That's it's problem too - it is too focus group-style data driven. A lot of the shows are either reboots or just very, very similar to each other. Less licensed content, more clones of series. I'm considerably less interested than I was.
Thank you - I was amazed not to read this anywhere else. Yes, if the time you start work includes 2008 -> now, then you have been working in a recession.
I started work in 1992. There was a mini recession then too (UK), and my unrealistic hopes of high starting salaries were quickly driven home when it transpired I was one of only two people graduating to actually get a job, let alone a vast salary. That also has a knock-on when you start looking at percentage rises as well of course - you may well get similar percentages in future years, but you started from a different base.
I was 'lucky'. I had a job when most didn't, and these days I've more than overcome the started-with-a-low-base problem. But 'these days' are quite a way away from 1992...people who started work near 2008 will have a more exaggerated manifestation of the same problem, and will likely have to wait until later in their working life to correct it.
Years back, there was an interview with Shigeru Miyamoto. It was by one of the tech mags and they were asking him what makes a great game. 3D instead of 2D? Immersive? Should the player have cinematic elements? Does the player need to be emotionally involved?
Miyamoto's answer was "well, I like moving things around the screen.". That's it. That, bluntly, is why he is a genius level game designer and the interviewers were not. Every element above is just that - an element. It can help or hinder the particular game, and Miyamoto just saw them as things that could be combined to form a game.
The point? Don't discount Flappy Bird. Just because it didn't take three years and a research team to develop, does not mean it wasn't talented.
I'm not American so all the Obama stuff is lost on me. The site was the clearest I found - there were others too. Here's Stanford making reference to the investment. There's quite a few more.
If by stolen you mean bought, then yes. He recognised the people and paid for it. MS copied it.
All history now of course and I actually quite like Win 10. Just the Xerox myth keeps getting trotted out without any recognition of the fact Jobs paid and brought on the actual engineers to carry on working with it. More here, amongst other places.
You disable it at the router's MAC level, if it's anything like Virgin's. You got to a site, register the MAC...and you're done. I don't want filtering so turned it off - and we're done. No fuss, no bother. Virgin were very upfront about it, and provide an easy opt-out.
I personally would prefer opt-in but it was extremely clear and easy to turn off, so I'm simply not very exercised by this.
Or in a city. There's an awful lot of London that this would apply to, even the most expensive areas. Mirrors can get clipped in narrow streets, doesn't have to be intentional or vandalism.
Have just checked - first 14k users, not 12k. I periodically try to recover the account (which doesn't even have a post against it) but without knowing exactly which email I registered it to I can't really prove it's mine. Irritating.
I was in the first 12k users, though annoyingly have lost my password for that account. Yes, have been here for a long time. It's not a natural response - in fact it feels a lot more like the style of other sites leaking in. I'm also on Reddit where you more or less expect this kind of stuff and take the bad with the good, but Slashdot's comments used to not suffer quite so badly from this kind of stuff.
Just anecdotally there's been a seriously offensive uptick in trolling on Slashdot today - I wonder if that's related. I haven't modded this article but did others. Whilst most I modded were positive contributions, there was a whole lot of junk at the beginning which (in my view) needed to be lost. I see people have 'graced' us with such a thread in this article too.
Look how the demo is given next to another Model X. The Model X has a narrower top than the bottom, and it gives a fair amount of room at the top for this kind of things to happen - you can see the doors encroaching into the space above the widest point of the other car.
Now imagine if that other car wasn't a Model X. Perhaps it's an SUV, or a van. No such extra space at the top, nothing for those does to use. Result? Bang.
cd/path/to/myproject/
wget http://my.artefact.repository/...
tar xvfz myproject-1.2.3.tgz
rm current
ln -s myproject-1.2.3 current
cd current ./myproject-ctl.sh restart
If it's good enough for your grandparents, it's good enough for you. Stick it in an ssh script if you want to run it across multiple machines.
That's not going to be true for a distributed system. It would still be true if the distributed system were running entirely on hardware I own and control, but consider the whole 'cloud'-based stuff or P2P. It's not a given that you can kill off the power, and even if you could - it's certainly not clear that you could do so in a timely fashion.
True - but consider this one: Vangelis - To The Unknown Man. Perhaps it's not your style of music, but it starts off with a very simple and repeatedly stated melody. That melody is then expanded on throughout the rest of the piece. There are many more examples, but that one came to mind quickly to me for some reason.
That's what I meant by lacking - seems like they have the makings of a reasonable anthem bit by following a very simple skipped-note arpeggio rule, and then none of the elaboration required to actually turn it into a fledged out piece of music.
It feels like the building blocks you'd use to hang a piece off, not the piece itself. You can easily imagine the first part, which is medium-level catchy, being used as the intro to all the complications, key changes, rhythmic additions, chordal backing etc. that would be needed to flesh this out into a real piece. Interestingly the bit where the algo tried to do a shift came off the weakest. It seems it new how to do broken arpeggios and a very basic chord structure, but then when it needed to shift into the 'emotional' bit and start doing legato expositions it completely lost the plot.
Full disclosure - I write music and have put an album out, second one 'real soon now'. Honest'.
Sounds like a variant of Electric Mountain in the UK. The same thing is done, only instead of moving trains up the hill they move water instead. There's more in the Wikipedia article - essentially though, this idea works fine.
Who's "we"? You might not, but I can tell you I was happy running closed source on Linux. From VMware Server through to binary graphics drivers, I was just fine. Different people may have different aims.
Not so - it was at its most popular, and the popular presenters decided to defect and create their own show. That trio of people was meant to be Clarkson, Quentin Wilson, Tiff Needell. They were damned popular, and wanted to exploit that.
Clarkson then reneged on it, leaving just Quentin Wilson and Tiff Needell. That show became 5th Gear, and Clarkson rebuilt Top Gear using 'new' presenters. They weren't actually new, they were just not the main stars of the show until then. Those people were James May and Richard Hammond.
tl;dr: Clarkson, May and Hammond were once basically in close to the same position as the new team will be now. There is one difference obviously - Clarkson to provide continuity. There are very definite similarities though.
Slashdot Mirror
That's it's problem too - it is too focus group-style data driven. A lot of the shows are either reboots or just very, very similar to each other. Less licensed content, more clones of series. I'm considerably less interested than I was.
Thank you - I was amazed not to read this anywhere else. Yes, if the time you start work includes 2008 -> now, then you have been working in a recession.
I started work in 1992. There was a mini recession then too (UK), and my unrealistic hopes of high starting salaries were quickly driven home when it transpired I was one of only two people graduating to actually get a job, let alone a vast salary. That also has a knock-on when you start looking at percentage rises as well of course - you may well get similar percentages in future years, but you started from a different base.
I was 'lucky'. I had a job when most didn't, and these days I've more than overcome the started-with-a-low-base problem. But 'these days' are quite a way away from 1992...people who started work near 2008 will have a more exaggerated manifestation of the same problem, and will likely have to wait until later in their working life to correct it.
Years back, there was an interview with Shigeru Miyamoto. It was by one of the tech mags and they were asking him what makes a great game. 3D instead of 2D? Immersive? Should the player have cinematic elements? Does the player need to be emotionally involved?
Miyamoto's answer was "well, I like moving things around the screen.". That's it. That, bluntly, is why he is a genius level game designer and the interviewers were not. Every element above is just that - an element. It can help or hinder the particular game, and Miyamoto just saw them as things that could be combined to form a game.
The point? Don't discount Flappy Bird. Just because it didn't take three years and a research team to develop, does not mean it wasn't talented.
although, and I'm fairly sure we'll find common ground here, 'anyone with a brain' can't have been running the commercial side of PARC at the time...
I'm not American so all the Obama stuff is lost on me. The site was the clearest I found - there were others too. Here's Stanford making reference to the investment. There's quite a few more.
Here you go.
If by stolen you mean bought, then yes. He recognised the people and paid for it. MS copied it.
All history now of course and I actually quite like Win 10. Just the Xerox myth keeps getting trotted out without any recognition of the fact Jobs paid and brought on the actual engineers to carry on working with it. More here, amongst other places.
You disable it at the router's MAC level, if it's anything like Virgin's. You got to a site, register the MAC...and you're done. I don't want filtering so turned it off - and we're done. No fuss, no bother. Virgin were very upfront about it, and provide an easy opt-out.
I personally would prefer opt-in but it was extremely clear and easy to turn off, so I'm simply not very exercised by this.
Or in a city. There's an awful lot of London that this would apply to, even the most expensive areas. Mirrors can get clipped in narrow streets, doesn't have to be intentional or vandalism.
Have just checked - first 14k users, not 12k. I periodically try to recover the account (which doesn't even have a post against it) but without knowing exactly which email I registered it to I can't really prove it's mine. Irritating.
I was in the first 12k users, though annoyingly have lost my password for that account. Yes, have been here for a long time. It's not a natural response - in fact it feels a lot more like the style of other sites leaking in. I'm also on Reddit where you more or less expect this kind of stuff and take the bad with the good, but Slashdot's comments used to not suffer quite so badly from this kind of stuff.
Clarkson,Wilson and Needell. But that was when it was about cars.
Just anecdotally there's been a seriously offensive uptick in trolling on Slashdot today - I wonder if that's related. I haven't modded this article but did others. Whilst most I modded were positive contributions, there was a whole lot of junk at the beginning which (in my view) needed to be lost. I see people have 'graced' us with such a thread in this article too.
No Amazon Prime. It's one of the things holding me back from buying and replacing my gen3.
Look how the demo is given next to another Model X. The Model X has a narrower top than the bottom, and it gives a fair amount of room at the top for this kind of things to happen - you can see the doors encroaching into the space above the widest point of the other car.
Now imagine if that other car wasn't a Model X. Perhaps it's an SUV, or a van. No such extra space at the top, nothing for those does to use. Result? Bang.
The next generation is going to grow up with a very different view of Gandhi...
cd /path/to/myproject/
./myproject-ctl.sh restart
wget http://my.artefact.repository/...
tar xvfz myproject-1.2.3.tgz
rm current
ln -s myproject-1.2.3 current
cd current
If it's good enough for your grandparents, it's good enough for you. Stick it in an ssh script if you want to run it across multiple machines.
That's not going to be true for a distributed system. It would still be true if the distributed system were running entirely on hardware I own and control, but consider the whole 'cloud'-based stuff or P2P. It's not a given that you can kill off the power, and even if you could - it's certainly not clear that you could do so in a timely fashion.
True - but consider this one: Vangelis - To The Unknown Man. Perhaps it's not your style of music, but it starts off with a very simple and repeatedly stated melody. That melody is then expanded on throughout the rest of the piece. There are many more examples, but that one came to mind quickly to me for some reason.
That's what I meant by lacking - seems like they have the makings of a reasonable anthem bit by following a very simple skipped-note arpeggio rule, and then none of the elaboration required to actually turn it into a fledged out piece of music.
" It seems it new" - I hang my head in shame.
It feels like the building blocks you'd use to hang a piece off, not the piece itself. You can easily imagine the first part, which is medium-level catchy, being used as the intro to all the complications, key changes, rhythmic additions, chordal backing etc. that would be needed to flesh this out into a real piece. Interestingly the bit where the algo tried to do a shift came off the weakest. It seems it new how to do broken arpeggios and a very basic chord structure, but then when it needed to shift into the 'emotional' bit and start doing legato expositions it completely lost the plot.
Full disclosure - I write music and have put an album out, second one 'real soon now'. Honest'.
Sounds like a variant of Electric Mountain in the UK. The same thing is done, only instead of moving trains up the hill they move water instead. There's more in the Wikipedia article - essentially though, this idea works fine.
That was the increasingly preachy-and-tedious new stuff. The original was a good mix of thought and action.
Who's "we"? You might not, but I can tell you I was happy running closed source on Linux. From VMware Server through to binary graphics drivers, I was just fine. Different people may have different aims.
Not so - it was at its most popular, and the popular presenters decided to defect and create their own show. That trio of people was meant to be Clarkson, Quentin Wilson, Tiff Needell. They were damned popular, and wanted to exploit that.
Clarkson then reneged on it, leaving just Quentin Wilson and Tiff Needell. That show became 5th Gear, and Clarkson rebuilt Top Gear using 'new' presenters. They weren't actually new, they were just not the main stars of the show until then. Those people were James May and Richard Hammond.
tl;dr: Clarkson, May and Hammond were once basically in close to the same position as the new team will be now. There is one difference obviously - Clarkson to provide continuity. There are very definite similarities though.