Can you recommend a suitable alternative for "didn't bother to read the first sentence of TFS"?
I recommend that they just have people rate a bunch of wines and then calculate the tastes of people who have similar interests to you. You know, like Amazon, or Netflix.
I am asking because beer companies discovered that their most avid customers couldn't taste the difference between their products and their competitors products.
Firstly, Blade Runner doesn't need a sequel. Or a prequel. Or a re-imagining. It was solid by itself. Let it be.
I think Blade Runner needs a TV series. It should be written by the people who wrote Caprica, or possibly by the writers of Game of Thrones.
If the Game of Thrones writers worked on it then the series would focus on a lot of different replicants. You would get to know them gradually and really care about them. Then, they would get killed off.
This will automatically be a steaming pile of shit.
Only if your criteria for "steaming pile of shit" boils down to "isn't written by the original author." Which seems like a stupid criteria.
Well, what about the Bible? Much of it was written by different people who used the original author's name to try and get credibility. So, is it automatically a steaming pile of shit too?
You know...I like many of Dick's stories, and some of the movies from them have been very interesting....I've never really seen the appeal of Blade Runner, certainly not enough for a sequel.
Are you kidding? Blade Runner is one of my all time favorite movies. It made me wonder about what makes something/someone deserve human rights. If we can make sentient computers, or whatever. Plus, the dark vision of the future was just awesome. It was a very influential movie in terms of the genre.
On the other hand, there is Star Wars episodes 1-3. So, I am a bit worried about any sequels to favorite childhood movies... I hope to god Disney doesn't ever make a sequel to Blade Runner...
If you are going to re-watch it, make sure you get the version with Harrison Ford's narration. It would suck without that.
They are slow scooters that require the entire world to adjust to them so those with more money than sense could walk less.
They take up more room than a walking human, have zero cargo capacity AND can't do stairs.
But most importantly they represent an overpriced way of doing something most people can do by just walking - moving slowly in a straight line.
Seqway is to transportation what a skateboard is to transportation. Neither makes transportation all that more efficient. But, it does make it more fun.
>" 'Google Glass fails to acknowledge that walking around with a camera mounted on the side of your face at all times makes you look dorky."
It isn't just dorky, it is rude, creepy, and invasive too. The author and Google (especially the CEO) seems to just completely skirt the entire issue of privacy- not only for the user, but all the hundreds of "victims" around the user, every day. Take out your phone and hold it up in the air, pointed at everyone you pass, meet, talk to, sit next to, and see what kind of reaction you get.
So stop pretending it is just about fashion, it is really insulting.
Everyone is walking around with their cell phone cameras pointed up at everyone else all the time. Is it just because I live in a college town? Do they not have smart phones where you live? They put cameras on both sides of cell phones now. It is difficult to look at your screen in public without pointing the camera at everyone. Yet, for some unknown reason, no one seems to have a problem with it when it is an iPhone. It only is concerning when Google is doing it...
Segways had a lot of problems, but being lame wasn't one of them. A company I used to work for had a few of them and we used to ride them around a bit for fun on the weekends. We had so many hot girls approach us and ask if they could try it. I was surprised at how well it worked.
So what does mainstream society do? Simply make it socially fashionable for everyone and their mother to walk around staring at a big unwieldy brick.
Despite that many people do so, it is decidedly not fashionable "to walk around staring at a big unwieldy brick". It's pretty much well understood being glued to a phone screen while in public is sort of pitiably goofy.
There are many obvious point of social etiquette that even otherwise thoughtful people overlook—everything from not picking one's nose in public to yielding to people who are less able. Walking around zombified by a smartphone screen is just one of those overlooked points.
Nonsense. Show me someone who does not walk around sometimes staring at their cellphone and I will show you someone who is definitely not fashionable.
It depends on how easy it is to get it fixed. For example, Dell's laptop warranty is awesome. They come out to your house withing like 48 hours and fix it on the spot. That's a lot different from shipping your laptop off somewhere and getting it back in two weeks. On the other hand, I am not willing to buy an extended warranty on most tablets because it is easier to just buy a new one when it breaks. Cell phones are similar. You often pay $50 to get the same kind of phone you had before. But that phone is probably free now (if you extend your contract.)
Elegant is supposed to be readable. They're supposed to be the same. If you write code no one understands, it's not elegant, it's obtuse.
With SQL, often it is easier for humans to understand stuff that has a lot of subqeries. But for an optimizer, it is easier to optimize if there are not subqueries. So, if elegant= more readable, then elegant != efficient.
What rubbish - with everyone and his brother being a programmer nowadays, anything new always ends up with a call to develop more software for it. When all you have is a hammer, then every problem is made to look like a nail. Software is most certainly not the bottleneck. There are plenty of 3D modeling programs out there,
Although I agree that 3D printers that can do something really useful are still too expensive, dismissing software is just plain wrong. If you think that software isn't a big part of the problem, then you've never used 3D modeling software.
The idea that anyone can design a 3D item as easily as drawing a picture in Microsoft Paint (or GIMP) is a fantasy that may never become a reality. If you've ever actually used 3D modelling software, you understand this.
Yes, most 3D software is hard to use. But, I think that problem will not really be solved. I mean, take the pencil. Most people have trouble creating 2d art with a pencil. MS Paint has the same problem. Other than high quality 3d scanners, making the software good enough for novices to design well is probably not going to happen.
My prediction is that the 720 will run Windows 8 metro apps. It makes sense for MS in all respects: it increases the audience, drawing developers. It gives Xbox a bigger software library out of the gate. It bolsters consumer confidence in metro.
If they can map Kinect input to what would normally be touchscreen gestures, it would effectively become a living room PC; perfect as Microsoft's stealth play into being just that.
If they can complete the picture by bringing their pretty weak Xbox Music and Video offerings, they might have both a strategic and sales win through 2014.
That is, if they can don't do boneheaded things like always-on DRM or releasing hardware that can fry an egg and gives you a double red ring of death.
There is one problem with this. Some developers might not like having their $60 games compete with $1.99 ones.
If you're purchasing an Xbox solely as a Netflix streaming device, you're already making a huge mistake. You can buy a Roku for much cheaper.
No. It's not that he is buying the Xbox solely for streaming. It is that Xbox Live Gold is useless for many people except for being able to use Netflix.
Are you kidding? PCs are absolutely horrible for gaming. The DRM they force into games tends to crash Windows. How well a game will work on your particular PC is very unpredictable. Often, the game will be unplayable but good luck getting a refund.
Aliens might visit us for reasons that are not rational. Or, they may have a religion that makes them want to come over and convert us. Or maybe that was redundant.
Then what would the judge have recommended as a best practice to not do it again? How can Apple be sure that the text that an author submits to iBooks is the author's own work? In fact, how can even the author?
Apple might not be able to completely avoid it. But, that doesn't mean they don't owe damages. Apple can pay the author all of the illegal profit that they made plus the money they paid the fake author. Then, they can sue the fake author.
I looked up the recycling efficiency of Aluminum in this case and found it was about 15%. This is worse efficiency than the lowest number you see for an Gas Engine. So using something like this for day to day usage seems out of the question.
But with the right packaging it might be a decent range extender in addition to a Lithium main battery pack.
This is exactly what they are using it for in the car in the article. They have a main battery which has a range of 100 miles. So, most of the time, you aren't using up the new battery at all. This makes it a lot more viable. I mean, I dive my car like 10 miles per day most of the time. And then once in a while, I will take a road trip and drive it like 500 miles. So, if every Walmart sold replacement batteries, and gas stations sold distilled water, then this could work out ok.
I looked up the recycling efficiency of Aluminum in this case and found it was about 15%. This is worse efficiency than the lowest number you see for an Gas Engine. So using something like this for day to day usage seems out of the question.
But with the right packaging it might be a decent range extender in addition to a Lithium main battery pack.
Internal combustion engines are only 13% efficient. "The total fuel efficiency during the cycle process in Al/air electric vehicles (EVs) can be 15% (present stage) or 20% (projected), comparable to that of internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEs) (13%). " See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium%E2%80%93air_battery
Nowadays, if W8/Metro is what Microsoft expects the planet to use, they may be in for a shock. No serious enterprise will touch it (outside of certain "Platinum Partners" who drink Redmond-flavored koolaid by the tanker-truck), since it (currently) hampers the hell out of work. When home users buy a PC, they want a frickin' PC - and not some over-spec'd tablet with a keyboard lashed onto it.
How does replacing a pop-up start menu with a full page start menu, but otherwise make the OS faster in every way (boot, sleep/resume, use) and fully backwards compatible "hamper the hell out of work". I get that the new start menu can be jarring, and that the need to click once to get to traditional desktop mode can be irritating, but I'm really lost in the Slashdot hyperbole of how extremely bad this is. I agree that metro and desktop could have smoother co-existence, and better defaults to stay with one or the other for the people who want that. But as I have and use Win8 on a new non-touch laptop, I think the exaggerations are ridiculous.
Well, at least on my machine that I upgraded to Windows 8, their start menu is really broken. There are applications in my old start menu, that I could find by typing their name that the Metro start menu doesn't show at all, even if I start typing their name. Essentially, the windows 8 method of launching them involves going into desktop mode and manually navigating to c:\program files x86\ etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you recommend a suitable alternative for "didn't bother to read the first sentence of TFS"?
I recommend that they just have people rate a bunch of wines and then calculate the tastes of people who have similar interests to you. You know, like Amazon, or Netflix.
I am asking because beer companies discovered that their most avid customers couldn't taste the difference between their products and their competitors products.
If you have the source code for the patch for this version of java, then can't you just make your own version of this API?
Firstly, Blade Runner doesn't need a sequel. Or a prequel. Or a re-imagining. It was solid by itself. Let it be.
I think Blade Runner needs a TV series. It should be written by the people who wrote Caprica, or possibly by the writers of Game of Thrones. If the Game of Thrones writers worked on it then the series would focus on a lot of different replicants. You would get to know them gradually and really care about them. Then, they would get killed off.
This will automatically be a steaming pile of shit.
Only if your criteria for "steaming pile of shit" boils down to "isn't written by the original author." Which seems like a stupid criteria.
Well, what about the Bible? Much of it was written by different people who used the original author's name to try and get credibility. So, is it automatically a steaming pile of shit too?
Let me guess, lots more action and 'plosions?
And better costumes for the "pleasure models"...
You know...I like many of Dick's stories, and some of the movies from them have been very interesting....I've never really seen the appeal of Blade Runner, certainly not enough for a sequel.
Are you kidding? Blade Runner is one of my all time favorite movies. It made me wonder about what makes something/someone deserve human rights. If we can make sentient computers, or whatever. Plus, the dark vision of the future was just awesome. It was a very influential movie in terms of the genre. On the other hand, there is Star Wars episodes 1-3. So, I am a bit worried about any sequels to favorite childhood movies... I hope to god Disney doesn't ever make a sequel to Blade Runner... If you are going to re-watch it, make sure you get the version with Harrison Ford's narration. It would suck without that.
I can't think of any time I would rather drive a Segway than a car.
I could think of times I would rather Segway than bike, or walk. Segways are far too slow to replace a car for any meaningful distance.
By that logic, we don't need cars because they generally can't go as fast as a jet.
On what planet exactly?
They are slow scooters that require the entire world to adjust to them so those with more money than sense could walk less. They take up more room than a walking human, have zero cargo capacity AND can't do stairs.
But most importantly they represent an overpriced way of doing something most people can do by just walking - moving slowly in a straight line.
Seqway is to transportation what a skateboard is to transportation. Neither makes transportation all that more efficient. But, it does make it more fun.
>" 'Google Glass fails to acknowledge that walking around with a camera mounted on the side of your face at all times makes you look dorky."
It isn't just dorky, it is rude, creepy, and invasive too. The author and Google (especially the CEO) seems to just completely skirt the entire issue of privacy- not only for the user, but all the hundreds of "victims" around the user, every day. Take out your phone and hold it up in the air, pointed at everyone you pass, meet, talk to, sit next to, and see what kind of reaction you get.
So stop pretending it is just about fashion, it is really insulting.
Everyone is walking around with their cell phone cameras pointed up at everyone else all the time. Is it just because I live in a college town? Do they not have smart phones where you live? They put cameras on both sides of cell phones now. It is difficult to look at your screen in public without pointing the camera at everyone. Yet, for some unknown reason, no one seems to have a problem with it when it is an iPhone. It only is concerning when Google is doing it...
Segways had a lot of problems, but being lame wasn't one of them. A company I used to work for had a few of them and we used to ride them around a bit for fun on the weekends. We had so many hot girls approach us and ask if they could try it. I was surprised at how well it worked.
So what does mainstream society do? Simply make it socially fashionable for everyone and their mother to walk around staring at a big unwieldy brick.
Despite that many people do so, it is decidedly not fashionable "to walk around staring at a big unwieldy brick". It's pretty much well understood being glued to a phone screen while in public is sort of pitiably goofy.
There are many obvious point of social etiquette that even otherwise thoughtful people overlook—everything from not picking one's nose in public to yielding to people who are less able. Walking around zombified by a smartphone screen is just one of those overlooked points.
Nonsense. Show me someone who does not walk around sometimes staring at their cellphone and I will show you someone who is definitely not fashionable.
Yes
As soon as Apple releases their version of it, then it will become the new hottest fashion trend.
It depends on how easy it is to get it fixed. For example, Dell's laptop warranty is awesome. They come out to your house withing like 48 hours and fix it on the spot. That's a lot different from shipping your laptop off somewhere and getting it back in two weeks. On the other hand, I am not willing to buy an extended warranty on most tablets because it is easier to just buy a new one when it breaks. Cell phones are similar. You often pay $50 to get the same kind of phone you had before. But that phone is probably free now (if you extend your contract.)
Elegant is supposed to be readable. They're supposed to be the same. If you write code no one understands, it's not elegant, it's obtuse.
With SQL, often it is easier for humans to understand stuff that has a lot of subqeries. But for an optimizer, it is easier to optimize if there are not subqueries. So, if elegant= more readable, then elegant != efficient.
What rubbish - with everyone and his brother being a programmer nowadays, anything new always ends up with a call to develop more software for it. When all you have is a hammer, then every problem is made to look like a nail. Software is most certainly not the bottleneck. There are plenty of 3D modeling programs out there,
Although I agree that 3D printers that can do something really useful are still too expensive, dismissing software is just plain wrong. If you think that software isn't a big part of the problem, then you've never used 3D modeling software.
The idea that anyone can design a 3D item as easily as drawing a picture in Microsoft Paint (or GIMP) is a fantasy that may never become a reality. If you've ever actually used 3D modelling software, you understand this.
Yes, most 3D software is hard to use. But, I think that problem will not really be solved. I mean, take the pencil. Most people have trouble creating 2d art with a pencil. MS Paint has the same problem. Other than high quality 3d scanners, making the software good enough for novices to design well is probably not going to happen.
My prediction is that the 720 will run Windows 8 metro apps. It makes sense for MS in all respects: it increases the audience, drawing developers. It gives Xbox a bigger software library out of the gate. It bolsters consumer confidence in metro.
If they can map Kinect input to what would normally be touchscreen gestures, it would effectively become a living room PC; perfect as Microsoft's stealth play into being just that.
If they can complete the picture by bringing their pretty weak Xbox Music and Video offerings, they might have both a strategic and sales win through 2014.
That is, if they can don't do boneheaded things like always-on DRM or releasing hardware that can fry an egg and gives you a double red ring of death.
There is one problem with this. Some developers might not like having their $60 games compete with $1.99 ones.
It's my hope that the over the top DRM on consoles will push ever more people back to PC gaming. Sure there is DRM on PCs, but cracked versions inevitably turn up. http://games.slashdot.org/story/13/04/26/1318214/paul-thurrot-predicts-november-debut-500-tag-for-xbox-720#With consoles making a crack isn't so easy.
Sadly, the trend will be to just make PCs into consoles that have draconian DRM. Or at least, that is Microsoft's strategy for Windows RTS.
If you're purchasing an Xbox solely as a Netflix streaming device, you're already making a huge mistake. You can buy a Roku for much cheaper.
No. It's not that he is buying the Xbox solely for streaming. It is that Xbox Live Gold is useless for many people except for being able to use Netflix.
A PC
Are you kidding? PCs are absolutely horrible for gaming. The DRM they force into games tends to crash Windows. How well a game will work on your particular PC is very unpredictable. Often, the game will be unplayable but good luck getting a refund.
Aliens might visit us for reasons that are not rational. Or, they may have a religion that makes them want to come over and convert us. Or maybe that was redundant.
The judge puts it squarely on Apple's feet.
Then what would the judge have recommended as a best practice to not do it again? How can Apple be sure that the text that an author submits to iBooks is the author's own work? In fact, how can even the author?
Apple might not be able to completely avoid it. But, that doesn't mean they don't owe damages. Apple can pay the author all of the illegal profit that they made plus the money they paid the fake author. Then, they can sue the fake author.
I looked up the recycling efficiency of Aluminum in this case and found it was about 15%. This is worse efficiency than the lowest number you see for an Gas Engine. So using something like this for day to day usage seems out of the question.
But with the right packaging it might be a decent range extender in addition to a Lithium main battery pack.
This is exactly what they are using it for in the car in the article. They have a main battery which has a range of 100 miles. So, most of the time, you aren't using up the new battery at all. This makes it a lot more viable. I mean, I dive my car like 10 miles per day most of the time. And then once in a while, I will take a road trip and drive it like 500 miles. So, if every Walmart sold replacement batteries, and gas stations sold distilled water, then this could work out ok.
I looked up the recycling efficiency of Aluminum in this case and found it was about 15%. This is worse efficiency than the lowest number you see for an Gas Engine. So using something like this for day to day usage seems out of the question.
But with the right packaging it might be a decent range extender in addition to a Lithium main battery pack.
Internal combustion engines are only 13% efficient. "The total fuel efficiency during the cycle process in Al/air electric vehicles (EVs) can be 15% (present stage) or 20% (projected), comparable to that of internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEs) (13%). " See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium%E2%80%93air_battery
Nowadays, if W8/Metro is what Microsoft expects the planet to use, they may be in for a shock. No serious enterprise will touch it (outside of certain "Platinum Partners" who drink Redmond-flavored koolaid by the tanker-truck), since it (currently) hampers the hell out of work. When home users buy a PC, they want a frickin' PC - and not some over-spec'd tablet with a keyboard lashed onto it.
How does replacing a pop-up start menu with a full page start menu, but otherwise make the OS faster in every way (boot, sleep/resume, use) and fully backwards compatible "hamper the hell out of work". I get that the new start menu can be jarring, and that the need to click once to get to traditional desktop mode can be irritating, but I'm really lost in the Slashdot hyperbole of how extremely bad this is. I agree that metro and desktop could have smoother co-existence, and better defaults to stay with one or the other for the people who want that. But as I have and use Win8 on a new non-touch laptop, I think the exaggerations are ridiculous.
Well, at least on my machine that I upgraded to Windows 8, their start menu is really broken. There are applications in my old start menu, that I could find by typing their name that the Metro start menu doesn't show at all, even if I start typing their name. Essentially, the windows 8 method of launching them involves going into desktop mode and manually navigating to c:\program files x86\ etc.