In the few years he was with the Diamondbacks, I don't think I ever once saw him running after a ball on the TV. The ball would be hit, they'd cut to the flight, then they'd cut to Devo, holding his mitt open, and the ball would plop into it.
He had the skill (all successful outfielders have it, btw) and he had the legs to make it look as easy as playing catch in the backyard.
"Does sliding help a runner to get to second base any faster? Of course not."
And then goes on to almost figure out that yes, it does.
Sliding allows the runner to run faster until he's very near the base. But he's going so fast he'll go past it if he doesn't slide. The steeper his deceleration, the longer he was going at full speed, and the shorter his total time getting to the base. That's the part the link forgot.
If he could reliably collide with the fielder to shed his inertia, he'd do that, instead, because it'd allow him full speed until he's right on the base.
The nominative usage of each verb refers specifically to the person performing the act, not to the product of the action.
A redact produces a "redaction". A censor produces "censored material". The main purpose of redaction of government documents is censorship, though a colophon or masthead or invoice may be added. If new text is inserted in the material to change its meaning, it's an FOIA no-no, tantamount to lying, though I couldn't point to any cases of it.
These guys seem to have a handle on the one-way trip information takes in an FOIA redaction, and they manage to omit misuse of the word entirely!
There's hope we'll discover intelligent life in Washington, as long as we avoid those who call themselves "intelligence" for reasons of maintaining their cover.
Now that these things can be printed, make the screen area itself modular, and sell the modules for cheap, way less than $100. Sell the rest of the monitor (body, power supply, connectors, DVI electronics, etc) for a normal monitor price.
Then, every 2-3 years, when most people upgrade anyway, they can pop out the now-funky-colored screen module, pop in a replacement, and get back to fragging little OLED-sharpened nazis.
1. Know a person who has terminal heart disease, and a heart-surgeon who's waiting for a call.
2. Come upon a car accident where a passer-by who happens to be a pathologist or medical examinger is the first on the scene and pronounces the victim; oh, and there's a truck full of food-grade bacon grease involved, but no refrigeration for miles.
3. Convince the pathologist that you know where that heart can go.
4. When the pathologist dissects the heart from the dead guy, pack it in the bacon grease.
5. Transport while paging your friend and his surgeon.
6. ???
7. Say "de nada" when your friend thanks you for the new heart.
Redaction is "preparing for publication" by formatting and editing.
Nobody ever adds or modifies a word in a FOIA request. They only remove words.
All they do is xerox the source pages, elide the confidential information by drawing over it in opaque ink, re-xerox the result, and send that.
It's censorship. No less than when the military used to snip out sensitive text from snail-mail between troops and home. People would get letters that looked like swiss cheese. I wonder if anyone was ever sneaky enough to use that as a means of sending coded messages back home. You know, write a fake letter with sure-to-be-censored words in the right places, then when the letter gets home the recipient places it over a code list and the real message shows through the holes...
>I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say eliding is a form of redaction.
Well, elision, insertion, and emendation are your three major textual changes, and all are used in redaction, but so are kerning, columnizing, etc.
And what happens to these documents isn't really redaction, nor even editing. It's censoring, but they don't want to use that word, because they have no moral character to draw upon to explain why it's just a word.
I use elide all the time. And have to explain it a lot.
how righteous of you. in fact, if you look and know a little about intelligence analysis techniques, i think you'll find that the NSA already know about this approach for 'interpreting' typewritten redacts, even as far back as the 50's.
I just wish the intelligence community and their unintelligent sycophants the press would stop using redact to mean elide.
Especially as a noun, because a "typewritten redact" is like a copy editor with ink hammered onto him, somewhere.
Lasseter and Stanton do almost nothing as an afterthought. You're trying to gild a lily, there.
You want raunchy toons, watch SKG's attempts. Antz was the uptown version of A Bug's Life. And suffered thereby.
>Product tie-ins.
The result of the collaborative method in a world where your collaborators are greedy sleaze. Pixar remains independent of Disney and avoids its cadres of climbers and grubbers. But some day it, too will be bought by someone with more money than heart, and will be coopted to the dark side of the movie industry.
But there's a new hope: you can WRITE YOUR OWN MOVIES AND SEND THEM TO HOLLYWOOD. If they're any good, you'll be the next Lasseter and Stanton, and if not, then you'll lose the power to fly and go back to being a mortal guy in tights and a cape.
These morons introduced 64-bit chips 5 years before anyone cared, and crippled the technology by making it straight IA32 with more bits.
The market needs dual-core CPUs to advance.
There's no way to get CPUs faster any more without reaching current levels that no power supply can reasonably handle in that space (hint: 100 Watts at 1.2 Volts is 83 Amps).
The only solution is to divide the computation among several processors and parallelize.
AMD's response is clanking hollow. They're already playing catch-up as you read this.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if someone hacked the fortune-cookie generator just for this article, but this is the quote I got at the bottom of the page:
"Beam me up, Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here!"
Isn't allowing your industrial waste to pollute fields downwind considered a violation of environmental protection law?
Monsanto should be in jail, even if this guy did infringe their patent.
Since when does Intel sell interposer boards?
Does this guy claim he invented common denominators? PLL synchrony? Frivolity?
I bet he gets $2 million to go away.
If they were so concerned about privacy, how did they compile the database and develop the profiling method in the first place?
I send them linux questions.
They don't post them.
Try to understand the math involved to do this.
(Link goes to footage of Randy Johnson hitting a bird on a fastball).
That's the sort of thing that's holding up Quake III.
Devon White.
In the few years he was with the Diamondbacks, I don't think I ever once saw him running after a ball on the TV. The ball would be hit, they'd cut to the flight, then they'd cut to Devo, holding his mitt open, and the ball would plop into it.
He had the skill (all successful outfielders have it, btw) and he had the legs to make it look as easy as playing catch in the backyard.
One of the links says:
"Does sliding help a runner to get to second base any faster? Of course not."
And then goes on to almost figure out that yes, it does.
Sliding allows the runner to run faster until he's very near the base. But he's going so fast he'll go past it if he doesn't slide. The steeper his deceleration, the longer he was going at full speed, and the shorter his total time getting to the base. That's the part the link forgot.
If he could reliably collide with the fielder to shed his inertia, he'd do that, instead, because it'd allow him full speed until he's right on the base.
My first reaction?
'Hey, they're going the wrong direction!'
You think I'm kidding?
Why do you think Hewlett Packard now spends most of its time and effort and legal budget beating up people who sell replacement ink?
My last iteration:
A redact is a person who redacts something.
Likewise a censor.
The nominative usage of each verb refers specifically to the person performing the act, not to the product of the action.
A redact produces a "redaction". A censor produces "censored material". The main purpose of redaction of government documents is censorship, though a colophon or masthead or invoice may be added. If new text is inserted in the material to change its meaning, it's an FOIA no-no, tantamount to lying, though I couldn't point to any cases of it.
These guys seem to have a handle on the one-way trip information takes in an FOIA redaction, and they manage to omit misuse of the word entirely!
These guys, however, blow it.
There's hope we'll discover intelligent life in Washington, as long as we avoid those who call themselves "intelligence" for reasons of maintaining their cover.
Profit? From what? Human-heart-flavored bacon grease?
...got to be more flavor in that than BK's new "anus^H^Hgus" burger.
Maybe...
Now that these things can be printed, make the screen area itself modular, and sell the modules for cheap, way less than $100. Sell the rest of the monitor (body, power supply, connectors, DVI electronics, etc) for a normal monitor price.
Then, every 2-3 years, when most people upgrade anyway, they can pop out the now-funky-colored screen module, pop in a replacement, and get back to fragging little OLED-sharpened nazis.
>Bacon grease cures heart disease
1. Know a person who has terminal heart disease, and a heart-surgeon who's waiting for a call.
2. Come upon a car accident where a passer-by who happens to be a pathologist or medical examinger is the first on the scene and pronounces the victim; oh, and there's a truck full of food-grade bacon grease involved, but no refrigeration for miles.
3. Convince the pathologist that you know where that heart can go.
4. When the pathologist dissects the heart from the dead guy, pack it in the bacon grease.
5. Transport while paging your friend and his surgeon.
6. ???
7. Say "de nada" when your friend thanks you for the new heart.
Redaction is "preparing for publication" by formatting and editing.
Nobody ever adds or modifies a word in a FOIA request. They only remove words.
All they do is xerox the source pages, elide the confidential information by drawing over it in opaque ink, re-xerox the result, and send that.
It's censorship. No less than when the military used to snip out sensitive text from snail-mail between troops and home. People would get letters that looked like swiss cheese. I wonder if anyone was ever sneaky enough to use that as a means of sending coded messages back home. You know, write a fake letter with sure-to-be-censored words in the right places, then when the letter gets home the recipient places it over a code list and the real message shows through the holes...
...no they're not... /.
>I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say eliding is a form of redaction.
Well, elision, insertion, and emendation are your three major textual changes, and all are used in redaction, but so are kerning, columnizing, etc.
And what happens to these documents isn't really redaction, nor even editing. It's censoring, but they don't want to use that word, because they have no moral character to draw upon to explain why it's just a word.
I use elide all the time. And have to explain it a lot.
how righteous of you. in fact, if you look and know a little about intelligence analysis techniques, i think you'll find that the NSA already know about this approach for 'interpreting' typewritten redacts, even as far back as the 50's.
I just wish the intelligence community and their unintelligent sycophants the press would stop using redact to mean elide.
Especially as a noun, because a "typewritten redact" is like a copy editor with ink hammered onto him, somewhere.
I doubt it. If it isn't a tax, why not roll it into the monthly rate?
Because you might argue "Hey! You can't raise the rate! I have a contract!"
The telecom industry is now nothing more than a way to test out new, duplicitous business models on the pure act of calling your mom.
How would you like a beowulf cluster of...
ah, who'm I kidding?
Do you suppose Microsoft patented Transparent Government and that's why we can't have one?
>the adult content wasn't an afterthought
Lasseter and Stanton do almost nothing as an afterthought. You're trying to gild a lily, there.
You want raunchy toons, watch SKG's attempts. Antz was the uptown version of A Bug's Life. And suffered thereby.
>Product tie-ins.
The result of the collaborative method in a world where your collaborators are greedy sleaze. Pixar remains independent of Disney and avoids its cadres of climbers and grubbers. But some day it, too will be bought by someone with more money than heart, and will be coopted to the dark side of the movie industry.
But there's a new hope: you can WRITE YOUR OWN MOVIES AND SEND THEM TO HOLLYWOOD. If they're any good, you'll be the next Lasseter and Stanton, and if not, then you'll lose the power to fly and go back to being a mortal guy in tights and a cape.
So now we've outsourced the frontiers of democracy, too...
I stopped counting names that should already be in the CHOF at 10.
These guys are way behind the curve.
What's with AMD?
"When we feel there's a market need?"
These morons introduced 64-bit chips 5 years before anyone cared, and crippled the technology by making it straight IA32 with more bits.
The market needs dual-core CPUs to advance.
There's no way to get CPUs faster any more without reaching current levels that no power supply can reasonably handle in that space (hint: 100 Watts at 1.2 Volts is 83 Amps).
The only solution is to divide the computation among several processors and parallelize.
AMD's response is clanking hollow. They're already playing catch-up as you read this.