Get Mike Lin's Startup Control Panel and StartupMonitor. With the Startup CPL, you can disable the entries without deleting them, which means the program still thinks it's there and active, keeping it from adding another one and causing it to start up again. StartupMonitor will make sure no nasty programs try to add stuff without your permission. (You catch a lot of crap, like GRPCONV (whatever the hell that is), but some of it is legitimately stuff you don't want -- Cydoor, for example.)
Aww, come on. Doesn't anyone else remember being forced to sit down and watch "Don't Copy That Floppy!" at the beginning of every year? Now they're gonna need to send out ALL NEW tapes that are called "Don't Copy That Floppy! (unless it's for school, of course)"
I spent quite a bit of time looking for 3D glasses at Stereo3D.com a while back and ended up with this information:
To the uninitiated, 3D might seem to be a pair of big goggles set on someone's head with inline monitors (and possibly gyros to detect head movement and adjust the view direction accordingly). However, there ARE different methods of 3D. (Goggles are, at the moment the most immersive, but also the most uncomfortable.) Another more "popular" (as in sales) but less known method is 3D shutterglasses. More on those later.
First, a little information on 3D goggles. The resolutions are usually less impressive than their specifications first indicate. The LCD panels usually used in consumer goggles offer a resolution of 789*230 (181470 pixels per eye). That sounds quite good, but it's not. They use 3 pixels (red, green, and blue) to produce one colored pixel. So the true resolution is 263*230*3. There are professional products out there with 1920*480. These should give a resolution of 640*480*3 (640x480).
Any decent (800*600*3) pair of goggles costs upwards of $3000, and those often only have an approximate 31 diagonal field of view. (Typically, a human can see with a horizontal field of view of 200 and a vertical field of view of 135. That's a diagonal view of ~241.3.) Anything more and you get into the tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars ($15000 for a 1024*768(*3?) pair with 35/50 horizontal FOV, and even, in the past, $100000 (yes, $100K) for a 1600*1200(*3?) [CRT] pair with a 40/60/75/90 horizontal FOV).
A second method, 3D shutterglasses, are a thin pair of LCDs that go over your eyes and "mask" (black out) one eye for one frame, then masks the other eye for the next, and so on. When it does this, the monitor draws two images: one for the left eye, and one for the right eye. This gives the appearance of 3D. (With goggles, these two images are drawn separately on each LCD.) There are many problems with this. First, synchronization has to be PERFECT or you'll see the image intended for the other eye, which "spoils" the 3D effect. As a companion to this, many glasses use a shortlived and now largely non-existant "DIN3" connector to synchronize. (Others use special ISA cards. ISA slots don't exist on modern motherboards.) While there are a growing number of glasses using VGA instead of DIN3 to synchronize, some of the "highest-rated" use DIN3. Second, the way 3D glasses work causes the image appear to be darker than it is, because one half of your vision is "black" for each frame. Third, most monitors use slow or medium-slow phospors, which means that they don't become black quickly. This means you can see remnants of the other eye's image in the unintended eye. For a good example of this, watch white-on-black credits, and notice the trails after each line. The only fast phosphors are monochrome, are used for medical equipment, and are rediculously expensive. These can only be colourized through projection. Fourth, your screen refresh rate needs to be and stay high. Because two images need to be drawn per "frame," your refresh rate needs to be at LEAST 60Hz (which, when halved for each eye, ends up being 30Hz or 30fps; seven frames less and you're watching a slideshow). Fifth, the field of view is limited to the size of your monitor. This is no problem for large theatres like IMAX, but even on a 22" screen the range and area is extremely limited. The upside of shutterglasses is that they're cheap. Usually $100 or less per pair. (Excluding the monitor, but you have that anyway.)
A third method, used in IMAX theatres, is projection 3D. This works by polarizing light, and then using polarized glasses to filter out the positive in one eye and the negative in the other. This works extremely well, but you'll be hard pressed to find any projectors capable of polarizing light.
A fourth method, discussed previously on/., are monitors that are physically 3D. Using several layers of LCDs, these monitors provide pseudo-3D similar to shutterglasses but without the often ugly and uncomfortable glasses. Often, however, this 3D has much less depth, and is also extremely expensive.
The final method is holographic technology which is in its extremely infant stages and is not something that a consumer would be able to purchase or use.
Tactile sense is something much harder to do. For the most part, the only common tactile sense creation devices are weighted motors (for example, the vibration system in/on game controllers). For a while there was a chair (the name escapes me) that physically vibrated and had built-in speakers, but that was a flop. Other ways this COULD be accomplished are to wear tight suits with motors in them, but that would be a costly and difficult thing to choreograph correctly. In the end, there really isn't much of a way to do this short of leaving your house and getting into a real fistfight/car accident/gunfight. Yet.
Actually, recently, MS[N] alerted Cerulean to a change in their network that would affect interoperability with Trillian. They're not GIVING away specs for their system, but they're certainly not trying to DENY it to anyone (unlike AOL/TW).
In any case, Trillian hasn't had ANY problems with AIM interoperability in months now. (Seems Cerulean finally fixed the last exploit that AOL/TW was able to use to prevent other clients from using their service (OSCAR protocol, not the buggy and grossly outdated "public" protocol)...or AOL/TW was too busy making like Arthur Andersen and shredding their financial documents.)
Oh, so you're gay, then? *gasp* That makes everything about alien anal probing fit right into place! *gasp* You're an alien, aren't you!? *gasp* My soda just spilled on my keyboard! Damm....!@#$!@#$ASDFOASndoaisdfasFMZOXN
(Yadda, yadda, closed source, I know, I know. Trouble is, there is no alternative to Flash at this time.)
Actually, the SWF format is open source. Get information at OpenSWF.org. (While it doesn't mean that there're any better programs for creating SWF files now, it certainly provides for opportunity for a competitive, open source program later.)
That said, Adobe makes a SWF program, GoLive. There is also SWiSH. While they're both less advanced (inevitably, since Macromedia was the pioneer of the SWF format), they're good starting points, especially for basic Flash programmers. There was also a 3D Flash program (before Flash 6), but the name escapes me at the moment.
"finally"? AMD has been kicking processing ass since their original Athlon series. (That's not to say that they're whomping Intel as far as sales are concerned, but they are MUCH better processors than anything Intel has crapped out in the past few years.)
Obviously you weren't around when AT&T was a government-santcioned monopoly. Telephones worked, dammit! And they were inexpensive. And customer service was great. And, since it was government-sanctioned, there was much stricter control over what the companies could do. Then everyone started going "oh, boo, government-sanctioned monopolies are bad" and the government started splitting up these companies. AT&T used to be great: now they're shit, just like Qwest, which used to be USWest, which was a subsidiary of Ma Bell (which...wasn't that great, but, err...). Anyway. My point is, this kind of comment is extremely ignorant. While I personally hate history, I've gotta say, LEARN YOUR DAMN HISTORY! And, if you can't get welfare, maybe you should consider getting rid of your computer and spending the money on other, more important stuff? Finally, what the hell is a 'food company'? That reminds me of the Simpsons shopping at a 33 store where everything was labeled "merchandise".
When I first read that, I thought that it was a study that said something about how broadband was "unpatriotic." I need more caffeine...or sleep...nah, caffeine.
Slashdot Mirror
Get Mike Lin's Startup Control Panel and StartupMonitor. With the Startup CPL, you can disable the entries without deleting them, which means the program still thinks it's there and active, keeping it from adding another one and causing it to start up again.
StartupMonitor will make sure no nasty programs try to add stuff without your permission. (You catch a lot of crap, like GRPCONV (whatever the hell that is), but some of it is legitimately stuff you don't want -- Cydoor, for example.)
Aww, come on. Doesn't anyone else remember being forced to sit down and watch "Don't Copy That Floppy!" at the beginning of every year?
Now they're gonna need to send out ALL NEW tapes that are called "Don't Copy That Floppy! (unless it's for school, of course)"
I spent quite a bit of time looking for 3D glasses at Stereo3D.com a while back and ended up with this information:
/., are monitors that are physically 3D. Using several layers of LCDs, these monitors provide pseudo-3D similar to shutterglasses but without the often ugly and uncomfortable glasses. Often, however, this 3D has much less depth, and is also extremely expensive.
To the uninitiated, 3D might seem to be a pair of big goggles set on someone's head with inline monitors (and possibly gyros to detect head movement and adjust the view direction accordingly). However, there ARE different methods of 3D. (Goggles are, at the moment the most immersive, but also the most uncomfortable.) Another more "popular" (as in sales) but less known method is 3D shutterglasses. More on those later.
First, a little information on 3D goggles. The resolutions are usually less impressive than their specifications first indicate. The LCD panels usually used in consumer goggles offer a resolution of 789*230 (181470 pixels per eye). That sounds quite good, but it's not. They use 3 pixels (red, green, and blue) to produce one colored pixel. So the true resolution is 263*230*3. There are professional products out there with 1920*480. These should give a resolution of 640*480*3 (640x480).
Any decent (800*600*3) pair of goggles costs upwards of $3000, and those often only have an approximate 31 diagonal field of view. (Typically, a human can see with a horizontal field of view of 200 and a vertical field of view of 135. That's a diagonal view of ~241.3.) Anything more and you get into the tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars ($15000 for a 1024*768(*3?) pair with 35/50 horizontal FOV, and even, in the past, $100000 (yes, $100K) for a 1600*1200(*3?) [CRT] pair with a 40/60/75/90 horizontal FOV).
A second method, 3D shutterglasses, are a thin pair of LCDs that go over your eyes and "mask" (black out) one eye for one frame, then masks the other eye for the next, and so on. When it does this, the monitor draws two images: one for the left eye, and one for the right eye. This gives the appearance of 3D. (With goggles, these two images are drawn separately on each LCD.) There are many problems with this. First, synchronization has to be PERFECT or you'll see the image intended for the other eye, which "spoils" the 3D effect. As a companion to this, many glasses use a shortlived and now largely non-existant "DIN3" connector to synchronize. (Others use special ISA cards. ISA slots don't exist on modern motherboards.) While there are a growing number of glasses using VGA instead of DIN3 to synchronize, some of the "highest-rated" use DIN3. Second, the way 3D glasses work causes the image appear to be darker than it is, because one half of your vision is "black" for each frame. Third, most monitors use slow or medium-slow phospors, which means that they don't become black quickly. This means you can see remnants of the other eye's image in the unintended eye. For a good example of this, watch white-on-black credits, and notice the trails after each line. The only fast phosphors are monochrome, are used for medical equipment, and are rediculously expensive. These can only be colourized through projection. Fourth, your screen refresh rate needs to be and stay high. Because two images need to be drawn per "frame," your refresh rate needs to be at LEAST 60Hz (which, when halved for each eye, ends up being 30Hz or 30fps; seven frames less and you're watching a slideshow). Fifth, the field of view is limited to the size of your monitor. This is no problem for large theatres like IMAX, but even on a 22" screen the range and area is extremely limited. The upside of shutterglasses is that they're cheap. Usually $100 or less per pair. (Excluding the monitor, but you have that anyway.)
A third method, used in IMAX theatres, is projection 3D. This works by polarizing light, and then using polarized glasses to filter out the positive in one eye and the negative in the other. This works extremely well, but you'll be hard pressed to find any projectors capable of polarizing light.
A fourth method, discussed previously on
The final method is holographic technology which is in its extremely infant stages and is not something that a consumer would be able to purchase or use.
Tactile sense is something much harder to do. For the most part, the only common tactile sense creation devices are weighted motors (for example, the vibration system in/on game controllers). For a while there was a chair (the name escapes me) that physically vibrated and had built-in speakers, but that was a flop. Other ways this COULD be accomplished are to wear tight suits with motors in them, but that would be a costly and difficult thing to choreograph correctly. In the end, there really isn't much of a way to do this short of leaving your house and getting into a real fistfight/car accident/gunfight. Yet.
Lots of amateur pr0n videos, then? ;)
Perhaps it doesn't have to do with global warming, but it DOES have to do with destroying habitat and generally fucking the world up even more.
Running a Windows server, it's no wonder Princeton could hack them.
Actually, recently, MS[N] alerted Cerulean to a change in their network that would affect interoperability with Trillian. They're not GIVING away specs for their system, but they're certainly not trying to DENY it to anyone (unlike AOL/TW).
In any case, Trillian hasn't had ANY problems with AIM interoperability in months now. (Seems Cerulean finally fixed the last exploit that AOL/TW was able to use to prevent other clients from using their service (OSCAR protocol, not the buggy and grossly outdated "public" protocol)...or AOL/TW was too busy making like Arthur Andersen and shredding their financial documents.)
Backslash-dot, eh? That's gotta be, like, helping sites by, y'know, mirroring them before they get posted here.
They could've used 411. "Information, how many I assist you?" "BRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEE"
Wait, I'm sorry, doesn't this happen already?
Oh, so you're gay, then? *gasp* That makes everything about alien anal probing fit right into place! *gasp* You're an alien, aren't you!? *gasp* My soda just spilled on my keyboard! Damm....!@#$!@#$ASDFOASndoaisdfasFMZOXN
Does that mean that I can hack these satellites and get lesbian porn from Japan? Sweet. I'm there.
(Sorry, SORRY! Bad taste, I know!)
That said, Adobe makes a SWF program, GoLive. There is also SWiSH. While they're both less advanced (inevitably, since Macromedia was the pioneer of the SWF format), they're good starting points, especially for basic Flash programmers. There was also a 3D Flash program (before Flash 6), but the name escapes me at the moment.
"finally"? AMD has been kicking processing ass since their original Athlon series. (That's not to say that they're whomping Intel as far as sales are concerned, but they are MUCH better processors than anything Intel has crapped out in the past few years.)
Human: I've got a big dick.
SlashWallace: How did you get it Cool. I have a great botmaster. it
I'd hope that Dr. Wallace doesn't talk like that.
Obviously you weren't around when AT&T was a government-santcioned monopoly. Telephones worked, dammit! And they were inexpensive. And customer service was great. And, since it was government-sanctioned, there was much stricter control over what the companies could do.
Then everyone started going "oh, boo, government-sanctioned monopolies are bad" and the government started splitting up these companies. AT&T used to be great: now they're shit, just like Qwest, which used to be USWest, which was a subsidiary of Ma Bell (which...wasn't that great, but, err...). Anyway. My point is, this kind of comment is extremely ignorant. While I personally hate history, I've gotta say, LEARN YOUR DAMN HISTORY!
And, if you can't get welfare, maybe you should consider getting rid of your computer and spending the money on other, more important stuff?
Finally, what the hell is a 'food company'? That reminds me of the Simpsons shopping at a 33 store where everything was labeled "merchandise".
When I first read that, I thought that it was a study that said something about how broadband was "unpatriotic." I need more caffeine...or sleep...nah, caffeine.
From the year 200AD? That's some old shit.
Y'know, there ARE alternative shells.
Anyone else thinking their 'cleanup mechanism' is gonna be Carnivore?
Petition to Remove CARP!
iTunes 3, iPod updates, iChat, iCal, iSync, a 17" iMac...!
What's next, iBrator?!!
It's already mirrored -- The WayBack Machine.
Putting extra scenes on a DVD? Unbelievable! What innovation!
The element numbers correspond to the number of neutrons a molecule has in it. As such, yes, it's quite possible to "skip" elements.