Oooooh, Someone else remembers that movie! The effects by Gerry Anderson's team rocked, but the story now looking at it with much older eyes was pretty stupid.
1) No need to install your heavy app on every desktop that needs it with all the joys of rollout and maintenance.
2) There is a rapidly increasing set of backend AJAX components that implement all the regular application controls. For example take a look at Blueshoes.
I heard it with my own ears when he said it and a thousand times since. There wasn't enough time between "for" and "man" for there to have been an "a". Also the way his diction moves through "for man" differs than that if he had said "for a man" which would have come out more like "fora man". (Say it to yourself a few times)
The trailers for Cars give away more than we've ever seen for a Pixar film and the characters just don't come across as appealing. Granted, when I first heard about "Finding Nemo" I didn't see how the story could be made to be widely popular ("A Daddy fish searches for his son?") but it was less the story than the characters that made Nemo appealing across all age groups.
Now we have a film that involves pretty limited characters and one that I can't stand listening to. ("Dad Gum!")
When your question is: Why am I here? or What is the purpose of my life? then science isn't much help.
Neither is religion in the purest sense. Yes, religion can provide answers, but not necessarily factual ones.
If "to serve God" is an answer that makes you feel comfortable, then great. But it is by no means a correct answer nor one that applies to everyone.
What a True Believer cannot comprehend is that "you have no purpose at all" and "your existence is just random chance" are potentially correct answers to your questions. I am willing to accept those answers.
So how do I give meaning to my life? I take pride in the work I do. Not even being terminated last week (financial re-org) will diminish that. The accomplishments of my son and daughter and what I did do to encourage them will, in the end, allow me to look back upon my life and say it had meaning. I personally will not have accomplished "great things" but so very few people do.
Everyone feels some attachment to the universal. No they don't. Many feel little if any attachment at all to "the universal", whatever you define that extremely vague expression to mean.
So what do you use the rest of the year? There were some really nice nights this past summer when even the lights from YVR couldn't diminish the seeing up here in Kerrisdale.
The ROM has had an exhibition about this going for some time now. At the entrance they have a diorama of a group of dinosaurs as they were throught to have appeared up to now, leather-skinned lizards. Through the exhibit they provide the evidence of why this impression has changed. Finally at the exit the same diorama is displayed only with the dinosaurs now covered in feathers.
I'm an IMAX freak. Have been ever since I watched the very first IMAX film at Ontario Place in 1971
Sendng and returning an IMAX camera to the moon is an idea that has stuck in my mind for a long time although I know it's impossible. At least you would know what you are looking at is the Real Thing and not a soundstage reproduction. Just the behaviour of the dust in the air is going to scream "fake!" to me.
Right. See my other response. What I wrote was how NASA would react to no visible foam loss, not what I think. You can just picture Griffin's press conference.
The foam loss was seen by only two cameras: The rocketcam on the external tank and the astronaut's hand-held cameras
None of the other ground or chase-plane-based cameras would have caught the foam loss at the altitude it ocurred. In addition, there was only one rocketcam on the external tank and so foam loss on the far side of the orbiter, the side that got Columbia, would not have been seen. I also doubt the astronauts were able to see the entire external tank after separation and could easily have missed foam loss.
NASA was extremely lucky to capture this loss the way it did.
I should have put quotes around the "back on track" comment because that is what I envisioned NASA boasting in all their post-launch press releases had they not visually seen any loss. You are right, if NASA had not seen any problem there would have been no problem in their eyes until, as another poster pointed out, the next burnup.
There are still too many wireless devices that only support WEP. The WiFi card for my Palm T3 being one of those, rendering it useless within our firm where WPA is required.
The distorted views that maps.google.com gives are a great reason to get Google World. Buckingham Palace looks messed up.
I live a 15-minute bike ride from Wreck Beach which is actually here.
Do I got there? No. This is Canada, not Rio or the south of France. You get people looking at you. The wrong type of people. Wrecks everything. (so to speak)
Slashdot Mirror
"Browsing Slashdot" is omitted.
Partly educational perhaps?
No, you've just been watching Grizzly Adams reruns again.
Oooooh, Someone else remembers that movie! The effects by Gerry Anderson's team rocked, but the story now looking at it with much older eyes was pretty stupid.
There are several screen capture to SWF generators:
1) Captivate.
2) Viewletbuilder.
3) Wink.
You're missing a couple of things:
1) No need to install your heavy app on every desktop that needs it with all the joys of rollout and maintenance.
2) There is a rapidly increasing set of backend AJAX components that implement all the regular application controls. For example take a look at Blueshoes.
No, it wasn't.
I heard it with my own ears when he said it and a thousand times since. There wasn't enough time between "for" and "man" for there to have been an "a". Also the way his diction moves through "for man" differs than that if he had said "for a man" which would have come out more like "fora man". (Say it to yourself a few times)
The trailers for Cars give away more than we've ever seen for a Pixar film and the characters just don't come across as appealing. Granted, when I first heard about "Finding Nemo" I didn't see how the story could be made to be widely popular ("A Daddy fish searches for his son?") but it was less the story than the characters that made Nemo appealing across all age groups.
Now we have a film that involves pretty limited characters and one that I can't stand listening to. ("Dad Gum!")
Not promising.
Maybe I should point out the movie in question.
"Louey isn't with us anymore..."
Say what you want about the eco-hippie theme, that movie had some nice AI concepts.
When your question is: Why am I here? or What is the purpose of my life? then science isn't much help.
Neither is religion in the purest sense. Yes, religion can provide answers, but not necessarily factual ones.
If "to serve God" is an answer that makes you feel comfortable, then great. But it is by no means a correct answer nor one that applies to everyone.
What a True Believer cannot comprehend is that "you have no purpose at all" and "your existence is just random chance" are potentially correct answers to your questions. I am willing to accept those answers.
So how do I give meaning to my life? I take pride in the work I do. Not even being terminated last week (financial re-org) will diminish that. The accomplishments of my son and daughter and what I did do to encourage them will, in the end, allow me to look back upon my life and say it had meaning. I personally will not have accomplished "great things" but so very few people do.
Everyone feels some attachment to the universal.
No they don't. Many feel little if any attachment at all to "the universal", whatever you define that extremely vague expression to mean.
So what do you use the rest of the year? There were some really nice nights this past summer when even the lights from YVR couldn't diminish the seeing up here in Kerrisdale.
Yes the migration to Word was delayed but as of 4 years ago the vast majority of law firms had moved to Word.
If they needed to open the old WP docs they would just do so in Word and run cleanup code. No need for WP there.
The last WordPerfect holdouts are currently making conversion plans.
The only place you see WordPerfect these days is the giveaway bundles with new PCs.
----
Law firm IT manager until last week.
In 1968, there were fast cars, good music and free sex.
In 2005, we watch movies about fast cars, good music and free sex.
I would say we now have good cars, free music and fast sex.
Much misinformation here and in other replies.
1) The Voyager probes were launched 9 years after 2001 came out.
2) Kubrick wasn't happy with the look of the effects of Saturn produced by Doug Trumbell so the destination was switched to Jupiter.
3) Doug got better at producing Saturn imagery and used it in "Silent Running".
The ROM has had an exhibition about this going for some time now. At the entrance they have a diorama of a group of dinosaurs as they were throught to have appeared up to now, leather-skinned lizards. Through the exhibit they provide the evidence of why this impression has changed. Finally at the exit the same diorama is displayed only with the dinosaurs now covered in feathers.
The 15-foot-high chicken is something to see.
I'm an IMAX freak. Have been ever since I watched the very first IMAX film at Ontario Place in 1971
Sendng and returning an IMAX camera to the moon is an idea that has stuck in my mind for a long time although I know it's impossible. At least you would know what you are looking at is the Real Thing and not a soundstage reproduction. Just the behaviour of the dust in the air is going to scream "fake!" to me.
Coloring around the outside of the case in green highlighter will fix the midrange.
Right. See my other response. What I wrote was how NASA would react to no visible foam loss, not what I think. You can just picture Griffin's press conference.
The foam loss was seen by only two cameras: The rocketcam on the external tank and the astronaut's hand-held cameras
None of the other ground or chase-plane-based cameras would have caught the foam loss at the altitude it ocurred. In addition, there was only one rocketcam on the external tank and so foam loss on the far side of the orbiter, the side that got Columbia, would not have been seen. I also doubt the astronauts were able to see the entire external tank after separation and could easily have missed foam loss.
NASA was extremely lucky to capture this loss the way it did.
I should have put quotes around the "back on track" comment because that is what I envisioned NASA boasting in all their post-launch press releases had they not visually seen any loss. You are right, if NASA had not seen any problem there would have been no problem in their eyes until, as another poster pointed out, the next burnup.
What if that one chunk hadn't fallen off right in view of the camera?
The return-to-flight mission would have been declared an outstanding success. Regular launches would have resumed. We would be back on track again.
Now we have to wait another seven months or more because little pieces of crap still keep falling off the fuel tank.
This is so completely pathetic.
Damn! Now you've reminded me I don't know what nougat is!!
Fortunately we live in the age of Google and Wikipedia. Give me 5 seconds and...
Ahhhh. Enlightenment!
There are still too many wireless devices that only support WEP. The WiFi card for my Palm T3 being one of those, rendering it useless within our firm where WPA is required.
Compare the area around my parents in law's place or where I used to live in Tokyo with where I live now.
Showing where the buildings are is nice. Wow! They opened a Macdonalds in Sakura Shin-machi!!!
The distorted views that maps.google.com gives are a great reason to get Google World. Buckingham Palace looks messed up.
I live a 15-minute bike ride from Wreck Beach which is actually here.
Do I got there? No. This is Canada, not Rio or the south of France. You get people looking at you. The wrong type of people. Wrecks everything. (so to speak)