This has been my complaint all along. It happens every time. Im doing a web site for someone, and they decide, "well, im going to try and update it myself".
Of course, they dont know HTML, and decide to use FrontPage Express (you know, the one that comes with IE.) They think they did everything right. They upload it, and its TOTALLY SCREWED UP!!!! FrontPage takes the working, hand-coded HTML, and FSCKS with it until its a bunch of garbage, with about 80 tags replacing all my tags, plus the code is totally unreadable because it removed all the line breaks. I have to re-upload the old page, and update it again.
I even tried it. I made a page look exactly the way I wanted it with manual HTML, then attempted to construct the same page in Dreamweaver, Mozilla Composer, and FrontPage Express. The FrontPage version didnt even look right in IE!!! All three of the WYSIWYG pages had filesizes 3-4 times as much as the hand coded version, and my hand coded version was the only one that passed W3C verification. Mozilla Composer and Dreamweaver did a better job than FrontPage, but still not acceptable.
When digital pixels can be made smaller than the grains in film and a CCD the size of a negative, then it will be fair to say that digital imaging has overtaken film.
That will take a while. The pixels would have to be able to be smaller than the grains in the finest grained film. I don't know much about colour film, but at least in black and white film, there are several films with grain so fine they can be enlarged to 8x10 or larger with NO grain visible to the naked eye. One way photographers often focus an enlarger is with a "Grain Focuser" which basically magnifies the grain of the image being projected onto the photographic paper. They then focus the enlarger until each grain is sharp. This is much more effective than focusing until, say, a sharp edge in the picture is sharp. Recently, I developed a roll of Fuji Neopan Acros 100. Although I did not dilute the developer when I developed the film, the grain was still so small I had difficulty focusing the enlarger, and this is with 35mm film. Remember there are still cameras around that use 8x10 FILM! An 8 inch by 10 inch ccd with resolution equal to or better than that of good black and white film would cost a fortune to manufacture, and purchase.
Interesting thought: I am in a photography class, and the teacher told us that if photographing people in a public place, if they will be recognizable in the photograph, you should have them sign a "model release form" if you will be making money from the picture. Otherwise, they can sue you. You have to arrange with them terms for you to use their image, usually like you send them a free copy of the picture, pay them some money, etc. Would this situation be any different? I dont know the exact laws that apply in the situation, but it seems there must be something. Of course, how you define "easily recognizable" in this situation has to be considered...
There is a version of GIMP for Windows. Do a Google search for GIMP Windows, and you should find it. The GIMP is a very nice program. It is not as stable under Windows as it is under Linux, but it is comparable with Photoshop. From what I can tell, it is quite a bit harder to use, but a LOT more extensible than Photoshop. Of course, it is Open Source, so you can extend it however much you want hehe.
The problem with this is that the glass would move the picture away from the scanner element, which would cause the image to be out of focus. Even the thickness of a thin sheet of glass would most likely be enough to bring the image out of focus.
The best way to do this is to sort the pictures by size, and put, say, 3 4x6 photos on the bed at once, all landscape. Tell the scanner to scan 7200 pixels high, 3600 pixels wide, and save all the 4x6 images this way. Now, use image manipulation programs (there are some programs that are commandline based for resizing, cropping, etc) to write a script that divides each image into 3 images 2400 pixels high each, save them with auto-numbered filenames, and delete the 3 picture images. Open the whole folder in xv or something, and go thru each photo with next, rotating as nescisary.
Bayer AG has given a lot to the world: Asprin and Heroin.
Didn't they also participate in many of the experiments performed at concentration camps during the holocaust? I seem to remember hearing something of that...
Screenshots? How do you get screenshots from a console game? Im glad people are finally going back to console games. Now I wont even need to install X to play games!!
I NEVER said OpenGL == DirectX. I merely said that OpenGL is an alternative to DirectX, and is more portable. OpenGL is open, while DirectX is a Microsoft-created "standard" (according to them.) OpenGL is portable across Linux, Windows, and other operating systems, while DirectX is Windows only. Please read my posts more carefully before flaming me.
Well, my 486-50 laptop only has 12MiB of RAM and a 127MiB hard drive, and it runs Slackware 3.5 just fine, with X, gcc, fvwm2, and 53MiB hard disk space left over!
DirectX did some good though as modern games just wouldn't be possible without it (imagine the development costs/times for writing drivers for every 3d accelerator).
What about OpenGL? OpenGL is at least as powerful as DirectX, and very widely supported under Linux, Windows and (I think) Macintosh. It is an open standard, and is widely used for games.
If you write a game using OpenGL, you will be able to write for Windows, and have it port quickly and easily to Linux, or vice versa
/me looks over at the 320k drive that he installed in his server in case he decided to back up some of the floppies from one of his two XTs in the basement...
d00d. This is like the fifth post like this I have seen. The size of the sensor does NOT change the focal length, it just uses less of the image. In 35mm photography, which is 36mm X 24mm, a lens with a 50mm focal length is a "normal" lens. This means that a 50mm lens most closely approximates natural perspective and field of view. In medium format photography, since the size of the film is larger, (usually 6cm X 6cm) the focal length required to get the same perspective and field of view is about 80mm. A lens shorter than a normal lens will have increced field of view, and exaggerated perspective. Nearby objects will appear unnaturally large, and distant objects very small. A lens longer than a normal lens will, however, have a narrower field of view, and flattened perspective.
Then there is the aperture. This is a collection of metal flaps inside the camera that opens and closes to control the amount of light entering the camera. It is measured in f stops. The aperture of the lens is the focal length divided by the size of the hole in the centre of the flaps.
As far as digital photography goes, I want a digital camera that can go full manual if I want it too. Manual focus, manual aperture, manual shutter speed, all adjustable with dials, NOT buttons. I HATE buttons. I want to be able to change the aperture with a flick of my wrist, not by pressing a button 8 times and navigating some menu. My 35mm SLR can take better pictures than all but the most expensive digital cameras (which are not 11 megapixel stand alone camera, but are digital backs for medium or large format cameras) I know someone who has a Hasselblad medium format camera, that takes 6x6cm film. It takes pictures sharper and more detailed than any digital camera could take, probably for several decades or more into the future. Plus, show me one digital camera that will still be working after 25+ years of use (like my dad's 35mm SLR) with only one trip to the shop to be cleaned, lubircated, and adjusted. Even many modern 35mm cameras probably wont last that long, and many old cameras last even longer.
Many films can reach 200 lines/mm of resolution. This means that it can distinctly show 200 separate lines in each mm. This would mean an equivalent digital sensor would have to have 200 pixels in 1mm to match the resolution. BTW, 200 lines/mm at 24mmX36mm is 34.56 megapixels. Sorry, but 11 megapixels just doesnt cut it. Call me when it reaches 25 megapixels in a 35mm sized sensor. I might be interested then.
Or, if you wanted to do some real hacking, you could figure out the pinout of the NuBus slot in the dock port, and wire up a NuBus ethernet card to it. That would be fun, and good solder practice;)
Actually, what happened is Linus was using Minix, and was frustrated by it's terminal emulator. He decided he did not wish to code a new one in Minix, (i don't remember why, something about limitations of the OS iirc) and instead wrote it in assembly, and just booted it off a floppy disk. He used that for a while, but then needed to transfer files, so he wrote in code to access a minix file system. After a while, it started to become more and more like an OS, and it eventually became an os when he got bash running on it, and accidentally wiped his minix partition. This is what i read in "Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary" by Linus Torvalds and David Diamond. (a good book btw)
Actually, I don't think it could even hurt Cisco very much, or at all. The people using Cisco stuff at a company arent going to do this, because it would piss off their bosses to not have the support from Cisco, not to mention the legal implications. The home users who just want a firewall for cheap will set up a Linux or OpenBSD firewall instead, rather than purchacing the expensive flash card and stuff. The only people likely to do this are the people who want to LEARN how to use the Cisco PIX, which actally gets MORE business for Cisco, as these people who are now learning how to use it by real experience could not AFFORD to purchace a real one in the first place. Once they know how to use them, and learn how powerful they are (i dont know if this is true, but they might be pretty powerful) they may even have their work purchace one for the corperate network. That's MORE business for Cisco.
I liked the ones where you had to look something up in the manual, like the name of a particular monster, or the wingspan of a particular airplane, top speed of a particular tank, etc. I remeber for Wolfenstein Spear of Destiny if you would just type "snoops" at the question screen you could get past it.
the blank CD tarrif is slated to go from $0.29 to $0.79 a disc
Isn't that tariff only for the "Music" cds that are required by the stand-alone cd recorders that you hook up to your stereo? If you just burn them in your computer, you can use the "Data" CD-Rs that have no tariff on them. Or are they imposing a tariff on those as well? Hope they are ready to have people pissed off at them when it costs more to back up their word documents.
Slashdot Mirror
This has been my complaint all along. It happens every time. Im doing a web site for someone, and they decide, "well, im going to try and update it myself".
Of course, they dont know HTML, and decide to use FrontPage Express (you know, the one that comes with IE.) They think they did everything right. They upload it, and its TOTALLY SCREWED UP!!!! FrontPage takes the working, hand-coded HTML, and FSCKS with it until its a bunch of garbage, with about 80 tags replacing all my tags, plus the code is totally unreadable because it removed all the line breaks. I have to re-upload the old page, and update it again.
I even tried it. I made a page look exactly the way I wanted it with manual HTML, then attempted to construct the same page in Dreamweaver, Mozilla Composer, and FrontPage Express. The FrontPage version didnt even look right in IE!!! All three of the WYSIWYG pages had filesizes 3-4 times as much as the hand coded version, and my hand coded version was the only one that passed W3C verification. Mozilla Composer and Dreamweaver did a better job than FrontPage, but still not acceptable.
Uhh, thats an announcement of version 0.1. This is 0.2. Not a duplicate story if you look at the title...
That will take a while. The pixels would have to be able to be smaller than the grains in the finest grained film. I don't know much about colour film, but at least in black and white film, there are several films with grain so fine they can be enlarged to 8x10 or larger with NO grain visible to the naked eye. One way photographers often focus an enlarger is with a "Grain Focuser" which basically magnifies the grain of the image being projected onto the photographic paper. They then focus the enlarger until each grain is sharp. This is much more effective than focusing until, say, a sharp edge in the picture is sharp. Recently, I developed a roll of Fuji Neopan Acros 100. Although I did not dilute the developer when I developed the film, the grain was still so small I had difficulty focusing the enlarger, and this is with 35mm film. Remember there are still cameras around that use 8x10 FILM! An 8 inch by 10 inch ccd with resolution equal to or better than that of good black and white film would cost a fortune to manufacture, and purchase.
Interesting thought: I am in a photography class, and the teacher told us that if photographing people in a public place, if they will be recognizable in the photograph, you should have them sign a "model release form" if you will be making money from the picture. Otherwise, they can sue you. You have to arrange with them terms for you to use their image, usually like you send them a free copy of the picture, pay them some money, etc. Would this situation be any different? I dont know the exact laws that apply in the situation, but it seems there must be something. Of course, how you define "easily recognizable" in this situation has to be considered...
Yeah just mount 2-3 of those to the bottom of your couch. It would work just as well, and only end up costing you $19,425 less.
There is a version of GIMP for Windows. Do a Google search for GIMP Windows, and you should find it. The GIMP is a very nice program. It is not as stable under Windows as it is under Linux, but it is comparable with Photoshop. From what I can tell, it is quite a bit harder to use, but a LOT more extensible than Photoshop. Of course, it is Open Source, so you can extend it however much you want hehe.
The problem with this is that the glass would move the picture away from the scanner element, which would cause the image to be out of focus. Even the thickness of a thin sheet of glass would most likely be enough to bring the image out of focus.
The best way to do this is to sort the pictures by size, and put, say, 3 4x6 photos on the bed at once, all landscape. Tell the scanner to scan 7200 pixels high, 3600 pixels wide, and save all the 4x6 images this way. Now, use image manipulation programs (there are some programs that are commandline based for resizing, cropping, etc) to write a script that divides each image into 3 images 2400 pixels high each, save them with auto-numbered filenames, and delete the 3 picture images. Open the whole folder in xv or something, and go thru each photo with next, rotating as nescisary.
Didn't they also participate in many of the experiments performed at concentration camps during the holocaust? I seem to remember hearing something of that...
Screenshots? How do you get screenshots from a console game? Im glad people are finally going back to console games. Now I wont even need to install X to play games!!
I NEVER said OpenGL == DirectX. I merely said that OpenGL is an alternative to DirectX, and is more portable. OpenGL is open, while DirectX is a Microsoft-created "standard" (according to them.) OpenGL is portable across Linux, Windows, and other operating systems, while DirectX is Windows only. Please read my posts more carefully before flaming me.
Well, my 486-50 laptop only has 12MiB of RAM and a 127MiB hard drive, and it runs Slackware 3.5 just fine, with X, gcc, fvwm2, and 53MiB hard disk space left over!
What about OpenGL? OpenGL is at least as powerful as DirectX, and very widely supported under Linux, Windows and (I think) Macintosh. It is an open standard, and is widely used for games.
If you write a game using OpenGL, you will be able to write for Windows, and have it port quickly and easily to Linux, or vice versa
/me gets the idea to set up a beowulf cluster of UML "boxes" to learn how to set up a cluster...
I might be thinking of something else, but IIRC, many people called 95OSR2 "Windows 97"
/me looks over at the 320k drive that he installed in his server in case he decided to back up some of the floppies from one of his two XTs in the basement...
what about amu/au^2?
d00d. This is like the fifth post like this I have seen. The size of the sensor does NOT change the focal length, it just uses less of the image. In 35mm photography, which is 36mm X 24mm, a lens with a 50mm focal length is a "normal" lens. This means that a 50mm lens most closely approximates natural perspective and field of view. In medium format photography, since the size of the film is larger, (usually 6cm X 6cm) the focal length required to get the same perspective and field of view is about 80mm. A lens shorter than a normal lens will have increced field of view, and exaggerated perspective. Nearby objects will appear unnaturally large, and distant objects very small. A lens longer than a normal lens will, however, have a narrower field of view, and flattened perspective.
Then there is the aperture. This is a collection of metal flaps inside the camera that opens and closes to control the amount of light entering the camera. It is measured in f stops. The aperture of the lens is the focal length divided by the size of the hole in the centre of the flaps.
As far as digital photography goes, I want a digital camera that can go full manual if I want it too. Manual focus, manual aperture, manual shutter speed, all adjustable with dials, NOT buttons. I HATE buttons. I want to be able to change the aperture with a flick of my wrist, not by pressing a button 8 times and navigating some menu. My 35mm SLR can take better pictures than all but the most expensive digital cameras (which are not 11 megapixel stand alone camera, but are digital backs for medium or large format cameras) I know someone who has a Hasselblad medium format camera, that takes 6x6cm film. It takes pictures sharper and more detailed than any digital camera could take, probably for several decades or more into the future. Plus, show me one digital camera that will still be working after 25+ years of use (like my dad's 35mm SLR) with only one trip to the shop to be cleaned, lubircated, and adjusted. Even many modern 35mm cameras probably wont last that long, and many old cameras last even longer.
Many films can reach 200 lines/mm of resolution. This means that it can distinctly show 200 separate lines in each mm. This would mean an equivalent digital sensor would have to have 200 pixels in 1mm to match the resolution. BTW, 200 lines/mm at 24mmX36mm is 34.56 megapixels. Sorry, but 11 megapixels just doesnt cut it. Call me when it reaches 25 megapixels in a 35mm sized sensor. I might be interested then.
Or, if you wanted to do some real hacking, you could figure out the pinout of the NuBus slot in the dock port, and wire up a NuBus ethernet card to it. That would be fun, and good solder practice ;)
Actually, what happened is Linus was using Minix, and was frustrated by it's terminal emulator. He decided he did not wish to code a new one in Minix, (i don't remember why, something about limitations of the OS iirc) and instead wrote it in assembly, and just booted it off a floppy disk. He used that for a while, but then needed to transfer files, so he wrote in code to access a minix file system. After a while, it started to become more and more like an OS, and it eventually became an os when he got bash running on it, and accidentally wiped his minix partition. This is what i read in "Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary" by Linus Torvalds and David Diamond. (a good book btw)
Actually, I don't think it could even hurt Cisco very much, or at all. The people using Cisco stuff at a company arent going to do this, because it would piss off their bosses to not have the support from Cisco, not to mention the legal implications. The home users who just want a firewall for cheap will set up a Linux or OpenBSD firewall instead, rather than purchacing the expensive flash card and stuff. The only people likely to do this are the people who want to LEARN how to use the Cisco PIX, which actally gets MORE business for Cisco, as these people who are now learning how to use it by real experience could not AFFORD to purchace a real one in the first place. Once they know how to use them, and learn how powerful they are (i dont know if this is true, but they might be pretty powerful) they may even have their work purchace one for the corperate network. That's MORE business for Cisco.
I liked the ones where you had to look something up in the manual, like the name of a particular monster, or the wingspan of a particular airplane, top speed of a particular tank, etc. I remeber for Wolfenstein Spear of Destiny if you would just type "snoops" at the question screen you could get past it.
Isn't that tariff only for the "Music" cds that are required by the stand-alone cd recorders that you hook up to your stereo? If you just burn them in your computer, you can use the "Data" CD-Rs that have no tariff on them. Or are they imposing a tariff on those as well? Hope they are ready to have people pissed off at them when it costs more to back up their word documents.
Either that, or as yet another way to cut down on bandwidth use
We can rebuild him. We have the technology.
Yep! You got it. But it wasnt until he dissed the Enterprise (said it should be hauled away as garbage) that Scotty punched him.