Just this morning I was sitting out in front of a coffee shop in San Francisco when some guy rode by on his bicycle wearing Google Glasses. This group of guys next to me spent the next 10 minutes straight just cracking jokes about that guy and his computer glasses.
Re:It would be safer if cyclists followed traffic
on
How Safe Is Cycling?
·
· Score: 1
So what you're saying is that you don't give a damn about me when I'm cycling because you've been witness to other people being reckless fools on their bikes? That's sure what it sounds like. Should I conclude that all drivers are a menace because I see so many cars speeding, running stop signs, and cutting people off? Should I conclude that all pedestrians are reckless because I've seen so many jaywalkers?
Does not matter. Passing laws, enacting regulations, issuing EO's does not trump the Constitution. It's no different than if the government passed a law or regulation that authorized DHS to conduct random no-warrant, no-probable-cause house searches, or passed laws restricting the right to vote based on skin color.
It's funny you say that, because they've already passed laws that authorize the DHS to conduct random no-warrant, no-probably-cause boat searches: 14 USC 89(a) reads "[Coast Guard] officers, may at anytime, go aboard any vessel subject to the jurisdiction or to the operation of any law of the U.S., address inquiries to those on board, examine the ship's documents and papers, and examine, inspect, and search the vessel, and use all necessary force to compel compliance."
SCOTUS claimed that the government has the authority to incarcerate someone indefinitely without trial.
No they haven't. His incarceration is ending. His civil commitment is beginning. All they've said is that you can still be committed to a mental hospital for being crazy/dangerous, even if you've just completed your prison sentence for committing a crime. The latter does not get you out of the former.
We won't be able to see a true Apples to Apple comparison until we can compare two discs that used the exact same codec at the exact same bitrate, or even the exact same H.264 / VC-1 data.
... yielding the exact same result on your screen. Yeah, that will be a useful test.
Re:there is an old russian joke...
on
Earth Sandwich
·
· Score: 1
The single biggest incompatibility has been applications, and the single biggest reason has been the fundamentally different processor.
I'm sorry, but porting an application between processors is much, much easier than porting between operating systems. When you write in a high-level programming language, you rarely care about what processor you will compile it for. Only when you are serializing multi-byte integers into byte-streams for the disk or network must you care about the processor's endianness. Sure, you may have tuned your Windows code to leverage SSE2, but translating that into AltiVec is trivial--trust me.
The difficulty in porting has to do with all of the system-level APIs your application depends on. On Windows you use the Win32 API or maybe even.NET whereas on Mac OS X you use Carbon or Cocoa, and many other mac-specific APIs. If you use.NET or Cocoa, now you're dealing with a somewhat OS-specific programming language. Sure, you may use cross-platform frameworks to easy this pain, but you will get the lowest common denominator of functionality. The result, more often than not, is an application that neither looks nor feels like a well-written application on either operating system.
We couldn't run 3DMark, Sysmark, etc. because of the missing video drivers - wouldn't have been fair. The Photoshop and Windows Media tests were the only ones of our standard benchmark suite we thought would generate results that made any proper sense, because they hit processor/disk/RAM rather than video.
Are you sure the Windows Media tests don't use the graphics processor? According to ATI, the X1600 accelerates WMV9. Without the video drivers then that could also be considered an unfair test, no?
You might be laughing now, but this is an uncannily accurate description of the first software shop I ever worked at, developing software for the US Navy.
Seriously... I'm not joking. It was only 7 years ago. In fact, I think it was even worse: we didn't have a "single samba-shared volume"; I had to shout "WHO HAS THE LATEST VERSION OF FILE X AND WHERE CAN I GET A COPY?"
In the markup, the row is represented by a p element which is fixed to the window rather than the scrollable canvas. If the Acid2 page is scrolled, the scalp will stay fixed in place, becoming unstuck from the rest of the face, which will scroll.
Slashdot Mirror
Just this morning I was sitting out in front of a coffee shop in San Francisco when some guy rode by on his bicycle wearing Google Glasses. This group of guys next to me spent the next 10 minutes straight just cracking jokes about that guy and his computer glasses.
Quite. About 1/3 of US citizens live within it: https://d320ze5h7gg57a.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/webroot/privacy/spying/cfz_map/Image-Map.gif
So what you're saying is that you don't give a damn about me when I'm cycling because you've been witness to other people being reckless fools on their bikes? That's sure what it sounds like. Should I conclude that all drivers are a menace because I see so many cars speeding, running stop signs, and cutting people off? Should I conclude that all pedestrians are reckless because I've seen so many jaywalkers?
We're talking about any and all parts used on an aircraft.
Ironically, by giving women longer leave than men, they've created an incentive to hire men instead of women. The discrimination goes both ways.
Does not matter. Passing laws, enacting regulations, issuing EO's does not trump the Constitution. It's no different than if the government passed a law or regulation that authorized DHS to conduct random no-warrant, no-probable-cause house searches, or passed laws restricting the right to vote based on skin color.
It's funny you say that, because they've already passed laws that authorize the DHS to conduct random no-warrant, no-probably-cause boat searches: 14 USC 89(a) reads "[Coast Guard] officers, may at anytime, go aboard any vessel subject to the jurisdiction or to the operation of any law of the U.S., address inquiries to those on board, examine the ship's documents and papers, and examine, inspect, and search the vessel, and use all necessary force to compel compliance."
IMHO, Google abandoned it's "Don't be evil" mantra long ago when they began evading taxes.
Step 2: Pay hacker to make fraudulent purchases for competitors' apps.
Step 3: Profit!!!!!!!
Dude, give it up. He has a 4-digit ID. You stand no chance.
It is the exact same view that some of the worst monsters in history have used to excuse some of the worst atrocities ever committed.
Or was it the exact same view that drove some of the worst monsters in history to commit some of the worst atrocities ever?
But suddenly when it's Apple it's all ok. Why the hell?
Uhh... who said it was all ok?
SCOTUS claimed that the government has the authority to incarcerate someone indefinitely without trial.
No they haven't. His incarceration is ending. His civil commitment is beginning. All they've said is that you can still be committed to a mental hospital for being crazy/dangerous, even if you've just completed your prison sentence for committing a crime. The latter does not get you out of the former.
Now imagine having to drive like that all the time.
My god. The roads would be safe.
It sounds to me like you just moved the instruction opcodes into the address operand.
... yielding the exact same result on your screen. Yeah, that will be a useful test.
Damn lilliputians!
No, it's the language of excited scientists who would love to get more grants.
Being able to run MacOS X and Windows, at native speeds, will rock my Jesus.
My jesus already rocks!
The single biggest incompatibility has been applications, and the single biggest reason has been the fundamentally different processor.
I'm sorry, but porting an application between processors is much, much easier than porting between operating systems. When you write in a high-level programming language, you rarely care about what processor you will compile it for. Only when you are serializing multi-byte integers into byte-streams for the disk or network must you care about the processor's endianness. Sure, you may have tuned your Windows code to leverage SSE2, but translating that into AltiVec is trivial--trust me.
The difficulty in porting has to do with all of the system-level APIs your application depends on. On Windows you use the Win32 API or maybe even .NET whereas on Mac OS X you use Carbon or Cocoa, and many other mac-specific APIs. If you use .NET or Cocoa, now you're dealing with a somewhat OS-specific programming language. Sure, you may use cross-platform frameworks to easy this pain, but you will get the lowest common denominator of functionality. The result, more often than not, is an application that neither looks nor feels like a well-written application on either operating system.
Please stop this misinformation right here.
Are you sure the Windows Media tests don't use the graphics processor? According to ATI, the X1600 accelerates WMV9. Without the video drivers then that could also be considered an unfair test, no?
Hmm... let's see... How about, a fun, prison break.
Really? I thought it was a toy fucking company.
Did you not read the article on the computer with 8 gallons of cooking oil inside?
Seriously... I'm not joking. It was only 7 years ago. In fact, I think it was even worse: we didn't have a "single samba-shared volume"; I had to shout "WHO HAS THE LATEST VERSION OF FILE X AND WHERE CAN I GET A COPY?"
In the markup, the row is represented by a p element which is fixed to the window rather than the scrollable canvas. If the Acid2 page is scrolled, the scalp will stay fixed in place, becoming unstuck from the rest of the face, which will scroll.