By far the most important problem is that for such a confined space you need to get the camera much further back than the opposite wall to get a good view of the room. Otherwise you either get closeups of people's heads and some instruments, or you have to use something that looks like a fish eye lens. If it is approximately square you will need at least the back and one side wall to be removable.
I think this pretty much means that a normal set will be much more efficient. Also you can modify a normal set to whatever the script needs are (add more or fewer seats, put in magical non-existent device and control panel, etc).
Note to some other posters: digital cameras like the Red do not have magical properties that make this unnecessary!
From 1986 to 1993 I used proportional fonts in terminals and in the text editor (which was Emacs run in the terminal). It worked quite well. I fully expected this to appear on it's own and am rather disappointed that my ideas never seem to have happened again. I could try to make a program that uses them but do we really need another terminal emulator?
I have no idea if the code I wrote can be found: first is the NeXT-machine terminal emulator made by Mark of the Unicorn called "Communicae". Second is a terminal emulator written for the Sun NeWS system called "jet".
Both programs used the same technique based on getting the best output from programs expecting fixed-sized fonts. First of all spaces were rendered as "en spaces", actually it used the width of a '2' character. This made words be somewhat spaced apart but made most tables of numbers line up. Second was that 3 or more spaces, and also a tab character, would move to the N*en position, regardless of the text earlier, where N is the number of characters (plus the round up to multiple of 8 by tab characters). In most fonts this would make a wider space, if not I think it avoided overprinting by instead making the space zero sized rather than negative.
The rules were limited by them being run when updating the display. On modern machines I would think much more complex pattern-matching rules could be used, such as detecting alignment in adjacent rows, and detecting usage of | and - and + in ascii art and replacing it with line drawings.
Yes if the barrel is horizontal then the ellipse will not intersect the Earth. Any other angle and it will, unless you put it on a mountain top, and even then the possible angles are all really close to horizontal.
You would only hit yourself if the Earth was not in the way. Ignoring drag, the orbit would be an ellipse passing through the gun barrel. Since the lower end is pointing toward the Earth this ellipse obviously passes through the Earth. The projectile would instead hit the ground at some other point where the ellipse enters the Earth.
These need 8 or more images to work, although it is quite possible to interpolate them from the 2 images of a normal stereo movie. This is currently nowhere near real time and sometimes some hints are needed for it to be done right. However I could imagine this becoming a standard: either the interpolation data is stored in the movie as it is far smaller than the images, or processing gets fast enough and the alogorithms good enough that it can be calculated from 2 pictures in real time.
The reason 8 images are needed is that at any position you are seeing image n and n+1 mod N where N is the number of images. Therefore at most positions your left eye sees one image and your right an image from a pov slightly to the right. However at some locations you see image N-1 and 0 and the eyes are reversed. Minimizing the size of these "wrong" positions requires N to be as high as possible.
I have refrained from saying anything about this but this attitude is bogus.
It is questionable what we are doing, but not for the denialist reasons you are saying.
It is blatently obvious that CO2 is responsible for the current changes. They are literally happening a hundred times faster than any changes in the past and the fact that this unusual thing is happening in almost perfect synchronicity with the industrial revolution is just too vastly high of a coincidence.
What I find questionable is current attempts to somehow limit CO2 output. It seems like feel-good and wasteful expense. The inconvenient truth is that this is going to happen even if we immediately somehow immediately stopped emitting CO2, the current elevated levels will be there and would not disappear unless we recreate the forests that absorbed it at first and buried them deeply and converted them back to oil. The money wasted trying to bribe countries into stopping burning fuel might be much better spent trying to figure out how to mitigate this and how to move the people who are going to be flooded. And if it really is bad the huge geo-engineering solutions such as a space parasol might just make sense, yes they will cost tens of trillions but it will be worth it and it really will work.
I think it is unfortunate that all the denialists are causing any argument about this to be hidden. If you are not in favor of massive payments to 3rd world countries then you must be a denialist. Thanks a lot for making it impossible to have reasonable arguments, you fucking jerks.
Userspace programs can be GPL with no problem and the kernel and other programs can still be BSD. Considering that is exactly what is happening today on BSD it should be obvious there would have been no problem with "GNU/BSD" as RMS would want to call it.
Those machines did not address units smaller than the 36 bit word.
I do not know of any machine that could address units small enough that anybody would think to put one character in each other than 8 bit addressing. There may have been 12-bit addressable units on PDP-8 style machines but there was a tendency to pack 2 characters into each of them.
I would agree that if unobtanium is so valuable, the humans are going to come back with a vengence.
However the NaVi have apparently 13 years (it said that a trip takes 6.5 years each way) and have found a cause that unites the different tribes and they appear to be very organized and highly communcative. And they have the remains of an entire military base and several spaceships to study and a few cooperative and educated humans, and may have technological insights from their natural world that humans don't, and all will be well aware that a counterattack is coming. I think Cameron may have a very interesting and different sequel in mind...
This is why Earth was able to re-form into a nice sphere again rather than a lopsided, cracked mess like Mimas did.
The earth is large enough that it would have collapsed to a perfect sphere even if it was completely solid and cold. Mimas is a lot lot lot smaller with 1/1000 the gravity. You might want to check obvious things like that, especially if you are attempting to deny AGW. When you say stupid science fallacies in your post it does not help your cause in any way!
There is nothing wrong with IE being included. The big difference is that OTHER programs can be included.
Buried in the story about the "ballot box" is the REAL story: "In addition, PC manufacturers will be allowed to ship computers with competing Web browsers, as well as or instead of Internet Explorer."
The real deal is that OEM manufactures were NOT ALLOWED TO SHIP A COMPETITOR TO IE. Not at all as long as they wanted to keep their volume discout pricing for Windows. This is the REAL antitrust settlement. Microsoft astroturfers have managed to bury this fact under so much fud about the "browser ballot box" that it is almost hidden even here at Slashdot. Disgusting.
Even with UCS4 you have combining characters, directional and spacing marks, and all kinds of other cruft. You have to realize the idea of thinking about splitting text into fixed-sized units that are independent of each other and can be rearranged is long obsolete. For this reason I think UTF-8 is far superior because it FORCES the lazy programmers to realize what is going on, rather than letting them pretend that only weird backwards countries are going to be inconvienced by their mistakes.
Also UTF-8 survives case shifting of ASCII. If you try to case-shift the ISO-8859-1 characters you will always end up with invalid UTF-8 (because the lower and upper ISO-8859-1 characters are the leading and continuation UTF-8 sets) and in fact this is fairly easy to detect and reverse. UTF-8 is very redundant, invalid UTF-8 sequences of 4 bytes outnumber valid ones by more than 10 times, making it extremely unlikely that any mistaken processing cannot be recognized and remedied.
In Windows the file system api is 16 bits, so the driver would translate the UTF-8 to the 16-bit filenames and no program could get it "wrong".
If an 8-bit api like on Unix is used, you are seriously wrong about the problems with programs treating UTF-8 as ISO8859-1. They will display gibberish, yes, but they will not destroy the UTF-8 when copying the files and will not misinterpret it (as all the bytes with the high bit set have no meaning to the file system apis). The only failure is in display. Claims that somehow the text is "wrong" when stored in a byte stream are bogus, it is like saying that we must throw exceptions when misspelled words are encountered in text files. This would obviously make text handling impossible, but people try to push these ideas into UTF-8 because they want to sabotage it and preserve their incorrect but politcially-correct decision to use "wide characters".
I see your point. I was only arguing for a static typed language such as C++. In my experience, attempts to duplicate dyanmic typing (such as replacing the float with a structure having the float and a flag) cause bugs because there is no low-level code insuring the two values match each other. When this goes wrong it can be really hard to debug because other code and the programmer themselves may assume it is impossible.
What I want to test is "will hitting the set to 1.0 button do something". This can ONLY be done by checking if the value is equal to the value that the 1.0 button will set it to.
In the cases I mostly run into, the test is to update a GUI to match buttons the user pushed. The value 1.0 is actually mathematically correct and works when used, so replacing it with some other value or a non-numeric would break the code. What is wanted is a reliable test that says "the user pushed the 'set to 1.0' button and we should highlight it". Things like that. I can assure you that if you use approximately-equal or try to track this value in a parallel variable things break and become unreliable.
What I would like to see is the compiler produce a warning only if the value being compared to is not a constant that can be exactly represented. So "x == y" might produce a warning, and even "x ==.1". But "x == 1.0" does not produce a warning. I don't like the fact that I have to turn off an otherwise useful warning because they don't understand how real software is written.
An improvement for both ECMAScript and Scheme, could be to throw an exception whenever the programmer compares two inexact or floating point numbers for equality.
In C I need to turn these warnings off. In perhaps 99% of the cases where the test is something like "x == 1.0" what is being tested is not "did the calculation result in 1". Instead the test that is really being done is "was the earlier statement that read x = 1.0 executed".
Unfortunatly these warnings are unable to distinguish why the test is being done, and it makes programmers do some stupid things to turn off the warnings. Changing it to some approximatly_equal() function will actually break the logic, especially for a calculation that CANNOT result in 1.0 except by the direct assignment. This is NOT uncommon!
So stop proposing ideas without actually seeing how things are done in the real world.
You can use hotmail without buying Windows. It is unlikely somebody uses IE without using Windows and that is only allowed if you pay for it.
However I do think the original poster is incorrect. The cost of Microsoft is spread over the price of the machines, even if you buy a bare box. If you use a computer you certainly parted with at least some money to Microsoft, and that was distributed to all their projects, so you are paying for at least a fraction of any Microsoft thing you use.
It is pretty hilarious and scary that you included a false anecdote (turkeys drowning) in your post and wrote it in such a way that a reader may think it is true. Managing to pretty much demonstrate the main fear people have of this new style of journalism right in the middle of your argument against the old.
Then again, it may be interesting and instructive if people had to assume every piece of information they hear is possibly bogus. They still have logic and can maybe combine multiple sources and determine what is actually true...
An obvious difference is that people are interested in seeing a movie exactly once, and as soon as possible.
Music relies on people wanting to hear it multiple times and they are probably more interested in the music well after it exists. And complete knowledge of the contents of the music increases, rather than decreases, their desire to hear it.
Slashdot Mirror
By far the most important problem is that for such a confined space you need to get the camera much further back than the opposite wall to get a good view of the room. Otherwise you either get closeups of people's heads and some instruments, or you have to use something that looks like a fish eye lens. If it is approximately square you will need at least the back and one side wall to be removable.
I think this pretty much means that a normal set will be much more efficient. Also you can modify a normal set to whatever the script needs are (add more or fewer seats, put in magical non-existent device and control panel, etc).
Note to some other posters: digital cameras like the Red do not have magical properties that make this unnecessary!
From 1986 to 1993 I used proportional fonts in terminals and in the text editor (which was Emacs run in the terminal). It worked quite well. I fully expected this to appear on it's own and am rather disappointed that my ideas never seem to have happened again. I could try to make a program that uses them but do we really need another terminal emulator?
I have no idea if the code I wrote can be found: first is the NeXT-machine terminal emulator made by Mark of the Unicorn called "Communicae". Second is a terminal emulator written for the Sun NeWS system called "jet".
Both programs used the same technique based on getting the best output from programs expecting fixed-sized fonts. First of all spaces were rendered as "en spaces", actually it used the width of a '2' character. This made words be somewhat spaced apart but made most tables of numbers line up. Second was that 3 or more spaces, and also a tab character, would move to the N*en position, regardless of the text earlier, where N is the number of characters (plus the round up to multiple of 8 by tab characters). In most fonts this would make a wider space, if not I think it avoided overprinting by instead making the space zero sized rather than negative.
The rules were limited by them being run when updating the display. On modern machines I would think much more complex pattern-matching rules could be used, such as detecting alignment in adjacent rows, and detecting usage of | and - and + in ascii art and replacing it with line drawings.
Yes if the barrel is horizontal then the ellipse will not intersect the Earth. Any other angle and it will, unless you put it on a mountain top, and even then the possible angles are all really close to horizontal.
You would only hit yourself if the Earth was not in the way. Ignoring drag, the orbit would be an ellipse passing through the gun barrel. Since the lower end is pointing toward the Earth this ellipse obviously passes through the Earth. The projectile would instead hit the ground at some other point where the ellipse enters the Earth.
These need 8 or more images to work, although it is quite possible to interpolate them from the 2 images of a normal stereo movie. This is currently nowhere near real time and sometimes some hints are needed for it to be done right. However I could imagine this becoming a standard: either the interpolation data is stored in the movie as it is far smaller than the images, or processing gets fast enough and the alogorithms good enough that it can be calculated from 2 pictures in real time.
The reason 8 images are needed is that at any position you are seeing image n and n+1 mod N where N is the number of images. Therefore at most positions your left eye sees one image and your right an image from a pov slightly to the right. However at some locations you see image N-1 and 0 and the eyes are reversed. Minimizing the size of these "wrong" positions requires N to be as high as possible.
I have refrained from saying anything about this but this attitude is bogus.
It is questionable what we are doing, but not for the denialist reasons you are saying.
It is blatently obvious that CO2 is responsible for the current changes. They are literally happening a hundred times faster than any changes in the past and the fact that this unusual thing is happening in almost perfect synchronicity with the industrial revolution is just too vastly high of a coincidence.
What I find questionable is current attempts to somehow limit CO2 output. It seems like feel-good and wasteful expense. The inconvenient truth is that this is going to happen even if we immediately somehow immediately stopped emitting CO2, the current elevated levels will be there and would not disappear unless we recreate the forests that absorbed it at first and buried them deeply and converted them back to oil. The money wasted trying to bribe countries into stopping burning fuel might be much better spent trying to figure out how to mitigate this and how to move the people who are going to be flooded. And if it really is bad the huge geo-engineering solutions such as a space parasol might just make sense, yes they will cost tens of trillions but it will be worth it and it really will work.
I think it is unfortunate that all the denialists are causing any argument about this to be hidden. If you are not in favor of massive payments to 3rd world countries then you must be a denialist. Thanks a lot for making it impossible to have reasonable arguments, you fucking jerks.
Userspace programs can be GPL with no problem and the kernel and other programs can still be BSD. Considering that is exactly what is happening today on BSD it should be obvious there would have been no problem with "GNU/BSD" as RMS would want to call it.
Those machines did not address units smaller than the 36 bit word.
I do not know of any machine that could address units small enough that anybody would think to put one character in each other than 8 bit addressing. There may have been 12-bit addressable units on PDP-8 style machines but there was a tendency to pack 2 characters into each of them.
I would agree that if unobtanium is so valuable, the humans are going to come back with a vengence.
However the NaVi have apparently 13 years (it said that a trip takes 6.5 years each way) and have found a cause that unites the different tribes and they appear to be very organized and highly communcative. And they have the remains of an entire military base and several spaceships to study and a few cooperative and educated humans, and may have technological insights from their natural world that humans don't, and all will be well aware that a counterattack is coming. I think Cameron may have a very interesting and different sequel in mind...
WHOOSH!
Brilliant. Thank you.
This is why Earth was able to re-form into a nice sphere again rather than a lopsided, cracked mess like Mimas did.
The earth is large enough that it would have collapsed to a perfect sphere even if it was completely solid and cold. Mimas is a lot lot lot smaller with 1/1000 the gravity. You might want to check obvious things like that, especially if you are attempting to deny AGW. When you say stupid science fallacies in your post it does not help your cause in any way!
There is nothing wrong with IE being included. The big difference is that OTHER programs can be included.
Buried in the story about the "ballot box" is the REAL story: "In addition, PC manufacturers will be allowed to ship computers with competing Web browsers, as well as or instead of Internet Explorer."
The real deal is that OEM manufactures were NOT ALLOWED TO SHIP A COMPETITOR TO IE. Not at all as long as they wanted to keep their volume discout pricing for Windows. This is the REAL antitrust settlement. Microsoft astroturfers have managed to bury this fact under so much fud about the "browser ballot box" that it is almost hidden even here at Slashdot. Disgusting.
Even with UCS4 you have combining characters, directional and spacing marks, and all kinds of other cruft. You have to realize the idea of thinking about splitting text into fixed-sized units that are independent of each other and can be rearranged is long obsolete. For this reason I think UTF-8 is far superior because it FORCES the lazy programmers to realize what is going on, rather than letting them pretend that only weird backwards countries are going to be inconvienced by their mistakes.
Also UTF-8 survives case shifting of ASCII. If you try to case-shift the ISO-8859-1 characters you will always end up with invalid UTF-8 (because the lower and upper ISO-8859-1 characters are the leading and continuation UTF-8 sets) and in fact this is fairly easy to detect and reverse. UTF-8 is very redundant, invalid UTF-8 sequences of 4 bytes outnumber valid ones by more than 10 times, making it extremely unlikely that any mistaken processing cannot be recognized and remedied.
In Windows the file system api is 16 bits, so the driver would translate the UTF-8 to the 16-bit filenames and no program could get it "wrong".
If an 8-bit api like on Unix is used, you are seriously wrong about the problems with programs treating UTF-8 as ISO8859-1. They will display gibberish, yes, but they will not destroy the UTF-8 when copying the files and will not misinterpret it (as all the bytes with the high bit set have no meaning to the file system apis). The only failure is in display. Claims that somehow the text is "wrong" when stored in a byte stream are bogus, it is like saying that we must throw exceptions when misspelled words are encountered in text files. This would obviously make text handling impossible, but people try to push these ideas into UTF-8 because they want to sabotage it and preserve their incorrect but politcially-correct decision to use "wide characters".
I see your point. I was only arguing for a static typed language such as C++. In my experience, attempts to duplicate dyanmic typing (such as replacing the float with a structure having the float and a flag) cause bugs because there is no low-level code insuring the two values match each other. When this goes wrong it can be really hard to debug because other code and the programmer themselves may assume it is impossible.
I'm still failing to describe the problem.
What I want to test is "will hitting the set to 1.0 button do something". This can ONLY be done by checking if the value is equal to the value that the 1.0 button will set it to.
I did not describe the problem all that well.
In the cases I mostly run into, the test is to update a GUI to match buttons the user pushed. The value 1.0 is actually mathematically correct and works when used, so replacing it with some other value or a non-numeric would break the code. What is wanted is a reliable test that says "the user pushed the 'set to 1.0' button and we should highlight it". Things like that. I can assure you that if you use approximately-equal or try to track this value in a parallel variable things break and become unreliable.
What I would like to see is the compiler produce a warning only if the value being compared to is not a constant that can be exactly represented. So "x == y" might produce a warning, and even "x == .1". But "x == 1.0" does not produce a warning. I don't like the fact that I have to turn off an otherwise useful warning because they don't understand how real software is written.
An improvement for both ECMAScript and Scheme, could be to throw an exception whenever the programmer compares two inexact or floating point numbers for equality.
In C I need to turn these warnings off. In perhaps 99% of the cases where the test is something like "x == 1.0" what is being tested is not "did the calculation result in 1". Instead the test that is really being done is "was the earlier statement that read x = 1.0 executed".
Unfortunatly these warnings are unable to distinguish why the test is being done, and it makes programmers do some stupid things to turn off the warnings. Changing it to some approximatly_equal() function will actually break the logic, especially for a calculation that CANNOT result in 1.0 except by the direct assignment. This is NOT uncommon!
So stop proposing ideas without actually seeing how things are done in the real world.
2nd google link gets it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/7932816.stm
Excellent work by the BBC! Damn I am impressed that they did this.
That link goes to the main page, do you have the link to the article?
You can use hotmail without buying Windows. It is unlikely somebody uses IE without using Windows and that is only allowed if you pay for it.
However I do think the original poster is incorrect. The cost of Microsoft is spread over the price of the machines, even if you buy a bare box. If you use a computer you certainly parted with at least some money to Microsoft, and that was distributed to all their projects, so you are paying for at least a fraction of any Microsoft thing you use.
I was talking about generic action/horror and pop music. Certainly there are exceptions.
It is pretty hilarious and scary that you included a false anecdote (turkeys drowning) in your post and wrote it in such a way that a reader may think it is true. Managing to pretty much demonstrate the main fear people have of this new style of journalism right in the middle of your argument against the old.
Then again, it may be interesting and instructive if people had to assume every piece of information they hear is possibly bogus. They still have logic and can maybe combine multiple sources and determine what is actually true...
An obvious difference is that people are interested in seeing a movie exactly once, and as soon as possible.
Music relies on people wanting to hear it multiple times and they are probably more interested in the music well after it exists. And complete knowledge of the contents of the music increases, rather than decreases, their desire to hear it.