper but, even if it did, "between 500Hz and 7.5kHz" means that a few frequencies in particular that happen to fall between those values will resonate, not everything between 500Hz and 7.5kHz, so yes, if skull resonances weren't damped, we probably *would* hear some particular frequencies significantly louder because of it. Now to wait for someone to nitpick on my post.
Floating point bitches?! Damn, and here I messin' with my integer bitches... Where can I buy?
Well... Domestically available gear is going in that direction. Think four Kinects recording to a laptop with GPS. Unsuitable now, but it's going there.
For the early version: Bandpass hue and saturation signals, then gain, then mix. For the later version: Track values in the spatial domain with subsample accuracy (subsample accuracy widely used in audio for delays and metering), make differential signal out of that tracking, bandpass that signal, amplify, apply as distortion to the original signal (a simple audio dynamics processor essentially does all of that, except in the amplitude domain rather than the spatial domain). Yes, there's more to this than "audio amplifier, except for video". Then again, there's more to audio than amplifiers. :-)
Either your audio courses were really crappy or you misunderstood them. Sure the vertical positioning is both imprecise and uncertain relatively to the horizontal positioning, but it's there, and it works by the pinnae's vertically asymetric comb filtering and your brain's reference database of the spectrum patterns of known sounds with known positions. No head tilting/moving necessary. Not to mention that head movement reduces the uncertainty a lot. You will subconsciously make slight head movements while compensating by moving your eyeballs to keep the picture centered, and that's more than enough.
Been there, done that, no need for monstrous rack, just laptop and some Arduino-ish electronics. It's even available commercially if you don't mind the "niche tech" price premium: http://www.amazon.com/beyerdynamic-Headzone-Home-Head-Tracking/dp/B001BAJ09A/ -- it's still an inappropriate solution for watching movies with the family, though.
I'm pretty sure some douche bag, somewhere, has exactly such a setup on his "ride"...
Uhm... I didn't RTFA or watch the video (good /.er and Flash disabled, respectively), but that sounds like an off-the-shelf bunch of audio effects pointed to a different array. Even TFS acknowledges this. "Applied to something no one else has" maybe, but hardly "invented". Really this is obvious stuff, but my guess is that everyone else just assumed a typical camera/video didn't have enough SNR for anything interesting to be amplifiable. I know I did when I had the idea of applying my audio filters to video a while ago (which consequently I never did).
Yes, really, that's what we think about the **AA.
This do mean diffuse reflection - which is not quite "non-existent reflection"
Well let's not forget the forest by looking too much at the leaves, for the purpose of looking at pictures on a screen such a diffuse reflection could indeed be described as "non-existent reflection". It's the subjective impression non-pedantic human observers (ie. most, thankfully) will have.
Ah, so the prism is actually ice, and the white beam is actually six laser beams combined. That explains a lot.
You both fail. These would work, yes, as alternative titles to the article, but they have no trolling value so they're useless for the purpose of the OP AC's suggestion. OK the GP's version would admittedly still troll the more sensitive to linguistics people, but that'd be a comparatively incomplete subset.
On the contrary, ATI sucked very hard until AMD bought them. AMD has been slowly dragging them out of the suckiness, and they're still working at it.
Your gender is not the headline of your driver's license. It is the headline of these news. Yes, it would be wrong if your gender was the headline of your driver's license.
Role models? Why? So, you're teaching them to follow the model of someone instead of being themselves? And furthermore you're teaching them that somehow it's something significant that the model they're following is of the same gender as them? (Also, what Nutria said in his first line. There's nothing wrong with letting your childhood have some fantasy.)
You know that the app you submit for the contest doesn't have to be free as in beer, right? The only requirement is that it's open source, but it can be paid-for (to be sold at the Ubuntu Software Centre). The rules explicitly say this.
Yeah, because this is CLEARLY a driver problem. (Yes, that's sarcasm)
Mind conservation: THAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM. We need new minds - blank brains. Imagine having to live with old and rich people who has the MAFIAA mindset for indefitine time... You know they're the ones who have enough paper in their wallets to pay the bill for life extension treatments the day they're available, and while newer generations may seem fresh now I'm sure they will start presenting similar problems 60 years on. We really should solve the social problems of the world before we start talking about solving the bioligical ones. All this stuff is like throwing hardware at the problem without ever bothering to look at the (sorry state of the) software. Sometimes it infuriates me.