However, through the magic of VSI programming, you could change the 16 colours that were set to be displayed partway through the TV scan, and effectively have 256 onscreen at once.
An amazing machine for the time. Besides colors you could even change graphic modes each scan line, which allowed for some pretty sophisticated effects considering it had a 1.8 MHz processor.
Few years back when I serviced macs it was not too uncommon to wait over a year (that meant the user had no computer for over a year) for simple parts like volume buttons, disk drives (superdrives), and other things like that.
A year. Please. Where do you live, Mars? And are you really claiming that people went without their computers for a year because of a broken volume button? I suppose these same people also stopped driving thier cars when the cigarette lighter stopped working.
The problem is that you live in the land of retarded drivers. They're also way too polite. A four way stop requires a comittee meeting before somone actually figures it's his turn to go.
You claim that you while driving outside of CT that 80% of the drivers who "blow past you an an ungodly speed" have CT plates?
I propose a small wager. Keep track for a month (and I mean actually write down what happens). If more than 75% of the cars have CT plates you win. I even give you the right to determine if the car was travelling at an "ungodly" speed, and thus counts in the stats, provided you attempt to do so fairly and consistently.
Winner gets $20. We'll settle up using PayPal. Is it a bet?
Because if the device isn't able to accurately determine whether speeding actually occurred, then how can they have a basis for charging the customer? GPS isn't perfect.
The fact that the method the company used to detect the speeding is possibly flawed in no way affects the contract itself, but rather only the ability of the company to prove the driver violated the contract. That doesn't mean they can't agree to it.
Grow a brain. Will you?....It IS against the law to go above the posted speed limit. It is the responsibility of law enforcement, i.e: the people of the state of CT, to enforce such laws.
Before tossing the rude insult into your post you might consider thinking through the topic to be sure you have some inkling of what the issues are. It would save the occasional embarrasment.
There's no "enforcment of the law" here. The company is saying that if you go faster than the posted speed we will charge you more than if you don't. The fact that it is also illegal to do so is beside the point. the agreement could have just as easily said the driver must go 5 MPH less than the posted speed. The company is not "fining" the driver on behalf of the people, it's acting in it's own interest. If by chance the driver also happened to get ticketed for speeding that would have no affect on the contractual issue.
Remove the fact that exceeding the posted speed is illegal, and change the poorly chosen word of "fine" to "fee," and the consequences of the contract are exactly the same, but your whole argument against it disappears, indicating that your argument is specious.
Or just truncate it at "deserve neither." How certain are you certain of the wording anyway? I've seen many variations, including that one. I think it's cleaner and more elegant, and the way I imagine someone as able as Franklin would have written it.
Yeah it is a guess......My point remains that the post was changed for no reason other than politics.
You miss my point. You state something as fact when it's nothing more than your own speculation. Then you do it again! You still don't know why the post was changed, you're guessing at the reason.
Maybe he changed it because in retrospect he thought it was a crappy thing to post. The point is you don't know, so don't say "The fact is..."
It's obvious by now that not even you believe what you post. If you truly believed it were dying you wouldn't bother posting this all the time. What would be the point? But you seem to be trying to will it to happen.
multiple real resolutions displayed simultaneously on one monitor. Or changing the palette of colors on every scanline. Or changing sprites on each line to simulate more hardware sprites.
You could do all three of those on the 8 bit Atari, a computer way ahead of its time.
Kingsfield: What is the law, Mister....Bliss? Bliss: If you cite your sources you can do almost anything. Kingsfield: Mr. Hart, is he correct? Hart: No sir. In fact, that's kind of retarded.
Kingsfield: Exactly. Thank you Mr. Hart. Mr. Bliss, you come here with a skull full of mush, and I see you still have it.
Warning! Threshold=2! Say something interesting or you will be totally ignored!
Assuming of course that you show up early enough so that your comment will be modded up before fm6 gets to it, and also assuming that you consider "totally ignored" to mean fm6 didn't read it.
Slashdot Mirror
The guy who did the assuming is not the guy who claimed to hit against it. Bonehead.
Microsoft is bashing sheep now? Those bastards!
That's pretty funny.
That's pretty funny.
An amazing machine for the time. Besides colors you could even change graphic modes each scan line, which allowed for some pretty sophisticated effects considering it had a 1.8 MHz processor.
Thanks for the link. That's a pretty good resource.
That's pretty funny. I think I'll make that my sig for a little while.
A year. Please. Where do you live, Mars?
And are you really claiming that people went without their computers for a year because of a broken volume button? I suppose these same people also stopped driving thier cars when the cigarette lighter stopped working.
You state that as if Moore's Law were the reason for it happening. It's the other way around. A better name for it would be Moore's Observation.
The problem is that you live in the land of retarded drivers. They're also way too polite. A four way stop requires a comittee meeting before somone actually figures it's his turn to go.
I propose a small wager. Keep track for a month (and I mean actually write down what happens). If more than 75% of the cars have CT plates you win. I even give you the right to determine if the car was travelling at an "ungodly" speed, and thus counts in the stats, provided you attempt to do so fairly and consistently.
Winner gets $20. We'll settle up using PayPal. Is it a bet?
The fact that the method the company used to detect the speeding is possibly flawed in no way affects the contract itself, but rather only the ability of the company to prove the driver violated the contract. That doesn't mean they can't agree to it.
Before tossing the rude insult into your post you might consider thinking through the topic to be sure you have some inkling of what the issues are. It would save the occasional embarrasment.
There's no "enforcment of the law" here. The company is saying that if you go faster than the posted speed we will charge you more than if you don't. The fact that it is also illegal to do so is beside the point. the agreement could have just as easily said the driver must go 5 MPH less than the posted speed. The company is not "fining" the driver on behalf of the people, it's acting in it's own interest. If by chance the driver also happened to get ticketed for speeding that would have no affect on the contractual issue.
Remove the fact that exceeding the posted speed is illegal, and change the poorly chosen word of "fine" to "fee," and the consequences of the contract are exactly the same, but your whole argument against it disappears, indicating that your argument is specious.
Or just truncate it at "deserve neither." How certain are you certain of the wording anyway? I've seen many variations, including that one. I think it's cleaner and more elegant, and the way I imagine someone as able as Franklin would have written it.
Then where do they keep their shit?
that was pretty good.
you had days? Why in my, uh,... etc.
I guess maybe this guy misunderstood when someone told him he should pave the way for other rocketeers.
You miss my point. You state something as fact when it's nothing more than your own speculation. Then you do it again! You still don't know why the post was changed, you're guessing at the reason.
Maybe he changed it because in retrospect he thought it was a crappy thing to post. The point is you don't know, so don't say "The fact is..."
It's obvious by now that not even you believe what you post. If you truly believed it were dying you wouldn't bother posting this all the time. What would be the point? But you seem to be trying to will it to happen.
You drag your grandma's recipes to the trash?
You could do all three of those on the 8 bit Atari, a computer way ahead of its time.
Kingsfield: What is the law, Mister....Bliss?
Bliss: If you cite your sources you can do almost anything.
Kingsfield: Mr. Hart, is he correct?
Hart: No sir. In fact, that's kind of retarded.
Kingsfield: Exactly. Thank you Mr. Hart. Mr. Bliss, you come here with a skull full of mush, and I see you still have it.
Assuming of course that you show up early enough so that your comment will be modded up before fm6 gets to it, and also assuming that you consider "totally ignored" to mean fm6 didn't read it.
Do you know this to be true, or are you just guessing that they made him change it?