That all pretty much sums up my view of a proper User Group. By nature, they are a highly political animal, and the strongest force is usually the zealot camp. That is always a tragedy.
Instead of trying to teach the world how wonderful XYZ is, and why they should run it to the exclusion of everything else, a good XYZ UG would be prepared to teach those who are interested, educate their own membership in the interoperability of the platform, and be a community resource for those wanting more information or an interpretation of the market for XYZ products. That is one hell of a long sentence, but it makes my point. If I run ABC, and am told about how real men use XYZ, I might give it a look, but I would probably consign the information to the slushpile that gets read after anything else deemed interesting/important. On the other hand, show me how using XYZ in conjunction with all the ABC I have invested in will bring about a 5% time savings every week, and I'll pay close attention.
The real way to evangelize a product or system is not to claim it can "whup ass" on anything else... It has to do with showing a definitive advantage to including it in the existing scheme. You will never convince a business to scrap it's infrastructure and start over, no matter how good something is. You can, however, educate the right people to show them how everything gets along, and what specific things your product or system does better than what they have.
There is a great old story about the CEO of a company (doesn't matter which one). Exasperated with the slow growth of sales, he called together all of his top salesmen, and asked them how they sold the product. Naturally, he got as many answers as people in the meeting. So he shakes his head and asks them, "What is the most important question you can ask your potential customer?" Again, lots of different answers. "No," he said, "the most important question is 'What makes you least happy with our competitor's product?'"
The idea behind that is that you don't attack the parts that work or need to be there, or the investment someone has made. You look for ways to make the least pleasurable thing better. Not cure cancer and the common cold, just make my nose stop running for a couple of hours.
I am really getting to be a windbag, here, but to sum it all up, I think a good UG needs to make contacts in the business world, become an educational resource to the community, and develop a reputation for making things better, not just for shouting slogans at the "competition".
I was a member of the Las Vegas OS/2 User Group, and attended every LV COMDEX from 1989 to 1998. While our "mission" was guided by the UG rep within IBM, we had distinct functions. While we did succeed in getting more OS/2 on demo machines on the show floor every year, we obviously didn't do so well in the longevity department.
I am not sure from your post, but I will ASSume that you are attending as an exhibitor, not just an attendee. In that case, there are a number of things I can think of to maximize your COMDEX presence.
Get a program and floor map as soon as possible - make your own map to point out Linux-based/compatible vendors
Have some stickers, or better yet, table-tent or pop-up signs (like monitor toppers) printed, distribute to any exhibitor willing to put one on their stuff, showing where you are located and who you are.
Ask for swag! COMDEX/fall was usually good for enough freebies for the group that we had doorpizes all year long
Ask if vendors would let you feature their product at your booth - one more logo placement is usually a "yes" at COMDEX
Offer a drawing for a single quality item at the end of the show in return for signing a mailing list opt-in.
Give away swag with your logo and contact info - COMDEX has scaled back in recent years, but I used to never need to buy a pen, frisbee, or stress-ball during the rest of the year.
Use the access opportunities to line up presenters for the year - The big guys are available, and usually willing to make the trip
Think about organizing a party for Linux vendors/developers at a spot that you, as locals, know about, but is off the beaten tourist trail.
These are a few things off the top of my head. A user group can do a lot of self-promotion to locals and the industry at an event like COMDEX. Remember that your image at the show is what the developers and equipment guys will remember. Politeness goes without saying, but nearly every company responds favorably to some professionalism. Work from the standpoint that you have something to offer them, not just looking for a handout - You do have a valuable commodity. You have over 1000 members, each of which has to purchase something, somewhere. And that is the true goal of the exhibitor at COMDEX: Marketing, marketing, marketing.
I think the upshot of this entire thread is that you should have the developers create the marketing concepts behind the evals, and the marketing wankers should work on tic-tac-toe strategies until the orders come in.
Re:how does this mean faster downloads?
on
No More Rebooting?
·
· Score: 1
Well, if you have ever had to wait for half an hour for your digital camera to "download" or transfer files to the computer's HD, then you have been impacted by bandwidth... Which is a combination of things like port speed, pipeline, processor and RAM, because most everything uses some kind of checksum or other scheme to verify good transfers.
I think the operative word was "transfers" and the inept, journalistic (read: marketing) one was "download".
And, in short, will never be as accurate as that Pantone Swatchbook. Computer based art is half science, half art. The designer that forgets that is doomed to have "bad press runs" in perpetuity. As all tools, proper use (not dependence, but use) succeeds. It is never wise to pound nails with an adjustable wrench.;-)
Ok, guys, here it is. CYMK is not a light tranmission system, it is a light reflection system. It reflects selected colors in white light, not produces them. RGB is a transmissive scheme using the filtered color of direct light.
As a long time graphics guy, I constantly get in harrangues with people who insist on wasting huge amounts of money and time on "color matching" monitors and the like. IMNSHO, it simply cannot be done! The only way of knowing what the exact color you will get off a press is going to be is to use a software solution like Pantone CMS. You have to learn to ignore the color on the screen, since, at best, it can only be an approximation, and still leaves room for error in brightness/contrast, to what the press will produce. The way to get accurate color from the press is to print a test strip, using known Pantone values, from a file generated on the computer in question, then use that test strip as a guide. Of course, time and operating factors will take the press out of true with the strip eventually, but the press can be recalibrated accurately to known inked color values. WYSIWYG in color spaces for computer generated graphics is a dangerous hook to hang your hat on. It often simply is wrong. Earthtones, especially, are hard to predict without a matching system that transmits press commands by known values, which is why you will find a Pantone swatch key in nearly every serious (print destined) graphics deskdrawer.
Whew! I am not trying to rant, but the two color spaces are so different as to make me have this pet peeve. You will never see any kind of "CYMK monitor". Physics just don't work that way. The differences in CRT and LCD, as far as color goes, is minimal. The CRT pumps light through a filter system of phosphor pixels, and the LCD uses a backlight to let you see light filtered through a filter system of Liquid Crystal Display elements. (or is it "Liquid Crystal Diode?? I am getting old...)
OMG... I was the CAD Moderator on U'NInet for a few years. I connected to Chip Shapiro's board, "Absolut(e)ly Temporary", in Las Vegas (702). This was 1990-93 or so. Chip also hosted my first SLIP connection to the internet. He ran PCBoard (Clarke?)on DOS, then OS/2. We were in the OS/2 User Group together.
My preferred packages were Telix and Silly Little Mail Reader (for offline qwk mail). I was trottin hot stuff, in those days, working from my CAD plotting service bureau on Telebit Trailblazer Plus modems (19.2 to other TB+'s!!), three lines each with a cubix box connected to my novell server. I fondly remember my big "workstation", a new 486 with 16 MB RAM and a 540MB HD. SVGA ruled!
(slightly OT->) I knew the guy that wrote Improc, a graphics tool of the day, who logged on to that board as well.... It had a "jiggler" feature to shake pixels in a marked area around. Lots of laughs with the dirty gifs of the day!
The problem with yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre is not about warning people when there is a fire, but of making a false alarm, and causing panic where there shouldn't be any.
Anyone here really feel that way about security holes? More to the point, anyone really feel that there is no "fire" in MS products??
Graphics professionals don't buy Macs out of brand loyalty, they buy them because they are the best tool for the job. It is really that simple. No matter what advances have been made by Windows or Linux in the past decade, both are still lacking many of the vital features required by folk working in the print industry or in visual arts.
I really have nothing against Macs, but will someone please tell me what tools the Mac has that isn't available to a PC for graphics? Photoshop? Nope. Tablet support? Nope. Color matching? Nope. Huge foundries worth of typefaces? Nope. Ilustrator? Nope.
I am really not trying to troll here, but I keep seeing this "explanation" of why graphics professionals use Macs, but nothing to back it up, or say what the features are that make it so perfect for graphics.
Don't get me wrong, I use Macs from time to time. I have nothing against them, except that bang-for-your-buck weighs heavily on the PC side of the argument.
And, BTW, I am a graphics professional that uses mostly PCs.
This is the most sensible post in the entire topic. gmhowell, you, sir, are absolutely, positively, 100% correct. Way too many folks are platform or OS crusaders. (OK, I know, mod me down as a troll if you must!)
My entire career, I have seen the computer as a tool. A fun, interesting tool, but a tool. The biggest factor in deciding a platform or an OS is what kind of bang for the buck you get, versus the appropriateness of the available software. I have used Macs, PCs, Solaris stations, and some rabid OS's on the PC's. Each had a place. But the most important factor for using any of them was the task at hand.
I love the Mac for pure art: 2d, image-oriented things that are destined for print or screen. OTOH, I do a lot of 3d model work, and need to render photorealistic designs that then need to be produced. The Autodesk tools are perfect for that. I use AutoCAD, 3D Studio Viz, and Photoshop on the PC for that. I haven't been keeping up with the *nix world in graphics, because it cost to much when I was investing in my home equipment. That may change, as I am coming into the market for a new system (or two, if the price is right).
My point is that I can't produce photoreal renderings on a Mac and have them translate well to construction documents of sufficient complexity. I also would use the Mac if I was doing background images, or something else like that. I have a tablet on a Mac, but not the PC.
The real trick is to try and anticipate what the artist friend may get into in the next couple of years. If he/she is more into fine art, then the mac is non-technical enough to be enjoyed by a visual artist, either in static or animated formats. The PC excels at translating artistic visions into construction documents to make the design a reality. For architectural or engineering style art, it is the way to go.
the other thing I'd stick my 2-cents on is to forget about color matching at that price range. To be honest, it can be frustrating, infuriating, or impossible to match colors on screen. That's not the important thing anyway. As an artist, you have to learn the hard way that what you see is rarely, if ever, what you get. Unless you are working on a closed match-proofing system, it is more important to work in color values that work together, rather than a particular tint. When specific colors are needed at press-time or large format print, that's what Pantone matching sytems are for. Specify a pantone color, and provide the service bureau a test strip showing colors on your check print with the actual pantone number set beside them. It's far from an automated world for color. As for color on the web, forget being precise. There is no way for you to stroke the color gamut on a bazillion monitors that will view your work on the net. Harmonize, clash, and be happy.
I can see your point. But consider it has a fallout... If you thought using free software in business was hard now, it'd be absolutely impossible after such a bill was passed.
I dunno... I'm reading this discussion, and thinking that I might like to offer a special consulting service... In return for a regular security audit, and a subscription fee, I'd certify open source installations against fault (read: Liability Insurance). Might be fun and lucrative, that.
Bravo! Your second point, concerning license-based hostage-taking, is right on the money. No accountability is exactly why so much software sucks. We need a system that recognizes that software has just as much potential to do damage as hardware.
While this may scare some small developers, some thought could be put into any legal changes, such as limiting exposure to the price paid for said software. That may not be right either, considering the possibility of damage beyond the value of the offending code. But this is an excellent point to start from, and the industry stands to make very big strides in the quality and price/performance arenas as a result.
Holding someone accountable for their product happens in every other area of the economy in the USA, with the exception of bad rulings from judges. Bring on the lawyers!
Yes! Connect a 20 foot iron pole to a ground loop. Stand in a bucket of water holding the iron pole. This is guaranteed to let you know when there is lightning in the area.
It's even more absurd to know that you can get the SSN of anyone sharing your name (or the name of someone whose SSN you know).
When my father died, my mother did a search on his name at the Social Security Administration site, and got back 17 (seventeen)pages of men with the same first and last names, with SSNs, DOBs, and last known residences. That from a 65 yo lady who doesn't want to deal with the computer unless it's running a bluescreen session of DOS Word Perfect.
I am completely in agreement. I do a ton of 3D models and animating, for money, even, and I have to tell you that a tool is a tool is a tool. I would go a step or two farther, and say that the application matters more than the OS (by leaps and bounds), and this is precisely why most professional studios write their own.
The competitive edge has got to be who can render the best fur, flesh, crowds, etc. Flock of Seagulls was written to do crowd scenes by one group, and Massive is simply the code written to do the crowds in LOTR. As with FoS, Massive will live on after the 3 films, be refined a bunch, overhauled, and tweaked. But in part, Massive will be why this company is chosen for a project over CompetitorX.
See, in the real world, it doesn't matter what car you drive, as long as it gets you to work. Even in school, the brand of notebook paper has damned little to do with your GPA. The only consideration for what OS to use for a major company is, "will it run the software I want on the hardware I want, quickly and well?"
The idea that the "cost" of Linux having anything to do with the decisions of the directors to use it is really funny. Does anyone really think that a cost of even $500 per box would make or break this deal? That's why you budget, kids. Some elementary business knowlege will quickly show that in the budget for the effects for three films, the cost of any OS on rendering stations is absurdly inconsequential.
FWIW, I use a few different systems in my 3D work. Some use an OS from Redmond. Some don't. It doesn't matter to me in the least. As long as I can maintain a good throughput of work at a decent billable rate, I make money.
Re:How much power are they using?
on
Dreamhack 2001
·
· Score: 1
So, er, how much power do you suppose is pulled at the annual COMDEX show at the Las Vegas Convention Center? A "mere" 6000 computers? Not a problem, once you think about the realities of robotic lighting systems, effects machines, LOTS of sound, and all the peripherals that chew watts like cherry Pez...
Absolutely on target. I did work for a porn site for a while, between "regular" gigs. I did not want to have checks from their payroll account, for a lot of reasons (one of which was the divorce i was going through....).
I did work as a contractor, consulting for project fees. So my work wasn't anything but standard piece work in the eyes of the court, and others. As a graphics guy, I figured that a pixel was a pixel, some were just pinker than others.
Do you want to isolate yourself from the two-faced employers out there who might reject you because of a porn site job? Then do two things. First, get a dba (Doing Business As) registered in your state. Better yet, incorporate a sole proprietor corporation. Then you are a company, not an employee. You are an employee of the corporation,and the corporation is the one with the seedy contract.
Second, get paid from the site's owner account. Every porn site has at least one parent company with a tame sounding name. Much better to work for "Take Six Enterprises" than "Hot Horny Sluts". If possible, get the contract done so their shell pays your shell. You are not trying to hide money from the IRS, just make it look better on your resume.
Remember, if you are a coder, you are writing code, not licking nipples. What I mean is, if you are programming something, then the application is your product, not what data is fed into the app. Most porn sites need the same kinds of things that any other site needs, like shopping carts and secure transactions, multimedia object feeds, etc. It's all in what you call them.
Yes, Virginia, there is life after porn, and if you are careful about the details that are public (like on your resume), then the HR managers who get their knickers in a twist over "morality" issues won't be the wiser.
Slashdot Mirror
Hold on, here...
In making real-life Anime, where is Cameron going to find actors with freakishly large eyes? Marty Feldman is dead, I think.....
Of course, Digital Domain could CG them in, I suppose....
That all pretty much sums up my view of a proper User Group. By nature, they are a highly political animal, and the strongest force is usually the zealot camp. That is always a tragedy.
Instead of trying to teach the world how wonderful XYZ is, and why they should run it to the exclusion of everything else, a good XYZ UG would be prepared to teach those who are interested, educate their own membership in the interoperability of the platform, and be a community resource for those wanting more information or an interpretation of the market for XYZ products. That is one hell of a long sentence, but it makes my point. If I run ABC, and am told about how real men use XYZ, I might give it a look, but I would probably consign the information to the slushpile that gets read after anything else deemed interesting/important. On the other hand, show me how using XYZ in conjunction with all the ABC I have invested in will bring about a 5% time savings every week, and I'll pay close attention.
The real way to evangelize a product or system is not to claim it can "whup ass" on anything else... It has to do with showing a definitive advantage to including it in the existing scheme. You will never convince a business to scrap it's infrastructure and start over, no matter how good something is. You can, however, educate the right people to show them how everything gets along, and what specific things your product or system does better than what they have.
There is a great old story about the CEO of a company (doesn't matter which one). Exasperated with the slow growth of sales, he called together all of his top salesmen, and asked them how they sold the product. Naturally, he got as many answers as people in the meeting. So he shakes his head and asks them, "What is the most important question you can ask your potential customer?" Again, lots of different answers. "No," he said, "the most important question is 'What makes you least happy with our competitor's product?'"
The idea behind that is that you don't attack the parts that work or need to be there, or the investment someone has made. You look for ways to make the least pleasurable thing better. Not cure cancer and the common cold, just make my nose stop running for a couple of hours.
I am really getting to be a windbag, here, but to sum it all up, I think a good UG needs to make contacts in the business world, become an educational resource to the community, and develop a reputation for making things better, not just for shouting slogans at the "competition".
I was a member of the Las Vegas OS/2 User Group, and attended every LV COMDEX from 1989 to 1998. While our "mission" was guided by the UG rep within IBM, we had distinct functions. While we did succeed in getting more OS/2 on demo machines on the show floor every year, we obviously didn't do so well in the longevity department.
I am not sure from your post, but I will ASSume that you are attending as an exhibitor, not just an attendee. In that case, there are a number of things I can think of to maximize your COMDEX presence.
Get a program and floor map as soon as possible - make your own map to point out Linux-based/compatible vendors
Have some stickers, or better yet, table-tent or pop-up signs (like monitor toppers) printed, distribute to any exhibitor willing to put one on their stuff, showing where you are located and who you are.
Ask for swag! COMDEX/fall was usually good for enough freebies for the group that we had doorpizes all year long
Ask if vendors would let you feature their product at your booth - one more logo placement is usually a "yes" at COMDEX
Offer a drawing for a single quality item at the end of the show in return for signing a mailing list opt-in.
Give away swag with your logo and contact info - COMDEX has scaled back in recent years, but I used to never need to buy a pen, frisbee, or stress-ball during the rest of the year.
Use the access opportunities to line up presenters for the year - The big guys are available, and usually willing to make the trip
Think about organizing a party for Linux vendors/developers at a spot that you, as locals, know about, but is off the beaten tourist trail.
These are a few things off the top of my head. A user group can do a lot of self-promotion to locals and the industry at an event like COMDEX. Remember that your image at the show is what the developers and equipment guys will remember. Politeness goes without saying, but nearly every company responds favorably to some professionalism. Work from the standpoint that you have something to offer them, not just looking for a handout - You do have a valuable commodity. You have over 1000 members, each of which has to purchase something, somewhere. And that is the true goal of the exhibitor at COMDEX: Marketing, marketing, marketing.
Good luck!
I think the upshot of this entire thread is that you should have the developers create the marketing concepts behind the evals, and the marketing wankers should work on tic-tac-toe strategies until the orders come in.
Well, if you have ever had to wait for half an hour for your digital camera to "download" or transfer files to the computer's HD, then you have been impacted by bandwidth... Which is a combination of things like port speed, pipeline, processor and RAM, because most everything uses some kind of checksum or other scheme to verify good transfers.
I think the operative word was "transfers" and the inept, journalistic (read: marketing) one was "download".
Your problem obviously was relying on Microsoft Diagnotics to tune your timing. Hasn't worked properly since DOS 3
And, in short, will never be as accurate as that Pantone Swatchbook. Computer based art is half science, half art. The designer that forgets that is doomed to have "bad press runs" in perpetuity. As all tools, proper use (not dependence, but use) succeeds. It is never wise to pound nails with an adjustable wrench.;-)
Doh!
Ok, guys, here it is. CYMK is not a light tranmission system, it is a light reflection system. It reflects selected colors in white light, not produces them. RGB is a transmissive scheme using the filtered color of direct light.
As a long time graphics guy, I constantly get in harrangues with people who insist on wasting huge amounts of money and time on "color matching" monitors and the like. IMNSHO, it simply cannot be done! The only way of knowing what the exact color you will get off a press is going to be is to use a software solution like Pantone CMS. You have to learn to ignore the color on the screen, since, at best, it can only be an approximation, and still leaves room for error in brightness/contrast, to what the press will produce. The way to get accurate color from the press is to print a test strip, using known Pantone values, from a file generated on the computer in question, then use that test strip as a guide. Of course, time and operating factors will take the press out of true with the strip eventually, but the press can be recalibrated accurately to known inked color values. WYSIWYG in color spaces for computer generated graphics is a dangerous hook to hang your hat on. It often simply is wrong. Earthtones, especially, are hard to predict without a matching system that transmits press commands by known values, which is why you will find a Pantone swatch key in nearly every serious (print destined) graphics deskdrawer.
Whew! I am not trying to rant, but the two color spaces are so different as to make me have this pet peeve. You will never see any kind of "CYMK monitor". Physics just don't work that way. The differences in CRT and LCD, as far as color goes, is minimal. The CRT pumps light through a filter system of phosphor pixels, and the LCD uses a backlight to let you see light filtered through a filter system of Liquid Crystal Display elements. (or is it "Liquid Crystal Diode?? I am getting old...)
OMG... I was the CAD Moderator on U'NInet for a few years. I connected to Chip Shapiro's board, "Absolut(e)ly Temporary", in Las Vegas (702). This was 1990-93 or so. Chip also hosted my first SLIP connection to the internet. He ran PCBoard (Clarke?)on DOS, then OS/2. We were in the OS/2 User Group together.
My preferred packages were Telix and Silly Little Mail Reader (for offline qwk mail). I was trottin hot stuff, in those days, working from my CAD plotting service bureau on Telebit Trailblazer Plus modems (19.2 to other TB+'s!!), three lines each with a cubix box connected to my novell server. I fondly remember my big "workstation", a new 486 with 16 MB RAM and a 540MB HD. SVGA ruled!
(slightly OT->) I knew the guy that wrote Improc, a graphics tool of the day, who logged on to that board as well.... It had a "jiggler" feature to shake pixels in a marked area around. Lots of laughs with the dirty gifs of the day!
"The quality goes in after the name goes on!".... Er, wait a minute...
The problem with yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre is not about warning people when there is a fire, but of making a false alarm, and causing panic where there shouldn't be any.
Anyone here really feel that way about security holes? More to the point, anyone really feel that there is no "fire" in MS products??
Let's not forget, "Perception is Reality", especially for consulting groups' images.
I really have nothing against Macs, but will someone please tell me what tools the Mac has that isn't available to a PC for graphics? Photoshop? Nope. Tablet support? Nope. Color matching? Nope. Huge foundries worth of typefaces? Nope. Ilustrator? Nope.
I am really not trying to troll here, but I keep seeing this "explanation" of why graphics professionals use Macs, but nothing to back it up, or say what the features are that make it so perfect for graphics.
Don't get me wrong, I use Macs from time to time. I have nothing against them, except that bang-for-your-buck weighs heavily on the PC side of the argument.
And, BTW, I am a graphics professional that uses mostly PCs.
Bravo!
This is the most sensible post in the entire topic. gmhowell, you, sir, are absolutely, positively, 100% correct. Way too many folks are platform or OS crusaders. (OK, I know, mod me down as a troll if you must!)
My entire career, I have seen the computer as a tool. A fun, interesting tool, but a tool. The biggest factor in deciding a platform or an OS is what kind of bang for the buck you get, versus the appropriateness of the available software. I have used Macs, PCs, Solaris stations, and some rabid OS's on the PC's. Each had a place. But the most important factor for using any of them was the task at hand.
I love the Mac for pure art: 2d, image-oriented things that are destined for print or screen. OTOH, I do a lot of 3d model work, and need to render photorealistic designs that then need to be produced. The Autodesk tools are perfect for that. I use AutoCAD, 3D Studio Viz, and Photoshop on the PC for that. I haven't been keeping up with the *nix world in graphics, because it cost to much when I was investing in my home equipment. That may change, as I am coming into the market for a new system (or two, if the price is right).
My point is that I can't produce photoreal renderings on a Mac and have them translate well to construction documents of sufficient complexity. I also would use the Mac if I was doing background images, or something else like that. I have a tablet on a Mac, but not the PC.
The real trick is to try and anticipate what the artist friend may get into in the next couple of years. If he/she is more into fine art, then the mac is non-technical enough to be enjoyed by a visual artist, either in static or animated formats. The PC excels at translating artistic visions into construction documents to make the design a reality. For architectural or engineering style art, it is the way to go.
the other thing I'd stick my 2-cents on is to forget about color matching at that price range. To be honest, it can be frustrating, infuriating, or impossible to match colors on screen. That's not the important thing anyway. As an artist, you have to learn the hard way that what you see is rarely, if ever, what you get. Unless you are working on a closed match-proofing system, it is more important to work in color values that work together, rather than a particular tint. When specific colors are needed at press-time or large format print, that's what Pantone matching sytems are for. Specify a pantone color, and provide the service bureau a test strip showing colors on your check print with the actual pantone number set beside them. It's far from an automated world for color. As for color on the web, forget being precise. There is no way for you to stroke the color gamut on a bazillion monitors that will view your work on the net. Harmonize, clash, and be happy.
I dunno... I'm reading this discussion, and thinking that I might like to offer a special consulting service... In return for a regular security audit, and a subscription fee, I'd certify open source installations against fault (read: Liability Insurance). Might be fun and lucrative, that.
Bravo! Your second point, concerning license-based hostage-taking, is right on the money. No accountability is exactly why so much software sucks. We need a system that recognizes that software has just as much potential to do damage as hardware.
While this may scare some small developers, some thought could be put into any legal changes, such as limiting exposure to the price paid for said software. That may not be right either, considering the possibility of damage beyond the value of the offending code. But this is an excellent point to start from, and the industry stands to make very big strides in the quality and price/performance arenas as a result.
Holding someone accountable for their product happens in every other area of the economy in the USA, with the exception of bad rulings from judges. Bring on the lawyers!
Yes! Connect a 20 foot iron pole to a ground loop. Stand in a bucket of water holding the iron pole. This is guaranteed to let you know when there is lightning in the area.
HJ-Osmet Mode On:
"....I spoof dead people...."
HJ-Osmet Mode Off
In short, a processor with on-board RAM and I/O. But reeeeeeeeeeeeally tiny.
Anyone interested can read his sponsor's account on his blog, as well as blog entries for the expedition before the tragedy.
Peter Blake's blog
Sorry, i just Checked Netstat:
It's even more absurd to know that you can get the SSN of anyone sharing your name (or the name of someone whose SSN you know).
When my father died, my mother did a search on his name at the Social Security Administration site, and got back 17 ( seventeen )pages of men with the same first and last names, with SSNs, DOBs, and last known residences. That from a 65 yo lady who doesn't want to deal with the computer unless it's running a bluescreen session of DOS Word Perfect.
I am completely in agreement. I do a ton of 3D models and animating, for money, even, and I have to tell you that a tool is a tool is a tool. I would go a step or two farther, and say that the application matters more than the OS (by leaps and bounds), and this is precisely why most professional studios write their own.
The competitive edge has got to be who can render the best fur, flesh, crowds, etc. Flock of Seagulls was written to do crowd scenes by one group, and Massive is simply the code written to do the crowds in LOTR. As with FoS, Massive will live on after the 3 films, be refined a bunch, overhauled, and tweaked. But in part, Massive will be why this company is chosen for a project over CompetitorX.
See, in the real world, it doesn't matter what car you drive, as long as it gets you to work. Even in school, the brand of notebook paper has damned little to do with your GPA. The only consideration for what OS to use for a major company is, "will it run the software I want on the hardware I want, quickly and well?"
The idea that the "cost" of Linux having anything to do with the decisions of the directors to use it is really funny. Does anyone really think that a cost of even $500 per box would make or break this deal? That's why you budget, kids. Some elementary business knowlege will quickly show that in the budget for the effects for three films, the cost of any OS on rendering stations is absurdly inconsequential.
FWIW, I use a few different systems in my 3D work. Some use an OS from Redmond. Some don't. It doesn't matter to me in the least. As long as I can maintain a good throughput of work at a decent billable rate, I make money.
So, er, how much power do you suppose is pulled at the annual COMDEX show at the Las Vegas Convention Center? A "mere" 6000 computers? Not a problem, once you think about the realities of robotic lighting systems, effects machines, LOTS of sound, and all the peripherals that chew watts like cherry Pez...
Absolutely on target. I did work for a porn site for a while, between "regular" gigs. I did not want to have checks from their payroll account, for a lot of reasons (one of which was the divorce i was going through....).
I did work as a contractor, consulting for project fees. So my work wasn't anything but standard piece work in the eyes of the court, and others. As a graphics guy, I figured that a pixel was a pixel, some were just pinker than others.
Do you want to isolate yourself from the two-faced employers out there who might reject you because of a porn site job? Then do two things. First, get a dba (Doing Business As) registered in your state. Better yet, incorporate a sole proprietor corporation. Then you are a company, not an employee. You are an employee of the corporation,and the corporation is the one with the seedy contract.
Second, get paid from the site's owner account. Every porn site has at least one parent company with a tame sounding name. Much better to work for "Take Six Enterprises" than "Hot Horny Sluts". If possible, get the contract done so their shell pays your shell. You are not trying to hide money from the IRS, just make it look better on your resume.
Remember, if you are a coder, you are writing code, not licking nipples. What I mean is, if you are programming something, then the application is your product, not what data is fed into the app. Most porn sites need the same kinds of things that any other site needs, like shopping carts and secure transactions, multimedia object feeds, etc. It's all in what you call them.
Yes, Virginia, there is life after porn, and if you are careful about the details that are public (like on your resume), then the HR managers who get their knickers in a twist over "morality" issues won't be the wiser.
Just a friendly note from a "survivor"...