I love it when people toss around the word 'ironic' without understanding its meaning - especially when the precede it with "kind of".
I'm not saying that Stalin was a nice guy. He was at least as much of a tyrannical despot as Hitler, but, in the final analysis, it was the Red Army and the Russian peoples (and others in the Soviet states) that truly destroyed the Reich's war machine.
Americans see 'Saving Private Ryan' and they think they charged over to save the world from tyranny - sheesh!
>>You could not be more wrong. Perhaps you're not aware of the sacrifices Americans made to defeat Hitler and the popularity of both the war president (Roosevelt) and the war itself.
I don't know what kind of revisionist history books you're gnawing on there Ratzo but they sure ain't the truth.
Dissapointing and misleading article title...
on
Microsoft FUD Watch
·
· Score: 2, Funny
I thought for a minute that MS had released a new product: "The Microsoft FUD Watch". i.e. Something you could strap to your wrist and monitor the amount of FUD present in any particular technology sector at that very instant - as well as being able to tell the time, set alarms etc.
Like you, I'm a keen amateur and carry a large 'professional' camera.
I had one of those 'ski lift' type of incidents the other day. I was shooting on London's South Bank, using slow shutter speed to capture movement of large numbers of people on the walkway. Suddenly this over-glammed, logo-bedecked, middle-aged woman wanders deliberately into frame dramatically waving her hand in a STOP! motion in front of my lens.
She obviously thought she was a 'celebrity' of some sort. I just laughed at her, and she huffed away towards the Hayward Gallery!
>>Perhaps you don't realize the extent of liberalism in the way the American people embraced rushing to save the rest of the world in the 1940's.
The US would probably never have joined WWII had it not been for the Pearl Harbor attack. The US populace were on the whole quite indifferent to the war in Europe and would have been quite happy for Hitler to have taken over.
As for "rushing to save the rest of the world", the Russians did far more to defeat Hitler, at huge cost to themselves.
Yes I know what you mean, but a 'phone' today, especially something like an iPhone is not a simple 2-way audio device.
I know that no device will suit everyone, but there are a significant number of people who won't be able to use iPhone and they will feel they are excluded and missing out. Other advanced phones can be used by blind people to a greater or lesser extent.
Problem is, there are a ton of bureaucrats that will force you to make your product conform to some politically-correct ideal or other.
It's already happening. Product design departments in the EU already have to wade through huge amounts of rules and regulations to make sure the product is accessible to all, even where it makes no sense (e.g. sports equipment!).
How can sight-impaired users make use of a buttonless phone?
In the EU there is already legislation to make software, websites and devices accessible. The buttonless iPhone must score pretty low on the accessibility scale.
Packets of network traffic pass between all mobile phones and the networks continually.
I can see no reason why a network of iPhones (or Nokia or whoever's) couldn't be used as a sort of distributed, redundant computing platform, using their idle cycles (~99%) to work on small, distributed pieces of a problem.
This could be done with the 'opt-in' cooperation of the user, or unwittingly as part of the Terms of Service offered by the network operator.
The Mac offers nothing special or unique in the field of digital arts today.
It used to be the case that the Mac had better software tools and better color management but this is no longer true. The same software and specialist hardware is available for Windows and many cost-concious design shops have gone over to Windows on generic workstations.
A lot of designers still use Macs because they've always used Macs - simple as that.
Slashdot Mirror
I love it when people toss around the word 'ironic' without understanding its meaning - especially when the precede it with "kind of".
I'm not saying that Stalin was a nice guy. He was at least as much of a tyrannical despot as Hitler, but, in the final analysis, it was the Red Army and the Russian peoples (and others in the Soviet states) that truly destroyed the Reich's war machine.
Americans see 'Saving Private Ryan' and they think they charged over to save the world from tyranny - sheesh!
>>You could not be more wrong. Perhaps you're not aware of the sacrifices Americans made to defeat Hitler and the popularity of both the war president (Roosevelt) and the war itself.
I don't know what kind of revisionist history books you're gnawing on there Ratzo but they sure ain't the truth.
However, the strength of the beer here more than lives up to expectations
...is my spelling.
I thought for a minute that MS had released a new product: "The Microsoft FUD Watch". i.e. Something you could strap to your wrist and monitor the amount of FUD present in any particular technology sector at that very instant - as well as being able to tell the time, set alarms etc.
Like you, I'm a keen amateur and carry a large 'professional' camera.
I had one of those 'ski lift' type of incidents the other day. I was shooting on London's South Bank, using slow shutter speed to capture movement of large numbers of people on the walkway. Suddenly this over-glammed, logo-bedecked, middle-aged woman wanders deliberately into frame dramatically waving her hand in a STOP! motion in front of my lens.
She obviously thought she was a 'celebrity' of some sort. I just laughed at her, and she huffed away towards the Hayward Gallery!
>>Perhaps you don't realize the extent of liberalism in the way the American people embraced rushing to save the rest of the world in the 1940's.
The US would probably never have joined WWII had it not been for the Pearl Harbor attack. The US populace were on the whole quite indifferent to the war in Europe and would have been quite happy for Hitler to have taken over.
As for "rushing to save the rest of the world", the Russians did far more to defeat Hitler, at huge cost to themselves.
Disclaimer: I'm not a 2nd-lifer or into these kinds of things, so I may be talking out of my ass, but I was wondering...
Where does Jurisdiction lie in a virtual world who's only physical manifestation lies in a bunch of web servers spread all over the world?
Yes I know what you mean, but a 'phone' today, especially something like an iPhone is not a simple 2-way audio device.
I know that no device will suit everyone, but there are a significant number of people who won't be able to use iPhone and they will feel they are excluded and missing out. Other advanced phones can be used by blind people to a greater or lesser extent.
Almost any modern cell phone can be used by deaf users.
Think about it!
I agree with you.
Problem is, there are a ton of bureaucrats that will force you to make your product conform to some politically-correct ideal or other.
It's already happening. Product design departments in the EU already have to wade through huge amounts of rules and regulations to make sure the product is accessible to all, even where it makes no sense (e.g. sports equipment!).
How can people with an icebrain make sensible comments? ;)
>>a Harrison Bergeron-esque quest to prevent gadget envy
Ha ha! I love it!
It's all balck, zippered Spandex for Steve!
How can sight-impaired users make use of a buttonless phone?
In the EU there is already legislation to make software, websites and devices accessible. The buttonless iPhone must score pretty low on the accessibility scale.
I think it will happen, at least to some extent.
The cost saving to network operators could be substantial in urban areas with fewer stations/repeaters to set up and maintain.
Probably a lot of privacy issues though. Always-on phones, reporting your position 24x7 etc.
Packets of network traffic pass between all mobile phones and the networks continually.
I can see no reason why a network of iPhones (or Nokia or whoever's) couldn't be used as a sort of distributed, redundant computing platform, using their idle cycles (~99%) to work on small, distributed pieces of a problem.
This could be done with the 'opt-in' cooperation of the user, or unwittingly as part of the Terms of Service offered by the network operator.
If by 'proles' you mean rural working people, then yes, they do support hunting - overwhelmingly so!
Anyway, who are you to call hard working people "proles", you miserable, elitist arsehole?
Merriam-Webster is simply following the trend of dumbing-down the English language.
Dumb people think their words carry more weight if they add a few syllables.
>>Due to the ubiquitousness of Java, this could prove a serious security problem.
Ah! That would be 'ubiquity' then?
FFS editors!
The Sea Dragon part was an acquisition, the rest (the really impressive stuff) was done in collaboration with MS Research.
But hey, don't let the truth get in the way of an M$-bashing opportunity.
This 'dominance' is slipping away.
The Mac offers nothing special or unique in the field of digital arts today.
It used to be the case that the Mac had better software tools and better color management but this is no longer true. The same software and specialist hardware is available for Windows and many cost-concious design shops have gone over to Windows on generic workstations.
A lot of designers still use Macs because they've always used Macs - simple as that.
It is and it is a BAD idea to clear the prefetch folder.
http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000743.html
By TA's own admission, it's not an OS, just an abstraction layer on top of a real OS.
Fucktard geegaws eh?
Funny. My Mac keyboard has TWO alt keys! The option button works just like the 'Windows' button on a pc keyboard when booted into Windows.
And why do you think that Windows won't support high DPI displays, or that Macs wont remain compatible with current displays?