Of course, the difference is, digital information can be copied infinitely, while labor can't.
I wonder, if we had replicator technology today would it create a star-trek style utopia, or would manufacturing companies rush to try to protect their 'intellectual property'?
Btw, the Chinese government no longer considers itself to be "Communist".
The taliban stoped the growing of opium, as per our request, but dumped their stock as soon as we declared 'war' in order rase capital to fight us off.
Actually it's way off base. It wasn't until the US started providing aid to Taliban Afghanistan that the Taliban cracked down on Opium production. And it wasn't a capital offence. If you got caught they marched you down the street warring a wreath of opium and then threw you in jail for like a month.
The punishment for being clean shaven was higher.
By your argument, I assume that you don't buy the argument that most heroin sales support terrorism (making users guilty of that)?
Does ANYONE believe that? The reality in Afghanistan was that drugs supported our allies in the northern alliance then did the taliban after Bush gave them (the taliban) a bunch of money to stop growing it.
Of course the taliban probably considered them terrorists, but whatever.
I agree with the AC: Might as well give her the best shoes you can to walk all over you.
I mean really, not only would you give up your money to please this women you'd give up your morals? That's just sad.
If my gf/fiance demanded I do something I had a moral problem with, I'd just get a new gf. (well, if I couldn't get her to accept that I wasn't going to do it)
I'm not saying that buying a diamond is that bad, but that's a pretty weak argument.
Are you saying that CG films don't need actors, and thus casting companies to find them?
Anyway, who cares? It's called frictional unemployment... new technology makes old jobs obsolete. You could ask that question about just about any industry.
Personally I don't think this'll be a big deal for quite some time, for one thing you can tell real motion from computerized stuff pretty easily, mostly because animators are lazy, and/or don't have enough time to produce really good motion. If you wanted to do a feature film with CG that looked totally real, you have to spend as much on animators getting the motion down as you would on all the other stuff... so jobs will be transferred, not lost.
The other issue is image quality, particularly reflections and lighting. Radiosity rendering takes a long time, and anything else is pretty obvious right away. It will always be cheaper to whip out a camera and film a tree and a field then trying to calculate every single ray of light as it bounces around and multiplies all over the place. It would probably be cheaper to have a costume designer make a dress and film it then have a costume designer work with more difficult tools to build one on a PC... and I suspect it'll be cheaper to hire and actor and get all the quality facial movements and stuff down rather then animating them.
A good example of this is in minority report. In one scene a bubble comes out Tom Cruse's nose while he's under water. It looks almost like CG, but it isn't. He just let a bubble out of his nose. Imagine how much money they saved by doing things that way rather then on a computer.
Yeah, you're probably right. I know at least a dozen guys on my block alone who are designing and building single-stage-to-orbit manned launch vehicles. Nothing [apple.com] good [hp.com] ever [nps.gov] came out of garage tinkering, anyhow.
We straightened the bent frame by wedging it between the trailer and Joseph's tractor, and running a floor jack under the middle until it straightened out. Russ gave it a quick paint job.
I don't doubt that Carmack is a smart guy, but these guys are basically garage tinkerers. I wouldn't really want to fly into space on a vehicle that used duct tape as an integral part of the craft. Even if these guys can build something capable of propelling someone into space, I wouldn't want to actually be on it until the design had been worked out by real engineers.
Aside from some of the computer control stuff, I doubt they are really doing all that much innovated (well, aside from cost saving measures:P). I'm sure they're having a lot of fun though:)
PowerPC has nothing whatsoever to do with the x86 instruction set. It's just a brand name for a CPU architecture, like "Pentium", "Athlon", or "Alpha". In fact, it isn't even mac spesific.
The processor is further enhanced by a vector processing unit implementing over 160 specialized vector instructions and...
Yet Mac zealots will still be going on and on about how PPC is better because "Its RISC!". Never mind that the 486 only had 142 instructions total or anything like that.
Yes, I suppose you're right. Still though, I think I could produce that much force if I had a good lead in. If I hit something and managed to accelerate it to 100mph in.004 seconds I would have done it.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, the difference is, digital information can be copied infinitely, while labor can't.
I wonder, if we had replicator technology today would it create a star-trek style utopia, or would manufacturing companies rush to try to protect their 'intellectual property'?
Btw, the Chinese government no longer considers itself to be "Communist".
The taliban stoped the growing of opium, as per our request, but dumped their stock as soon as we declared 'war' in order rase capital to fight us off.
Actually it's way off base. It wasn't until the US started providing aid to Taliban Afghanistan that the Taliban cracked down on Opium production. And it wasn't a capital offence. If you got caught they marched you down the street warring a wreath of opium and then threw you in jail for like a month. The punishment for being clean shaven was higher.
By your argument, I assume that you don't buy the argument that most heroin sales support terrorism (making users guilty of that)?
Does ANYONE believe that? The reality in Afghanistan was that drugs supported our allies in the northern alliance then did the taliban after Bush gave them (the taliban) a bunch of money to stop growing it.
Of course the taliban probably considered them terrorists, but whatever.
I agree with the AC: Might as well give her the best shoes you can to walk all over you.
I mean really, not only would you give up your money to please this women you'd give up your morals? That's just sad.
If my gf/fiance demanded I do something I had a moral problem with, I'd just get a new gf. (well, if I couldn't get her to accept that I wasn't going to do it)
I'm not saying that buying a diamond is that bad, but that's a pretty weak argument.
Are you saying that CG films don't need actors, and thus casting companies to find them?
Anyway, who cares? It's called frictional unemployment... new technology makes old jobs obsolete. You could ask that question about just about any industry.
Personally I don't think this'll be a big deal for quite some time, for one thing you can tell real motion from computerized stuff pretty easily, mostly because animators are lazy, and/or don't have enough time to produce really good motion. If you wanted to do a feature film with CG that looked totally real, you have to spend as much on animators getting the motion down as you would on all the other stuff... so jobs will be transferred, not lost.
The other issue is image quality, particularly reflections and lighting. Radiosity rendering takes a long time, and anything else is pretty obvious right away. It will always be cheaper to whip out a camera and film a tree and a field then trying to calculate every single ray of light as it bounces around and multiplies all over the place. It would probably be cheaper to have a costume designer make a dress and film it then have a costume designer work with more difficult tools to build one on a PC... and I suspect it'll be cheaper to hire and actor and get all the quality facial movements and stuff down rather then animating them.
A good example of this is in minority report. In one scene a bubble comes out Tom Cruse's nose while he's under water. It looks almost like CG, but it isn't. He just let a bubble out of his nose. Imagine how much money they saved by doing things that way rather then on a computer.
Yeah, you're probably right. I know at least a dozen guys on my block alone who are designing and building single-stage-to-orbit manned launch vehicles. Nothing [apple.com] good [hp.com] ever [nps.gov] came out of garage tinkering, anyhow.
Would you trust your life to an Apple 1?
from the site:
:P). I'm sure they're having a lot of fun though :)
We straightened the bent frame by wedging it between the trailer and Joseph's tractor, and running a floor jack under the middle until it straightened out. Russ gave it a quick paint job.
I don't doubt that Carmack is a smart guy, but these guys are basically garage tinkerers. I wouldn't really want to fly into space on a vehicle that used duct tape as an integral part of the craft. Even if these guys can build something capable of propelling someone into space, I wouldn't want to actually be on it until the design had been worked out by real engineers.
Aside from some of the computer control stuff, I doubt they are really doing all that much innovated (well, aside from cost saving measures
That all 160 of these vector instructions take that format? I do find that a bit hard to belive.
Also, load store instructions don't take that form.
"Hey, can I fire you?"
:P
Looks like they could
PowerPC has nothing whatsoever to do with the x86 instruction set. It's just a brand name for a CPU architecture, like "Pentium", "Athlon", or "Alpha". In fact, it isn't even mac spesific.
The processor is further enhanced by a vector processing unit implementing over 160 specialized vector instructions and...
Yet Mac zealots will still be going on and on about how PPC is better because "Its RISC!". Never mind that the 486 only had 142 instructions total or anything like that.
But they didn't lose controll untill 2001, so you could have goten 2 more years of of freedom from other people watching TV if you had wanted to.
Taliban Afghanistan banned television before legalized it. So you could have moved from Butan to Afghanistan. If you wanted to.
I don't even want to think about that.
I get my valuesystem from the web and thats the way I likes it
He wrote "goto considered harmful" in 1968
I use M$ products and read slashdot. I don't pay for them, but an ad here might clue me in on pirating the next version of something.
I would hate trying to take notes with an iPaq.
I mean, not that I ever take notes anyway, but still.
Yes, and they can be exicuted if they traveled to China.
But, they won't be.
Yes, I suppose you're right. Still though, I think I could produce that much force if I had a good lead in. If I hit something and managed to accelerate it to 100mph in .004 seconds I would have done it.
Newton doesn't (as far as I know) prevent any of this stuff, it's Einstein's relativity.
Yeh, someone made a flash animation with really obnoxious sound effects of that.
g is just a mesure of force. 1000g is just 9800 newtons. I could probably generate that much force with my car.
let's assume graviry is mass, so shooting 'gravity' is shooting mass...
Yes, and while we're at it, lets assume that light is force, pressure is density, and that current is pizza.
from what I know, the devices work by reflecting (and, I guess in this case) amplifying earth's gravity.
There is no energy 'inherent' in the gravity at earths surface, just force. energy is force times distance, IIRC.
So if you dropped a 1kg weight 1 meter, 1 watt of energy would be used up.