Must be part of a broader strategy. This sort of misinformation is being used also in FUD campaigns against Mac OS X. For example, "Mac is less secure than Win. Apple has released more security patches in the last year than Microsoft."
Ah well, it doesn't take much to convince some people...
I don't think it's a matter of discrimination between "noise" and not. It's just that steady signals are more efficiently filtered than intermittent signals. Hence, you can't hear the airplane engines, but you can hear the jabber. At least with the noise cancellation headphones I've tried. Perhaps the technology has advanced lately?
I don't understand why the noise cancellation headphones are so popular. They just reduce the background, making the cellphone shouters more clearly audible.
I use gray noise - equalized pink noise (See the Wiki). It covers up everything with an even background that you forget you're even hearing. Turns a busy office into an acoustic oasis. Even better is to pop in some plugs on top of that.
Try this: If you strip away enough you can get to the fact that every Hollywood movie has one of two plots:
There is much more that can be conveyed in a movie than that. Go see some foreign films, documentaries, or independent films.
More broadly, you were hitting on one of the basic elements in human story-telling - a protagonist. I ask that you please do not perform your insightful analysis on any famous literature, such as Shakespeare.
The evangelical-dominated state school board recently voted to accept a new set of standards that mandates it. Final vote in October.
More frightening still, they're also changing the definition of science itself that is taught in the classroom. From "seeking natural explanations" to "seeking logical explanations," giving easier entree to ID.
As it turns out, Apple blew the description of its "aural feedback" and "touch sensitivity" out of proportion and led most of us to believe that 1) there was some sort of speaker built into the mouse with synthetic mouse sounds coming out of it, and 2) the shell might be solid-state touch-sensitive like our beloved iPod wheels."
When someone says "should of" instead of "should have," most seasoned English speakers understand exactly what that phrase means. Yes, communication has happened, and the language has served its purpose.
Communication has indeed happened. In addition to what was said, the speaker has also communicated, "I can't be bothered to pay attention to details, therefore what I have to say is of little value."
I response to other posts, this is with auto-grammar and auto-spelling turned OFF, and a document open. Even for a blank document, it hovers around 8 % CPU usage.
My Powerbook runs hotter if any of the MS apps are running, even in the background, so even idling they're hitting the processor hard.
Yup. Open up the Activity Monitor/Process Viewer and you'll see that Word X is sucking up 10-25% of your processor cycles on a 1 GHz laptop. Even if when it's in the background. You'll never see another app so egregious.
To Do list? Depends on the timing:
* 1 Day - brain
* 1 Week - Post-Its
* >1 Week - iCal, which emails me an alert
Appointments work similarly.
I move regularly between three computers in different locations, and Apple's free iCal/AddressBook are enough to keep things in order and sync'ed between them. And web access to boot!
That's good enough for us scientists, but may not be enough for everybody.
People need to realize that nanoparticles (etc.) are not new. It's just that humans are now able to control what nanoparticles (etc.) we make, and to explore and exploit their unique properties. We have made nanoparticles through all of human history, and they were around before that. Our environment is full of them.
For example, any time you burn something, like wood, you are generating jillions and jillions of nanoparticles.
If you think nanoparticles are a problem, then stop driving your car, stop cooking, and stop using electricity before whining to me.
IAANS. The issue here is that Nano-Tex(TM) in pants are advertised as having had a "treatment at the molecular level" during fabric finishing. They mention whiskers and molecular "hooks."
Translation: "Chemistry." They're using "nano" as a marketing buzzword. They have a chemical treatment for fabrics, like many others.
It takes 5 minutes to sweep 1300 sqft of wood floor.
I meant that it takes 5 minutes with a big handheld dustmop if you have no furniture, in which case a Roomba is pointless. The Roomba would take all day if it didn't get stuck.
This is a Roomba with different floor-cleaning head, but the same random-walk navigation system.
We have a Roomba. The thing inevitably gets stuck under a chair within 20 minutes. These things only work properly if you have a huge space and almost no furniture. It takes 5 minutes to sweep 1300 sqft of wood floor.
RealNetworks had streaming audio ten years ago, over modems. Ten! They were way ahead of anyone else, but threw it all away and by trying to turn it into an invasive advertising platform. Real could have absolutely owned streaming audio, but threw it all away. Everyone else caught up years ago. They deserve it.
Just because it wasn't cheap enough for joe sickpack to have laying about his hard drive, doesn't mean it does not exist.
Way back in 1996 we were pitch-shifting tracks in multitrack recordings on a Joe-sixpack budget, turning an acoustic guitar into a bass, among other things. All for the low, low price of $35 using Alberto Ricci's SoundEffects 0.9.2 shareware, plus a DSP plugin ($10?) from a fellow named Mike Norris. Producing full-length multitrack songs required stretching the hardware and software to its limits back then. Fun.
Sleep cycles are about 90 minutes long, so setting the alarm at a 90-minute interval from when you fall asleep will make it more likely that you'll wake up on the high side of sleep, and more likely that you'll feel refreshed. The rule fails if something disturbs your sleep pattern, though, which is where this device (if it exists) would be better.
Slashdot Mirror
Must be part of a broader strategy. This sort of misinformation is being used also in FUD campaigns against Mac OS X. For example, "Mac is less secure than Win. Apple has released more security patches in the last year than Microsoft."
Ah well, it doesn't take much to convince some people...
I don't think it's a matter of discrimination between "noise" and not. It's just that steady signals are more efficiently filtered than intermittent signals. Hence, you can't hear the airplane engines, but you can hear the jabber. At least with the noise cancellation headphones I've tried. Perhaps the technology has advanced lately?
I don't understand why the noise cancellation headphones are so popular. They just reduce the background, making the cellphone shouters more clearly audible.
I use gray noise - equalized pink noise (See the Wiki). It covers up everything with an even background that you forget you're even hearing. Turns a busy office into an acoustic oasis. Even better is to pop in some plugs on top of that.
Why have you stopped playing?
I took a math class.
You were close.
Try this: If you strip away enough you can get to the fact that every Hollywood movie has one of two plots:
There is much more that can be conveyed in a movie than that. Go see some foreign films, documentaries, or independent films.
More broadly, you were hitting on one of the basic elements in human story-telling - a protagonist. I ask that you please do not perform your insightful analysis on any famous literature, such as Shakespeare.
Creators and Looters is what Ayn Rand called them. Go read Atlas Shrugged.
-
Kansas.
The evangelical-dominated state school board recently voted to accept a new set of standards that mandates it. Final vote in October.
More frightening still, they're also changing the definition of science itself that is taught in the classroom. From "seeking natural explanations" to "seeking logical explanations," giving easier entree to ID.
Thankfully, this opens the door to other "alternative" ideas that equally as valid as ID, such as Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. Also described in Wikipedia.
to be fair, we should ask the proponents of ID to teach particle physics and celestial mechanics in the church?
By "us" I think you mean "you." Apple's description is entirely clear.
Who cares if it has a speaker or not, as long as it feels natural in use?
Doesn't Duracell(TM) sponsor their periodic smoke-detector-battery campaign?
A computer is a tool. You use it to get stuff done.
An Apple Mac does its best to help you do your stuff done, and gets out of your way otherwise.
This is why many people love their Macs. As long as that doesn't change, we won't care what's on the inside.
Communication has indeed happened. In addition to what was said, the speaker has also communicated, "I can't be bothered to pay attention to details, therefore what I have to say is of little value."
I response to other posts, this is with auto-grammar and auto-spelling turned OFF, and a document open. Even for a blank document, it hovers around 8 % CPU usage.
Yup. Open up the Activity Monitor/Process Viewer and you'll see that Word X is sucking up 10-25% of your processor cycles on a 1 GHz laptop. Even if when it's in the background. You'll never see another app so egregious.
To Do list? Depends on the timing:
* 1 Day - brain
* 1 Week - Post-Its
* >1 Week - iCal, which emails me an alert
Appointments work similarly.
I move regularly between three computers in different locations, and Apple's free iCal/AddressBook are enough to keep things in order and sync'ed between them. And web access to boot!
That's good enough for us scientists, but may not be enough for everybody.
People need to realize that nanoparticles (etc.) are not new. It's just that humans are now able to control what nanoparticles (etc.) we make, and to explore and exploit their unique properties. We have made nanoparticles through all of human history, and they were around before that. Our environment is full of them.
For example, any time you burn something, like wood, you are generating jillions and jillions of nanoparticles.
If you think nanoparticles are a problem, then stop driving your car, stop cooking, and stop using electricity before whining to me.
IAANS. The issue here is that Nano-Tex(TM) in pants are advertised as having had a "treatment at the molecular level" during fabric finishing. They mention whiskers and molecular "hooks."
Translation: "Chemistry." They're using "nano" as a marketing buzzword. They have a chemical treatment for fabrics, like many others.
It works well I hear, but nano it ain't.
It takes 5 minutes to sweep 1300 sqft of wood floor.
I meant that it takes 5 minutes with a big handheld dustmop if you have no furniture, in which case a Roomba is pointless. The Roomba would take all day if it didn't get stuck.
This is a Roomba with different floor-cleaning head, but the same random-walk navigation system.
We have a Roomba. The thing inevitably gets stuck under a chair within 20 minutes. These things only work properly if you have a huge space and almost no furniture. It takes 5 minutes to sweep 1300 sqft of wood floor.
Why oh why did I waste my money on a Roomba?
Dear Slashdot,
Thank you for bringing this opportunity for purchase of Star Wars paraphernalia to my attention.
I'm glad that the ad-free pay-for-subscription model is working out for you.
Good bye.
RealNetworks had streaming audio ten years ago, over modems. Ten! They were way ahead of anyone else, but threw it all away and by trying to turn it into an invasive advertising platform. Real could have absolutely owned streaming audio, but threw it all away. Everyone else caught up years ago. They deserve it.
Way back in 1996 we were pitch-shifting tracks in multitrack recordings on a Joe-sixpack budget, turning an acoustic guitar into a bass, among other things. All for the low, low price of $35 using Alberto Ricci's SoundEffects 0.9.2 shareware, plus a DSP plugin ($10?) from a fellow named Mike Norris. Producing full-length multitrack songs required stretching the hardware and software to its limits back then. Fun.
This may beat the 90-minute rule.
Sleep cycles are about 90 minutes long, so setting the alarm at a 90-minute interval from when you fall asleep will make it more likely that you'll wake up on the high side of sleep, and more likely that you'll feel refreshed. The rule fails if something disturbs your sleep pattern, though, which is where this device (if it exists) would be better.
It's called Photoshop.