And never mind that it was the French who helped us in getting rid of the British. Oh, yeah that whole statue of Liberty thing.
Yeah, but that was purely by accident. It was fall out from the Napoleonic Wars. Britain and France were fighting in Europe too, it's just that it was beneficial for the american settlers that this had repercussions in America. We were more worried about what was going on on our doorstep rather than across the Atlantic so we didn't try to hard. The French Revolution had taken place not that long before so they related to a fight against "Imperial Agression".
By the way, the French Foreign Legion is mainly foreigners, i.e. non French citizens, hence it's name.
Nearly no DVDs in the UK are only 4:3 unless they were TV broadcasts formatted in that way. Most are 16:9 with a few have two versions of the movie. Recently all of Sky's PPV movies went wide screen. Before then I'd only watch the widescreen one's anyway.
Most subscribers to TV (Satelite and Cable) receive digitally. You can also receive digital TV down your Antenna for free. Digital transmissions and the receivers can support pure widescreen, letter box widescreen (for 4:3 TVs) and 'pan and scan'. In most cases the processing has already been done but you can in theory transmit a widescreen signal together the pan and scan data. Many movies and new programs on analogue are widescreen (letterbox) broadcasts.
UK Widescreen TVs support both line 23 WSS and SCART signalling which means the TV can select the most appropriate mode in which to display the video. They can display 4:3 either 'squashed' or with black side borders. A 36" TV will be similar to a 26" 4:3 in that mode. Many of these TVs now have terrestrial (antenna based) digital decoders built in.
I really don't understand this aversion to widescreen in the US or is it just that you're a bit behind us and don't have the broadcasts yet to warrant it?
Only in the US. Most new broadcasts in the UK are widescreen. All our digital STBs support widescreen. Most want widescreen over here. I have one 4:3 DVD (The Crow) and was so disappointed that I couldn't find a 16:9 copy. Recently a new release with the widescreen format version on it came out. So I've bought it again. Now all I need to get is my 48" plasma display. 4:3 sucks.
Re:This will kill X in the long term.
on
DRI Comes to DirectFB
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. It's a retrograde step. The reason that X has been around for so long is because it's a design that works. Hell, even NT, 2K and XP have client server graphics at the core, just not as good as X.
The problem with Linux is not the X design but the implementation. XFree is rather boaty and slow. What we need is a new version of X rather than to throw away the protocol. There are plenty of established extensions to support graphics, overlays and the like when you need them.
You must also remember that Linux != UNIX. X wouldn't die even if the kiddies stopped using it on their Lienucks boxes. I have Solaris and IRIX machines at home which use X. Your NVidia graphics card was probably designed with the help of engineers who developed IRIX's X implementation.
If someone wants to do a framebuffer implementation than fine. The whole point of open source is that it allows choice. If someone wants something and they are willing to develop it for the community, that's great. Open source also exhibits evolution, survival of the fittest. Those which are are found wanting fall by the wayside.
X is still here because it works, plain and simple. Throwing it away would be madness.
So you need to fix your society first. Are you really telling me that a predominantly white voting population would *not* support an equal education system. That's terrible.
The old conumdrum - The best thing about democracy is that everyone gets to vote. The worst thing about democracy is that *anyone* gets to vote!
Solution - introduce a voting qualification. You can't vote until you have satisfied some kind of requirement, i.e. exhibited an understanding of politics, issues or whatever. Such as the rules od democracy, basic economics etc etc.
You cannot argue that this biases any particular group because:
(a) if there's a problem which means a particular group wont get the education so some of it's members can get qualified, fix the problem which is one of education.
(b) if anyone cannot qualify then they shouldn't be voting anyway. Should you allow someone to vote who doesn't comprehend the basics of what they are voting for?
Where does it say that in that link? I've had a good look and can't find it, although I may be blind. Having said that it strikes me that it is daft to allow in patents that cover an area which you personally don't allow to be patented. I still believe that US Software Patents are not valid in the UK and if you have a case (like a succesful suit) that disproves that I would like a link.
Shows you how much you know. The *UK* Patent Office's defines a patent as so.
Notice the important bit:
An invention is not patentable if it is:
* a discovery;
* a scientific theory or mathematical method;
* an aesthetic creation such as a literary, dramatic or artistic work;
* a scheme or method for performing a mental act, playing a game or doing business; * the presentation of information, or a computer program.
US patents are *NOT* enforceable in the UK. You need a UK patent for that and as the UK doesn't recognise software patents, software patents are unenforceable in the UK.
Ok my statement about Europe may be a little broad but it's true for this country.
Jesus of Nazareth did not die so we could enjoy eggs and chocolate bunnies!
No he died so that christians could usurp a perfectly good pagan spring time festival. Eggs, bunnies, and spring flowers are fine examples of birth and rebirth. I for one love watching my garden/yard resurect itself around this time.
To be a sad pendant Ford don't own the trademark (or what ever it is) on Thunderbird. They licenced it from Triumph who still own, hence the new Triumph Thunderbird motorcycle.
" When you show that graphic violence then all you will do is either get people to react emotionally rather than logically or desensitize them to the violence."
Where as I would argue that the film of smart bombs clinically taking out targets also desensitises people. I understand your position I just don't agree with it.
I agree that you should not manipulate the media to manipulate the populace, I think you should publish graphic images to remind them of the consequences of their decisions. The media should inform and sanitised news stories to not give the whole picture.
" I am sure you think we could have talked Hitler into being a nice guy as well, if we just would have asked politely. "
You should remember that Hitler was a democratically elected leader of his nation. He was elected by a significant but not overwhelmingly significant (suggesting it wasn't rigged) vote. The vast majority (as white anglo saxons) had nothing to fear from him.
" I don't understand this. Why is it so necessary to see the mangled bodies of soldiers. On several sites now I've seen a poor young girl with half her foot blown off. I've seen some Iraqi soldiers with huge holes in their head and brains everywhere. It just isn't necessary."
Because this war is in danger of becoming a video game war with us in the west being sanitised to the destruction and death being broadcast on our screens. We need to know that war is bad, war is horrible, war kills and war mames. One of the most memorable images from the Vietnam war is that of the Vietnamese child running along a road towards the camera with her skin melted off by napalm. Why should this war be sanitised just in case it upsets those viewing the images over their breakfast.
"ok, here we go.. the auto was invented in Germany? maybe one design. the auto was DEVELOPED in the USA (Ford Motors) first mass production."
The internal combustion engine and the diesel engine were both invented in Europe. They are fairly vital to the motorcar. Yes Henry Ford did invent mass production of the car and bring it to the masses but from that point onwards it wasn't just the USA which invovated in motor vehicle design.
"This Country the one that brought us the telegraph, lightbulb..."
The light bulb was invented by Joseph Swan in the UK but Edison being owner of the electric company ended up being known as the inventor of the lightbulb. Even worse, Edison didn't use the carbon filament at first (he used bamboo), that was suggested by one of his employees and he claimed it as his own.
"afterall, we STILL have 80% of the worlds wealth"
Using what criteria? US GDP is $10 trillion, Japan's GDP is $4 trillion, Germany's GDP is $2 trillion, UK GDP is $2 trillion, CIA Factbook. External debt US $862 billion, Japan N/A, UK N/A, Germany N/A.
The US has some very bright people. But it also has some very dumb people and it's education of non US matters needs improvement. A significant proportion of the US's schoolchildren don't know where Canada is. It seems that the knowledge of the rest of the world isn't much better.
The US is alright but most non US citizens will tell you that it's not as great as you all believe it is and that's partly the problem with the US's image. Your nation does come across as arogant treating the rest of the world as country bumkins.
Re:Content still available...
on
4l-j4z333ra 0wn3d
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"Wrong in a couple of ways, I think. First, Al Jazeera, while most cerainly outside U.S. control, is far from being outside U.S. influence. It is truly said that "he who angers you controls you". Al Jazeera is run by people so opposed to the United States and its policies that they violate every tenet of journalistic professionalism in their efforts to make Americans look bad. The result is a "news" service that disdains superficialities like fact-checking and citing sources. They are worse than useless for stories involving the U.S."
It is interesting to note that the Iraqi minsters themselves are complaining about Al Jazeera because of they believe it is pro the war, or at least not anti the US. It may relay what Iraqi TV is saying as well as other Arab TV channels, but so does the BBC (which also runs Iraqi press conferences live. Boy are those speeches long and rambling). It is up to the viewer to decide as to the validity of the information it is receiving. In amoungst the crap there is news. They will have reporters where the west cannot and news from the military is not always exactly accurate. The US said they'd picked up the pilots from the downed Apache, but they turn up on Iraqi TV.
I believe anyone who is pro free speech has to support the channel.
"Heres a thought.. DONT SPEED! Howsabout that! I _hate_ chugging down the highway at highway speed, then suddenly being down to 45 (where the limit is 55) because some paranoiac at the front saw a cop and is now "making up" for going 70 before."
That's the argument against exact cut off at the speed limit. If a driver is going to be pulled the moment they go over the speed limit they'll spend forever driving around staring at the speedo rather than concentrating on the road. If you give them a leaway then they'll not worry about it so much and actually look where they are going.
Anyway it's not a speed that kills it's going too fast, where too fast is subjective. If it's raining or foggy you should have a lower limit. If there's more traffic then lower the limit. If it's a fine sunny day and there are few cars around, raise the limit. On a motorway early on a fine summer's Sunday morning which is total empty, crank the car or motorbike right up [1] (As I have done on the bike 130+mph it was fun)? What's going to happen? You won't hit anything because there's nothing to hit, you can see for miles and the road surface is good. Driving in a residential area or past a school you need to keep it right down because kids are about.
In the UK they have implemented variable speed limits on a section of the London Orbital Motorway and it appears to work well. Cameras enforce the speed limit which varies according to conditions. It apparently reduces both congestion and emissions. The bigest complaint from the motoring organisations is that it doesn't increase the speed limit above the UK National Speed Limit (70mph) where appropriate.
Technically speed limits aren't necessary in the UK as there is there are the two catch all offences of "Driving without due care and attention" and "Dangerous driving". And if you're driving too fast then you are surely driving dangerously. So in an ideal world speed limits wouldn't be required because people would assess the conditions and drive appropriately. Unfortunately this isn't an ideal world and some people are just plain bad drivers.
Absolute speed doesn't kill. In appropriate speed kills absolutely.
"For the time it was high-end. Nobody had 256 color displays, you were getting 'high end' EGA cards with 32 colors, and 256 colors was available for several thousand bucks. Your high-end machines were 32-bit and aproaching 33 Mhz, with 32-mb of disk space and, if you were rich, had 16 MB of RAM. A more common scenario was a 16-bit machine with a 20-mb hard disk, 12 or 16 Mhz, and up 2 MB of ram"
Some of us were using AmigaDOS or RISC OS and had 32bit machines, thousands or millions of colours and decent sound support all for a reasonable price. 80's PCs were crap!
I'm sorry but I think you'll find in the most of the world it does. If I start attacking, lets say Belgians (ie. people holding a belgian passport), it would be considered racism. There are white West Indians for example, who's families have been living there as long as those of African origin. If someone started attacking West Indians (generally) but only the attacks against those with African ancestry were considered racism, that is in itself racist!
What about the Italians or the Irish. Both comprise a large proportion of the US population. Is discriminating against someone because they're Irish or Italian racism? If so why? What constitutes being Irish or Italian. Place of birth? Can't be most of them are born in the US. Genetics or family history? So someone who isn't genetically Irish and wasn't born in Ireland but has an Irish passport isn't Irish?
It's a tough one isn't it. Just how do you determine when discrimination is racism or not? I think the only fair approach is that any discrimintation due to nationality, race, colour or creed is unfair and must be stopped.
Slashdot Mirror
And never mind that it was the French who helped us in getting rid of the British. Oh, yeah that whole statue of Liberty thing.
Yeah, but that was purely by accident. It was fall out from the Napoleonic Wars. Britain and France were fighting in Europe too, it's just that it was beneficial for the american settlers that this had repercussions in America. We were more worried about what was going on on our doorstep rather than across the Atlantic so we didn't try to hard. The French Revolution had taken place not that long before so they related to a fight against "Imperial Agression".
By the way, the French Foreign Legion is mainly foreigners, i.e. non French citizens, hence it's name.
I got dissuaded from calling my dog "You-bastard" just so that I could stand in the park and shout, "You-bastard, you-bastard, come here you-bastard!"
Bad form to follow up your own post I know but since then I've found the following links. Firstly details about the BBC's first widescreen broadcast some six years ago. Then their current info about widescreen. Aparently 40% of their broadcasts are widescreen. And finally a news article about someone who was really worked up about widescreen TVs.
Nearly no DVDs in the UK are only 4:3 unless they were TV broadcasts formatted in that way. Most are 16:9 with a few have two versions of the movie. Recently all of Sky's PPV movies went wide screen. Before then I'd only watch the widescreen one's anyway.
Most subscribers to TV (Satelite and Cable) receive digitally. You can also receive digital TV down your Antenna for free. Digital transmissions and the receivers can support pure widescreen, letter box widescreen (for 4:3 TVs) and 'pan and scan'. In most cases the processing has already been done but you can in theory transmit a widescreen signal together the pan and scan data. Many movies and new programs on analogue are widescreen (letterbox) broadcasts.
UK Widescreen TVs support both line 23 WSS and SCART signalling which means the TV can select the most appropriate mode in which to display the video. They can display 4:3 either 'squashed' or with black side borders. A 36" TV will be similar to a 26" 4:3 in that mode. Many of these TVs now have terrestrial (antenna based) digital decoders built in.
I really don't understand this aversion to widescreen in the US or is it just that you're a bit behind us and don't have the broadcasts yet to warrant it?
Only in the US. Most new broadcasts in the UK are widescreen. All our digital STBs support widescreen. Most want widescreen over here. I have one 4:3 DVD (The Crow) and was so disappointed that I couldn't find a 16:9 copy. Recently a new release with the widescreen format version on it came out. So I've bought it again. Now all I need to get is my 48" plasma display. 4:3 sucks.
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. It's a retrograde step. The reason that X has been around for so long is because it's a design that works. Hell, even NT, 2K and XP have client server graphics at the core, just not as good as X.
The problem with Linux is not the X design but the implementation. XFree is rather boaty and slow. What we need is a new version of X rather than to throw away the protocol. There are plenty of established extensions to support graphics, overlays and the like when you need them.
You must also remember that Linux != UNIX. X wouldn't die even if the kiddies stopped using it on their Lienucks boxes. I have Solaris and IRIX machines at home which use X. Your NVidia graphics card was probably designed with the help of engineers who developed IRIX's X implementation.
If someone wants to do a framebuffer implementation than fine. The whole point of open source is that it allows choice. If someone wants something and they are willing to develop it for the community, that's great. Open source also exhibits evolution, survival of the fittest. Those which are are found wanting fall by the wayside.
X is still here because it works, plain and simple. Throwing it away would be madness.
...the guy must have an extremely small penis.
So you need to fix your society first. Are you really telling me that a predominantly white voting population would *not* support an equal education system. That's terrible.
The old conumdrum - The best thing about democracy is that everyone gets to vote. The worst thing about democracy is that *anyone* gets to vote!
Solution - introduce a voting qualification. You can't vote until you have satisfied some kind of requirement, i.e. exhibited an understanding of politics, issues or whatever. Such as the rules od democracy, basic economics etc etc.
You cannot argue that this biases any particular group because:
(a) if there's a problem which means a particular group wont get the education so some of it's members can get qualified, fix the problem which is one of education.
(b) if anyone cannot qualify then they shouldn't be voting anyway. Should you allow someone to vote who doesn't comprehend the basics of what they are voting for?
Where does it say that in that link? I've had a good look and can't find it, although I may be blind. Having said that it strikes me that it is daft to allow in patents that cover an area which you personally don't allow to be patented. I still believe that US Software Patents are not valid in the UK and if you have a case (like a succesful suit) that disproves that I would like a link.
I know it's bad form to follow up one's own reply but here's an interesting a record of a discussion last year about Software Patents in Europe.
Basically, at the moment, the EU doesn't recognise them!
Shows you how much you know. The *UK* Patent Office's defines a patent as so.
Notice the important bit:
An invention is not patentable if it is:
* a discovery;
* a scientific theory or mathematical method;
* an aesthetic creation such as a literary, dramatic or artistic work;
* a scheme or method for performing a mental act, playing a game or doing business;
* the presentation of information, or a computer program.
US patents are *NOT* enforceable in the UK. You need a UK patent for that and as the UK doesn't recognise software patents, software patents are unenforceable in the UK.
Ok my statement about Europe may be a little broad but it's true for this country.
Ah but Linux comes from Europe and software patents are unenforceable in Europe.
What about IRIX?
Sorry I was a little harsh. I like your analogy.
Bright blessings.
GBB
Jesus of Nazareth did not die so we could enjoy eggs and chocolate bunnies!
No he died so that christians could usurp a perfectly good pagan spring time festival. Eggs, bunnies, and spring flowers are fine examples of birth and rebirth. I for one love watching my garden/yard resurect itself around this time.
To be a sad pendant Ford don't own the trademark (or what ever it is) on Thunderbird. They licenced it from Triumph who still own, hence the new Triumph Thunderbird motorcycle.
" When you show that graphic violence then all you will do is either get people to react emotionally rather than logically or desensitize them to the violence."
Where as I would argue that the film of smart bombs clinically taking out targets also desensitises people. I understand your position I just don't agree with it.
I agree that you should not manipulate the media to manipulate the populace, I think you should publish graphic images to remind them of the consequences of their decisions. The media should inform and sanitised news stories to not give the whole picture.
" I am sure you think we could have talked Hitler into being a nice guy as well, if we just would have asked politely. "
You should remember that Hitler was a democratically elected leader of his nation. He was elected by a significant but not overwhelmingly significant (suggesting it wasn't rigged) vote. The vast majority (as white anglo saxons) had nothing to fear from him.
" I don't understand this. Why is it so necessary to see the mangled bodies of soldiers. On several sites now I've seen a poor young girl with half her foot blown off. I've seen some Iraqi soldiers with huge holes in their head and brains everywhere. It just isn't necessary."
Because this war is in danger of becoming a video game war with us in the west being sanitised to the destruction and death being broadcast on our screens. We need to know that war is bad, war is horrible, war kills and war mames. One of the most memorable images from the Vietnam war is that of the Vietnamese child running along a road towards the camera with her skin melted off by napalm. Why should this war be sanitised just in case it upsets those viewing the images over their breakfast.
"ok, here we go.. the auto was invented in Germany? maybe one design. the auto was DEVELOPED in the USA (Ford Motors) first mass production."
The internal combustion engine and the diesel engine were both invented in Europe. They are fairly vital to the motorcar. Yes Henry Ford did invent mass production of the car and bring it to the masses but from that point onwards it wasn't just the USA which invovated in motor vehicle design.
"This Country the one that brought us the telegraph, lightbulb..."
The light bulb was invented by Joseph Swan in the UK but Edison being owner of the electric company ended up being known as the inventor of the lightbulb. Even worse, Edison didn't use the carbon filament at first (he used bamboo), that was suggested by one of his employees and he claimed it as his own.
"afterall, we STILL have 80% of the worlds wealth"
Using what criteria? US GDP is $10 trillion, Japan's GDP is $4 trillion, Germany's GDP is $2 trillion, UK GDP is $2 trillion, CIA Factbook. External debt US $862 billion, Japan N/A, UK N/A, Germany N/A.
The US has some very bright people. But it also has some very dumb people and it's education of non US matters needs improvement. A significant proportion of the US's schoolchildren don't know where Canada is. It seems that the knowledge of the rest of the world isn't much better.
The US is alright but most non US citizens will tell you that it's not as great as you all believe it is and that's partly the problem with the US's image. Your nation does come across as arogant treating the rest of the world as country bumkins.
"Wrong in a couple of ways, I think. First, Al Jazeera, while most cerainly outside U.S. control, is far from being outside U.S. influence. It is truly said that "he who angers you controls you". Al Jazeera is run by people so opposed to the United States and its policies that they violate every tenet of journalistic professionalism in their efforts to make Americans look bad. The result is a "news" service that disdains superficialities like fact-checking and citing sources. They are worse than useless for stories involving the U.S."
It is interesting to note that the Iraqi minsters themselves are complaining about Al Jazeera because of they believe it is pro the war, or at least not anti the US. It may relay what Iraqi TV is saying as well as other Arab TV channels, but so does the BBC (which also runs Iraqi press conferences live. Boy are those speeches long and rambling). It is up to the viewer to decide as to the validity of the information it is receiving. In amoungst the crap there is news. They will have reporters where the west cannot and news from the military is not always exactly accurate. The US said they'd picked up the pilots from the downed Apache, but they turn up on Iraqi TV.
I believe anyone who is pro free speech has to support the channel.
"Heres a thought.. DONT SPEED! Howsabout that! I _hate_ chugging down the highway at highway speed, then suddenly being down to 45 (where the limit is 55) because some paranoiac at the front saw a cop and is now "making up" for going 70 before."
That's the argument against exact cut off at the speed limit. If a driver is going to be pulled the moment they go over the speed limit they'll spend forever driving around staring at the speedo rather than concentrating on the road. If you give them a leaway then they'll not worry about it so much and actually look where they are going.
Anyway it's not a speed that kills it's going too fast, where too fast is subjective. If it's raining or foggy you should have a lower limit. If there's more traffic then lower the limit. If it's a fine sunny day and there are few cars around, raise the limit. On a motorway early on a fine summer's Sunday morning which is total empty, crank the car or motorbike right up [1] (As I have done on the bike 130+mph it was fun)? What's going to happen? You won't hit anything because there's nothing to hit, you can see for miles and the road surface is good. Driving in a residential area or past a school you need to keep it right down because kids are about.
In the UK they have implemented variable speed limits on a section of the London Orbital Motorway and it appears to work well. Cameras enforce the speed limit which varies according to conditions. It apparently reduces both congestion and emissions. The bigest complaint from the motoring organisations is that it doesn't increase the speed limit above the UK National Speed Limit (70mph) where appropriate.
Technically speed limits aren't necessary in the UK as there is there are the two catch all offences of "Driving without due care and attention" and "Dangerous driving". And if you're driving too fast then you are surely driving dangerously. So in an ideal world speed limits wouldn't be required because people would assess the conditions and drive appropriately. Unfortunately this isn't an ideal world and some people are just plain bad drivers.
Absolute speed doesn't kill. In appropriate speed kills absolutely.
[1] Of course this is where legal!
"For the time it was high-end. Nobody had 256 color displays, you were getting 'high end' EGA cards with 32 colors, and 256 colors was available for several thousand bucks. Your high-end machines were 32-bit and aproaching 33 Mhz, with 32-mb of disk space and, if you were rich, had 16 MB of RAM. A more common scenario was a 16-bit machine with a 20-mb hard disk, 12 or 16 Mhz, and up 2 MB of ram"
Some of us were using AmigaDOS or RISC OS and had 32bit machines, thousands or millions of colours and decent sound support all for a reasonable price. 80's PCs were crap!
"Citizenship in a country does not connote race"
I'm sorry but I think you'll find in the most of the world it does. If I start attacking, lets say Belgians (ie. people holding a belgian passport), it would be considered racism. There are white West Indians for example, who's families have been living there as long as those of African origin. If someone started attacking West Indians (generally) but only the attacks against those with African ancestry were considered racism, that is in itself racist!
What about the Italians or the Irish. Both comprise a large proportion of the US population. Is discriminating against someone because they're Irish or Italian racism? If so why? What constitutes being Irish or Italian. Place of birth? Can't be most of them are born in the US. Genetics or family history? So someone who isn't genetically Irish and wasn't born in Ireland but has an Irish passport isn't Irish?
It's a tough one isn't it. Just how do you determine when discrimination is racism or not? I think the only fair approach is that any discrimintation due to nationality, race, colour or creed is unfair and must be stopped.