If you don't actually study art history, it is very unlikely you will understand what is so great about Mona Lisa and why it is considered a masterpiece, while many art works of the time, painted as skillfully are not.
The art itself, first of all, is about conveying an *idea* and/or *emotion*. The medium and the implementation is always secondary. Some ideas are best expressed as sculptures, some as realistic paintings, some as buildings (cathedrals) and some as just a couple of brush strokes on a canvas. I've seen plenty of photo-realistic paintings, done with a great amount of skill, but which nevertheless were dull and boring as far as art is concerned. I've also seen a lot of cases where the painter should have written a short story, but instead he chose to create a painting, because this is where his/her skill lies (example of wrong medium).
You don't have to feel stupid, but you do have to make some effort to actually understand some piece of art.
In other words, skill is about the *artist*, while the art has to be about... art itself. If you are looking at the painting and you think "hey, this guy is pretty good", it draws the focus from the *art* to the *artist*. It is just a show off. You you look at it and you think "this is really interesting (inspiring, pleasant -- whatever)", then this is a real art.
I suggest you, when looking at the painting, think of it this way: if you had the raw skill to paint something like this, would you actually want to do it?
The problem is that "economy wellness" is defined in terms that have nothing to do with well being of 95% of population. They try to drive up totally meaningless numbers (DJIA, S&Ps anyone?). When defined like this, unions *are* driving economy down.
This shit will continue, unless we convince government to shove GDP, DJIA, S&Ps and other shitty metrics up their collective ass and come up with something that actually makes sense for most people.
Yeah, I understand that, but making an extension for Chrome, that will help you set private/public key pair and let you decrypt email in your browser is still doable.
...patent for an embedded software translation machine that streamlines data sharing and eliminates code bloat to create efficient communication between devices
Wow, I can definitely see myself using that! Where can I buy it?
Well, pretty much any sort of creativity: creating/playing/processing music, creating/editing pictures, creating/editing video, writing software.
I can give you writing novels, because the requirement for tool is quite minimalistic and the fact that you can write anywhere probably makes the laptop perfect for it.
Again, I'm not claiming that you can't create/edit videos on you tablet, I'm just saying that they are by far not the best tool for any of those tasks.
I kinda feel that this is the problem with all mobile devices. You can do pretty much everything with them, but for anything you use them for there is a device that will beat a crap out of it in terms of functionality, usability, everything. It may be a good compromise, I mean it *is* portable and you *can* do pretty much anything, but if you are a professional, you have to have a real thing.
The good thing about Open Source is that if two contributors strongly disagree on something, both are given an equal opportunity to prove their point. In the end, society wins.
I'm amazed by the amount of damage "touch" have done to UI design. Everything now has to be touch! My MP3 player (iAudio10, which is otherwise cool) does not have physical buttons for forward/backward anymore, so I have to wake the sucker before switching the song if I choose to.
That is exactly why I'm using FLAC. I mean, nobody arguing that mp3 gives you better quality than FLAC, the whole point is to save some space on hard drive. Which is dirt cheap this days, so why bother.
Only you aren't really paying the person who created the product. You are paying to the company that usurped the right to distribute that content, taking that right away FROM THE AUTHOR himself.
And please don't give me the bullshit that the author had a choice, willfully signed the contract yada yada. I know it he did. This does not change the fact that you are not paying to the author in any way.
The main reason there is an outrage about copyright laws is not the money. It is that people enforcing it appeal to moral principles, while at the same time acting like a total scumbags.
The artists need to be compensated. The current model we have is not the one I would have called fair, is what I'm saying.
Slashdot Mirror
You confuse the raw skill with an art.
If you don't actually study art history, it is very unlikely you will understand what is so great about Mona Lisa and why it is considered a masterpiece, while many art works of the time, painted as skillfully are not.
The art itself, first of all, is about conveying an *idea* and/or *emotion*. The medium and the implementation is always secondary. Some ideas are best expressed as sculptures, some as realistic paintings, some as buildings (cathedrals) and some as just a couple of brush strokes on a canvas. I've seen plenty of photo-realistic paintings, done with a great amount of skill, but which nevertheless were dull and boring as far as art is concerned. I've also seen a lot of cases where the painter should have written a short story, but instead he chose to create a painting, because this is where his/her skill lies (example of wrong medium).
You don't have to feel stupid, but you do have to make some effort to actually understand some piece of art.
In other words, skill is about the *artist*, while the art has to be about ... art itself. If you are looking at the painting and you think "hey, this guy is pretty good", it draws the focus from the *art* to the *artist*. It is just a show off. You you look at it and you think "this is really interesting (inspiring, pleasant -- whatever)", then this is a real art.
I suggest you, when looking at the painting, think of it this way: if you had the raw skill to paint something like this, would you actually want to do it?
So, we are modding a flamebait shit like this 'Insightful' nowadays?
Well, this is actually true.
The problem is that "economy wellness" is defined in terms that have nothing to do with well being of 95% of population. They try to drive up totally meaningless numbers (DJIA, S&Ps anyone?). When defined like this, unions *are* driving economy down.
This shit will continue, unless we convince government to shove GDP, DJIA, S&Ps and other shitty metrics up their collective ass and come up with something that actually makes sense for most people.
Well, I *do* have a facebook account, but I haven't logged in for like 2years or so and none of the information about me there is true.
If they were covered by patent, we would either a) have all went extinct of starvation b) learned how to eat grass.
Yeah, I understand that, but making an extension for Chrome, that will help you set private/public key pair and let you decrypt email in your browser is still doable.
Wow, I can definitely see myself using that! Where can I buy it?
Well, pretty much any sort of creativity: creating/playing/processing music, creating/editing pictures, creating/editing video, writing software.
I can give you writing novels, because the requirement for tool is quite minimalistic and the fact that you can write anywhere probably makes the laptop perfect for it.
Again, I'm not claiming that you can't create/edit videos on you tablet, I'm just saying that they are by far not the best tool for any of those tasks.
I thought Confirmation Bias *is* a supernatural power.
The point was more about creativity.
Still, I'm pretty sure most of those tasks were solved by special devices long before iStuff showed up.
I kinda feel that this is the problem with all mobile devices. You can do pretty much everything with them, but for anything you use them for there is a device that will beat a crap out of it in terms of functionality, usability, everything. It may be a good compromise, I mean it *is* portable and you *can* do pretty much anything, but if you are a professional, you have to have a real thing.
The good thing about Open Source is that if two contributors strongly disagree on something, both are given an equal opportunity to prove their point. In the end, society wins.
I'm amazed by the amount of damage "touch" have done to UI design. Everything now has to be touch! My MP3 player (iAudio10, which is otherwise cool) does not have physical buttons for forward/backward anymore, so I have to wake the sucker before switching the song if I choose to.
And that touch interface in Tesla is just stupid.
The panel in Cinnamon is not as good as in GNOME2 and they don't have as many nice applets as GNOME2, but it is OK. Looks very nice, though.
Too late, GNOME!
Switched to Cinnamon and love it.
Encrypt it in the first place. That way nobody will be able to find out what kind of pr0n you were masturbating to, if you die unexpectedly.
Unless of course you die while masturbating.
Of course this is not proof. However, this is definitely something worth to take a better look at.
Make PGP/GnuPG Gmail a paid service? I'd use that.
This is the most creative use of citations I've seen today.
That is exactly why I'm using FLAC. I mean, nobody arguing that mp3 gives you better quality than FLAC, the whole point is to save some space on hard drive. Which is dirt cheap this days, so why bother.
I'm not defending MAFIAA in any way, but just want to point out, that the study was conducted under circumstances when file sharing is illegal.
If it becomes legal, it may very well impact the sales in a negative way. Bottom line: interesting study, no practical applications.
As much as I liked bashing MS before, nowadays it is like beating a dead horse.
Only you aren't really paying the person who created the product. You are paying to the company that usurped the right to distribute that content, taking that right away FROM THE AUTHOR himself.
And please don't give me the bullshit that the author had a choice, willfully signed the contract yada yada. I know it he did. This does not change the fact that you are not paying to the author in any way.
The main reason there is an outrage about copyright laws is not the money. It is that people enforcing it appeal to moral principles, while at the same time acting like a total scumbags.
The artists need to be compensated. The current model we have is not the one I would have called fair, is what I'm saying.
Yeah, also just keep the heads, they are of the most interest anyway. I feel like there is futurama joke hidden here somewhere, but I can't find it.
I think this is the most awesome idea I've ever heard about changing the calendar.