8GB seems fine, they are not going for blockbuster games. sure an SD card would help
Games that actually use that Tegra3 have to have textures and other art assets that take up space. I have 4 of the big 'Yay Tegra3' games for Android - Max Payne Mobile, Shadowgun THD, Dead Trigger, and Dark Meadow. Every one of them had a lengthy post-'install' download of around 1 GB each. That'd fill up over half that 8GB space.
I'd figure an SD card slot, or even an external USB drive connection, would be necessary in practice. Or you'd be limited to smaller games and one or two big ones, period.
My Transformer Prime can hook up to a TV via HDMI, and can use PS3 controllers via Bluetooth with no extra software. (You just hook the controller up via USB, turn on Bluetooth on the tablet, and hit the "PS" button. Boom, paired.)
Not all games support controllers, but 'higher end' ones do. I have three in particular - Max Payne, Shadowgun, and Dead Trigger. The graphics are pretty good - not much below current-gen consoles, actually. So long as more and more games support gamepads like that, I can see a niche for the Ouya.
Thankfully, all it takes is a declaration from the CEO to turn everything around.
(At this point, sarcasm should actually condense out of the air around you.)
The moment I can smoothly run Linux applications inside Android I'm switching.
Well, for command-line-based stuff, there's things like this, though you'll need to root it. Graphical apps don't do so hot yet (have to bounce through VNC for the nonce) but I suspect that'll get sorted eventually.
You don't really plug much of anything else into it, except maybe headphones.
I've found reasons to plug a couple things into my Transformer Prime:
A full-size SDHC card, for sneakernet of large files. Note: The Prime can handle NTFS-formatted media, so nice big video files are no problem.
A PS3 controller into the USB port. For a couple of games I have (Max Payne Mobile, Shadowgun THD) it turns the thing practically into a games console. The graphics are surprisingly good, especially for the battery life.
I've found that I hardly every take my Transformer Prime out of the dock. I use it like a netbook; the keyboard is nice for even just typing in URLs. Except I've never run into a netbook with better than 12 hours of battery life. It's really nice to not have to even think about 'how much battery do I have left' all day long.
I've got the ARM version of the Transformer, and it's exactly that. A tablet, but you can plug it into a foldable keyboard dock that turns it into a netbook.
As noted, you misunderstood how oil is supposed to form in standard geology. I even specifically mentioned "plankton" and "plant matter" in my replies, btw. I'm afraid I run into that kind of misunderstanding a lot when I discuss this stuff with others.
The creationist believe that there might of been a canopy of water over the earth...
Okey-dokey. You now have a hypothesis. Now... what are some things you would do to test it? Boring standard geology expects oil to form where (a) lots of plant matter gets buried, and (b) a hard layer of rock forms over it to trap the oil as it develops. Given known climate in the past (e.g. knowing where continents have drifted) we can make some predictions about the most likely spots to find such conditions. Ancient shallow deltas and such are among the best spots.
But if 'Flood geology' is right and the environment was better for vegetation all over, then that would imply that there'd be large deposits of buried vegetation in places where 'standard' geology wouldn't predict them. And thus large, unexpected deposits of oil. Go ahead, put your money into testing this hypothesis. If you're as sure as you claim, you'll have more money to give to the poor!
Also please explain what makes Flood geology good or bad about drilling?
Yeah, I've tried a few file managers, but only the stock one seems to be able to see flash drives/SD cards in the dock. I don't have a micro SD card for the tablet itself, yet.
that's what scientists who believe in a young universe do... that's what scientists who believe in a young universe do.
No they don't. And we know they don't really believe what they say because they don't put their money where their mouths are.
Finding oil is a very important and high-stakes issue for oil companies. Literally trillions of dollars are riding on it. Exxon's exploration budget alone is around $20 billion per year. When the chips are down and they need to find the most likely spots to drill - what kind of geology do they use? Flood geology, or mainstream? Which one actually delivers the goods?
Let's assume the Earth is only a few thousand years old. Where did the oil come from? Was it created in the ground with the rest of the Earth? If so, is there a way to predict where it might be found? Or perhaps it really did form from plankton (with a few plants and dinosaurs), but about 10,000 times faster than any chemist believes it could in those conditions? Any way you look at it, a young Earth and a Flood would imply some very interesting scientific questions to ask, some interesting (and potentially extremely valuable) research programs to start. How come nobody's actually, seriously pursuing such research programs?
Why don't creationists put together an investment fund, where people pay in and the stake is used as venture capital for things like oil and mineral rights? If "Flood geology" is really a better theory, then it should make better predictions about where raw materials are than standard geology does. The profits from such a venture could pay for a lot of evangelism. Why isn't anyone doing this?
we always assume the creationists are wrong, but what if they aren't?
We don't "assume" they're wrong. We know. For lots of reasons. I'm not a biologist or paleontologist, but I've read a fair amount about the topics and I've seen good evidence for evolution there. One of the best is also one that's fairly easy to check if you start looking into things. It's the "twin nested hierarchies".
Books used to be copied by scribes, and (despite a lot of care) sometimes typos would be introduced. Later scribes, making copies of copies, would introduce other typos. It's possible to look at the existing copies and put them into a 'family tree'. "These copies have this typo, but not that one; this other group has yet another typo, though three of them have a newer typo as well, not seen elsewhere..." This is not controversial at all when dealing with books, including the Bible.
Now, this process of copy-with-modification naturally produces 'family trees', nested groups. When we look at life, we find such nested groups. No lizards with fur or nipples, no mammals with feathers, etc. Living things (at least, multicellular ones, see below) fit into a grouped hierarchy. This has been solidly recognized for over a thousand years, and systematized for centuries. It was one of the clues that led Darwin to propose evolution. (Little-known fact: Linnaeus, who invented the "kingdom, phyla, genus, species, etc." classification scheme for living things, tried to do the same thing for minerals. But minerals don't form from copy-with-modification, and a 'nested hierarchy' just didn't work and never caught on.)
Today, more than a century later, we find another tree, one Darwin never suspected - that of DNA. This really is a 'text' being copied with rare typos. And, as expected, it also forms a family tree, a nested hierarchy. And, with very very few surprises, it's the same tree that was derived from looking at physical traits.
It didn't have to be that way. Even very critical genes for life - like that of cytochrome C - have a few neutral variations, minor mutations that don't affect its function. (Genetic sequences for cytochrome C differ by up to 60% across species.) Wheat engineered to use the mouse form of cytochrome C grows just fine. But we find a tree of mutations that fits evolution precisely, instead of some other tree. (Imagine if a tree derived from bookbinding technology - "this guy used this kind of glue, but this other bookbinder used a different glue..." - conflicted with a tree that was derived from typos in the text of the books. We'd know at least one tree and maybe both were wrong.)
The details of these trees are very specific and very, very numerous. There are billions of quadrillions of possible trees... and yet the two that we see (DNA and morphology) happen to very precisely match. This is either a staggering coincidence, or a Creator deliberately arranged it in a misleading manner, or... universal common ancestry is actually true.
(Single-celled organisms are much more 'promiscuous' in their reproduction and spread genes willy-nilly without respect for straightforward inheritance. With single-celled creatures, it looks more like a 'web' of life than a 'tree'. But even if the tree of life has tangled roots, it's still very definitely a tree when it comes to multicellular life.)
How many "non-tech people" do you know who actually installed Windows from disk?
How many "non-tech people" do you know who actually maintain their Windows box? No, they have their kid or their cousin or their neighbor who's "good with computers" do it. My wife had to get me a t-shirt that says "No, I will not fix your computer." for me to wear to family reunions.
From a "non-tech user" perspective, Linux is actually easier to maintain than Windows, since there's a centralized updata service for basically all the software on the system.
My wife surprised me with the TF201 (Transformer Prime) for our anniversary. I agree, very nice setup with the keyboard dock. Essentially a netbook with a touchscreen, and you can yank the screen out and make it a tablet. The battery life is literally all-day, and videos play very nicely. (Converted a Blu-ray to 720p and it looks spectacular.) And game graphics are impressive - current-generation-console level, at least. Only complaint is that the file manager is sloooow and a little buggy for big files.
I wouldn't use it for development or office editing, but I have a desktop for that stuff. It fulfills pretty much all my portable needs quite well. And not having to worry about battery life is a major plus - pretty much a 'kiler app' all by itself.
Sure you can play downloadable games offline. Most DRM schemes do keep track of the date, though, and if things get mucked up there you'll probably need to re-login. Had that happen when I reflowed my old, 'fat' PS3.
Every time I tun on the PS3 it needs another frickin update before it will let me play. But, the worst part is that the download takes 30 minutes or more despite the fact that I am on a 15Mbps connection.
Updates don't come that often. But I agree, Sony's download speeds leave much to be desired. To the point where people have put together PC proxies to help speed things up.
But, the real problem, that no one seems to see as a problem, is that online only games evaporate after a couple or three years... I don't want that to be my only option.
I don't see it as a problem in that there are plenty of single-player games still. Actually, relatively few games are online-only. And even downloadable games can be run so long as the DRM server somewhere is running. Those are much lower bandwidth than servers handling actual gameplay, and only rarely get shut down.
'Mutation' isn't like in the X-men, producing a full-blown new species. If it did, then yes, evolution (of multicellular sexually-reproducing organisms, at least) would be impossible, because you'd need a male and female that happened to be compatible. But that's not the model evolution actually proposes.
For a much clearer picture of how species really do come about, look up 'ring species'. For example, the Larus gulls are several subspecies where variants live in a ring around the Arctic. The Herring Gull in the U.K. can interbreed with the American Herring Gull, and the American can interbreed with the Vega Gull in Russia. And so on, until you come to the Lesser Black-Backed Gull in the Netherlands. It basically canâ(TM)t breed with the Herring Gull. Hybrids are extremely rare and don't seem to be fertile, like mules.
So, is it a separate species? You could breed it with its relative to the East, and so on. But what if, say, the Vega Gull went extinct? Would you have separate species then?
Now, imagine such variations happening across time instead of (or as well as) space, and youâ(TM)ve got an idea how species actually do form, instead of the â(TM)saltationistâ(TM) strawman that many try to imply.
David Sloan Wilson's "Evolution For Everyone". He's a group-selectionist in some ways, but don't hold that against him. He really does cover the basics in a way interested but non-technical readers can follow. He makes clear what evolution is, and - equally important these days - what evolution isn't.
Slashdot Mirror
Games that actually use that Tegra3 have to have textures and other art assets that take up space. I have 4 of the big 'Yay Tegra3' games for Android - Max Payne Mobile, Shadowgun THD, Dead Trigger, and Dark Meadow. Every one of them had a lengthy post-'install' download of around 1 GB each. That'd fill up over half that 8GB space.
I'd figure an SD card slot, or even an external USB drive connection, would be necessary in practice. Or you'd be limited to smaller games and one or two big ones, period.
Not all games support controllers, but 'higher end' ones do. I have three in particular - Max Payne, Shadowgun, and Dead Trigger. The graphics are pretty good - not much below current-gen consoles, actually. So long as more and more games support gamepads like that, I can see a niche for the Ouya.
Thankfully, all it takes is a declaration from the CEO to turn everything around. (At this point, sarcasm should actually condense out of the air around you.)
Well, for command-line-based stuff, there's things like this, though you'll need to root it. Graphical apps don't do so hot yet (have to bounce through VNC for the nonce) but I suspect that'll get sorted eventually.
I've found reasons to plug a couple things into my Transformer Prime:
Doesn't take away from your point, though.
I've found that I hardly every take my Transformer Prime out of the dock. I use it like a netbook; the keyboard is nice for even just typing in URLs. Except I've never run into a netbook with better than 12 hours of battery life. It's really nice to not have to even think about 'how much battery do I have left' all day long.
For Windows XP they picked Madonna's "Ray of Light". I came up with better lyrics than the stock ones.
Gotta admit, though, after maybe 5 years XP became nearly tolerable. For playing games, at least.
I've got the ARM version of the Transformer, and it's exactly that. A tablet, but you can plug it into a foldable keyboard dock that turns it into a netbook.
Or... subduction.
Um... there's a difference between short and long-chain hydrocarbons. I know of no detection of long-chain hydrocarbons, e.g. octane, off Earth.
Hint: From the same kind of rock?
Bingo. There was a setting in EStrongs to enable navigating up to the root directory.
Okey-dokey. You now have a hypothesis. Now... what are some things you would do to test it? Boring standard geology expects oil to form where (a) lots of plant matter gets buried, and (b) a hard layer of rock forms over it to trap the oil as it develops. Given known climate in the past (e.g. knowing where continents have drifted) we can make some predictions about the most likely spots to find such conditions. Ancient shallow deltas and such are among the best spots.
But if 'Flood geology' is right and the environment was better for vegetation all over, then that would imply that there'd be large deposits of buried vegetation in places where 'standard' geology wouldn't predict them. And thus large, unexpected deposits of oil. Go ahead, put your money into testing this hypothesis. If you're as sure as you claim, you'll have more money to give to the poor!
Ask a petroleum geologist and (former) young-Earth creationist.
Yeah, I've tried a few file managers, but only the stock one seems to be able to see flash drives/SD cards in the dock. I don't have a micro SD card for the tablet itself, yet.
No they don't. And we know they don't really believe what they say because they don't put their money where their mouths are.
Finding oil is a very important and high-stakes issue for oil companies. Literally trillions of dollars are riding on it. Exxon's exploration budget alone is around $20 billion per year. When the chips are down and they need to find the most likely spots to drill - what kind of geology do they use? Flood geology, or mainstream? Which one actually delivers the goods?
Let's assume the Earth is only a few thousand years old. Where did the oil come from? Was it created in the ground with the rest of the Earth? If so, is there a way to predict where it might be found? Or perhaps it really did form from plankton (with a few plants and dinosaurs), but about 10,000 times faster than any chemist believes it could in those conditions? Any way you look at it, a young Earth and a Flood would imply some very interesting scientific questions to ask, some interesting (and potentially extremely valuable) research programs to start. How come nobody's actually, seriously pursuing such research programs?
Why don't creationists put together an investment fund, where people pay in and the stake is used as venture capital for things like oil and mineral rights? If "Flood geology" is really a better theory, then it should make better predictions about where raw materials are than standard geology does. The profits from such a venture could pay for a lot of evangelism. Why isn't anyone doing this?
We don't "assume" they're wrong. We know. For lots of reasons. I'm not a biologist or paleontologist, but I've read a fair amount about the topics and I've seen good evidence for evolution there. One of the best is also one that's fairly easy to check if you start looking into things. It's the "twin nested hierarchies". Books used to be copied by scribes, and (despite a lot of care) sometimes typos would be introduced. Later scribes, making copies of copies, would introduce other typos. It's possible to look at the existing copies and put them into a 'family tree'. "These copies have this typo, but not that one; this other group has yet another typo, though three of them have a newer typo as well, not seen elsewhere..." This is not controversial at all when dealing with books, including the Bible. Now, this process of copy-with-modification naturally produces 'family trees', nested groups. When we look at life, we find such nested groups. No lizards with fur or nipples, no mammals with feathers, etc. Living things (at least, multicellular ones, see below) fit into a grouped hierarchy. This has been solidly recognized for over a thousand years, and systematized for centuries. It was one of the clues that led Darwin to propose evolution. (Little-known fact: Linnaeus, who invented the "kingdom, phyla, genus, species, etc." classification scheme for living things, tried to do the same thing for minerals. But minerals don't form from copy-with-modification, and a 'nested hierarchy' just didn't work and never caught on.) Today, more than a century later, we find another tree, one Darwin never suspected - that of DNA. This really is a 'text' being copied with rare typos. And, as expected, it also forms a family tree, a nested hierarchy. And, with very very few surprises, it's the same tree that was derived from looking at physical traits. It didn't have to be that way. Even very critical genes for life - like that of cytochrome C - have a few neutral variations, minor mutations that don't affect its function. (Genetic sequences for cytochrome C differ by up to 60% across species.) Wheat engineered to use the mouse form of cytochrome C grows just fine. But we find a tree of mutations that fits evolution precisely, instead of some other tree. (Imagine if a tree derived from bookbinding technology - "this guy used this kind of glue, but this other bookbinder used a different glue..." - conflicted with a tree that was derived from typos in the text of the books. We'd know at least one tree and maybe both were wrong.) The details of these trees are very specific and very, very numerous. There are billions of quadrillions of possible trees... and yet the two that we see (DNA and morphology) happen to very precisely match. This is either a staggering coincidence, or a Creator deliberately arranged it in a misleading manner, or... universal common ancestry is actually true. (Single-celled organisms are much more 'promiscuous' in their reproduction and spread genes willy-nilly without respect for straightforward inheritance. With single-celled creatures, it looks more like a 'web' of life than a 'tree'. But even if the tree of life has tangled roots, it's still very definitely a tree when it comes to multicellular life.)
How many "non-tech people" do you know who actually maintain their Windows box? No, they have their kid or their cousin or their neighbor who's "good with computers" do it. My wife had to get me a t-shirt that says "No, I will not fix your computer." for me to wear to family reunions.
From a "non-tech user" perspective, Linux is actually easier to maintain than Windows, since there's a centralized updata service for basically all the software on the system.
I wouldn't use it for development or office editing, but I have a desktop for that stuff. It fulfills pretty much all my portable needs quite well. And not having to worry about battery life is a major plus - pretty much a 'kiler app' all by itself.
Sure you can play downloadable games offline. Most DRM schemes do keep track of the date, though, and if things get mucked up there you'll probably need to re-login. Had that happen when I reflowed my old, 'fat' PS3.
Updates don't come that often. But I agree, Sony's download speeds leave much to be desired. To the point where people have put together PC proxies to help speed things up.
I don't see it as a problem in that there are plenty of single-player games still. Actually, relatively few games are online-only. And even downloadable games can be run so long as the DRM server somewhere is running. Those are much lower bandwidth than servers handling actual gameplay, and only rarely get shut down.
That'd be a nice 'bonus' application, to add some entropy by using it as part of a hardware random number generator.
The reason the Cambrian stands out is that it's the first period that saw widespread hard body parts that actually had a decent chance of fossilizing. And we even have some good reasons for the morphological variation seen.
https://xkcd.com/258/
By small changes over a long time.
'Mutation' isn't like in the X-men, producing a full-blown new species. If it did, then yes, evolution (of multicellular sexually-reproducing organisms, at least) would be impossible, because you'd need a male and female that happened to be compatible. But that's not the model evolution actually proposes.
For a much clearer picture of how species really do come about, look up 'ring species'. For example, the Larus gulls are several subspecies where variants live in a ring around the Arctic. The Herring Gull in the U.K. can interbreed with the American Herring Gull, and the American can interbreed with the Vega Gull in Russia. And so on, until you come to the Lesser Black-Backed Gull in the Netherlands. It basically canâ(TM)t breed with the Herring Gull. Hybrids are extremely rare and don't seem to be fertile, like mules. So, is it a separate species? You could breed it with its relative to the East, and so on. But what if, say, the Vega Gull went extinct? Would you have separate species then?
Now, imagine such variations happening across time instead of (or as well as) space, and youâ(TM)ve got an idea how species actually do form, instead of the â(TM)saltationistâ(TM) strawman that many try to imply.
...and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof." - John Kenneth Galbraith
David Sloan Wilson's "Evolution For Everyone". He's a group-selectionist in some ways, but don't hold that against him. He really does cover the basics in a way interested but non-technical readers can follow. He makes clear what evolution is, and - equally important these days - what evolution isn't.
True, but the main objections to raising the speed limits after the gas crunch eased were safety-based, and people still call for a return to 55MPH based on safety.