This is exactly how I feel about relativity in general. I believe that yes, it passes every test we can throw at it right now, but one day it'll be shown that it's just plain silly. I don't have a better idea but do not prescribe to relativity.
(Time dilation due to speed? Pft hardly. Maybe there are subatomic particles such as electronics whose movement becomes dampened when approach speed because they have a fixed absolute speed, or even slow downs at the quantum level [maybe], but that doesn't mean time actually moves at a different speed. It just means that below our current ability to understand things are working more slowly so everything that we do understand seems be slower. Time warp? I think not.) Oh egocentric humans amuse me.
The brain is really screwy. If I see a vehicle, or anything of an obvious color, and I am not looking directly at it, while I know what color it was, I cannot connect it to the word. It feels like when you just can't remember the word for something. It's kind of fun to play with and almost 100% reliable. In this case I can see the color, and I can differentiate it, however not with my speech.
Interestingly enough (to me) if the color on the edge of my vision is a significant light source, say, an LED in a dark room, I have no problem identifying the color by name. Now I'm willing to accept that I am screwed up on many levels, but I'd wager a lot of people actually are the same way, just they never noticed or put much thought into it.
Oh and by the way I have to type the word "enemas" below so that slashdot knows I'm not a bot.
Before you do something, think about how you'd feel if it was reported on the front page of cnn.com, or on the nightly news. If you'd be ashamed if it were public, why aren't you if it's private? Is it something that you actually find morally acceptable, or is it something that is simply easy?
Come on there is one very obvious flaw in the way that Wikipedia is cited. I don't know off bat if what you need to do can be done, but, Wikipedia is moving, therefore, you need another dimension in your citation: time.
Author. "Article Title", date, Wikipedia. URL: [url for citation as appeared on "date" which remains forever archived, never ever changing with revision]
Once you can do that in your references, Wikipedia will be valuable for this use. On the other hand, you can always backtrack the references to whatever Wikipedia references, and use those. Those are usually far more static.
Well, I have a Trolltech Greenphone on my desk because we develop software for it. And while it is hackable, Linux based, and a nice geek gizmo, there is no way I'm going to use it as my primary mobile phone. Teeeeny stuff to hit with the stylus. Lots of buttons that you don't really know what they do. Difficult to enter text. (It's a development platform after all.)
Methinks you speak too much for own good. A marketing failure could be blamed on anything, such as a comment. Should that comment come from a developer before release...
I dunno, I try to be cautious about what I say. When I worked at Intel I didn't run out and blurt online that the project I was on was doomed, upper management wasn't listening, and it'd go down in a firey explosion in several months after tons of wasted money. That part didn't happen until I left but boy did it happen.
That's what I was thinking until I read your comment and realized it's wrong. This wouldn't be nanniesm (sp?). We're not protecting your dumb drunk self from yourself, we're protecting everyone else from your dumb drunk self.
If you want to make damn sure that it isn't nanniesm, we'll put a boxing glove in ontop of the airbag to give you a broken nose if you try to operate while drunk. There. Not being a nanny, being the friend you should have with you.
No, I think it's a simple case of people thinking that the severity of an action determines guilt. It doesn't. This argument is the same as if it caused 1st degree burns, just the money amount is adjusted to reflect it. Blame is blame. How much is irrelevant until after guilt has been determined. Too bad it doesn't work this way and you can use emotions to sway courts.
Do they support file transfers yet, or still just pretend to?
It's rather sad when two computers with the same version of gaim and absolutely no firewalls can't use a file transfer. I think I've had it work when sending from Gaim to Aim, but never Aim to Gaim. Anyway their lack of a functioning file transfer system is the only thing keeping me off of Gaim.
So if I leave my iPod in a car, and it gets down to say just 20 degrees (instead of a more realistic -5 to -10), it will work? This goes directly against something I heard in the past week from a friend at work.
I don't think confirmation bias is it. IDNPTIF (I do not prescribe to iPod fanboyism), but my iRiver's shuffle seems to have a problem. It may or may not be nicely random, but the issue is that it's the same random. Granted, it's several years old now, but if I load songs on there, by the third or forth cycle through on random, I can tell which song leads into what. I don't know about others, but on a CD once I play it through a couple times, I just know at the end of a song which one comes next, and my head kinda links the songs. Well with the iRiver on shuffle the same happens, and while the list appears random to be a random order, it's always the same. I could give my playlist and my shuffled playlist from my head, but I haven't used my player for anything other than an FM radio for the past 6-8 months.
But I don't understand the attraction to begin with. As far as I know, the iPod currently (or used to) has these problems:
1. It cannot be treated as a USB harddrive
2. It can only use MP3's.
3. It is highly overpriced compared to its competitors.
4. The batteries are of extremely low quality (talked to someone at work just this last week, he said everyone in the family got one for last christmas (5 iPods), and 3 were dead by then).
5. It does not work in cold weather (say, jogging in the winter).
In addition I've used iPod's belonging to others. I didn't really like the UI (if I'm spinning my finger around a circle of sorts, when do I stop to make it get where I want?). I suppose I'd get used to it, but the UI seemed terrible to me compared to my iRiver. With my iRiver, I can change the song or volume without taking it out of my pocket.
So, what's the allure of an iPod if I can buy a rival for $100 with a better battery, better temperature immunity, better UI (to perspective), better compatability (ogg, treated as a harddrive)? I want an honest answer actually.
Actually you should be able to take them on just fine. There's plenty of healing stuff. Perception doesn't matter so eat it up. The only hard part is the guy at the end, and if your INT is high enough you can bluff your way out. Don't get any weapons, just use fists.
Melee (fists), Small Guns, Throwing. The only three you need.
No no. This is just why you never make a character with more than 4 strength; it's just a waste. The suit gives you plenty to hold the largest weapons with no penalties and lets you put points into the far more valuable int and agi.
Despite living in a democracy, over 50% of the population saying that the Earth is flat, that evolution is false, or that toilets spin opposite directions in different hemispheres is correct. Same goes for murder-for-murder. Popular support has no sway on any concept of "right" or "just". Maybe "allowable". These aren't variant concepts, there's just what we perceive at the time and our difference from that and the truth is how much we are wrong. We're getting closer, though.
I don't think you can make any logical argument for the death penalty as a general punishment, even in the case that one person killed a billion. Now if there was good chance that the person being alive would somehow cause more deaths, then it would be logical to do so. In other cases the act of murdering-them-back (which you can only really do once anyway) may cause even more murders and make it therefore unjust.
There's just a lot to look at that we choose to ignore right now. One thing we have a good track record for is taking three steps forward but only one step back on the process of advancing the concept of justice. Well, maybe in this country we just took a few steps back but relatively speaking if you're white, you'll get a fairly fair trial (although you may be bankrupted by the "justice").
Re:nobody's going to stop buying SUVs
on
The Hybrid Scooter
·
· Score: 1
When a Civic and an H3 crash. the H3 gets destroyed, the Civic, not so much. Granted this is an extreme example (H3's totally blow), but H3's are sold as being tough, so it's valid.
The problem with the argument that you need to have a vehicle at least as big as anyone else's is of course escalation. If that mentality is common, then people will buy larger and larger vehicles to no end, after all that is how these things work. Any safety you have is short term. On the other hand if you support the mentality that paying attention while you drive is more important, then there will be no escalation, people will drive smaller vehicles, and there will be less carnage on th road.
Now you're a have-not so I'm certainly not picking on you. Just everyone else who thinks that driving an SUV makes them safer.
I can't quite understand it but I think that spelling implies a Scottish accent to me. I think the future of the internet is destined to be controlled by our kilt-wielding overlords.
I could tell you were born in '82 from your slashdot ID. I'm pretty obviously '83. Anyway when I look at "1985" I don't think "WOW! Old!" yet, but 1982 is so very long ago, you old person. The 70's? I can't imagine a world with disco and without an internet on which to complain about it.
Re:Low yields on vital PS3 components
on
How the PS3 Hit $600
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Either you are an idiot or you have big balls. Or you're an idiot with big balls. At any rate I wish to subscribe to your idiotic large testicled newsletter.
My previous employer boasted the best yields in IC manufacturing, but I never heard what any competition got. I don't know if anyone could tell me if yields this low are somewhat normal, but I'd like an idea.
Actually it does create a circular pattern of distortion (in each frequency). Wavelets of course have the quality of being of finite energy and of a location. It's not terribly visibly circular, but given the right image and compression, it'll be pretty plainly visible. I'm not saying it's intrinsically circular, it will just appear this way on a 2nd image. If you had a 3d image, it'd appear spherical, although I can't begin to guess how to show that. I'm also a little drunk right now but that makes math more meaningful, if not clear.
Ok fine no one gets it. A banddand is a range of frequencies you will find in an image. As it turns out, we don't respond to error in an image by the image itself, but by the frequency that the error in the image disrupts. We're worse at seeing disruptions in the high and low range of frequencies, and better in the midrange. Somewhat ironically that means we can take advantage of the high and low and compress more inside those frequency ranges. A DWT or DCT wil give you component pieces for various frequencies which you can simply or delete to form the compression (DCT is JPEG, DWT is JPEG2000). Remember the square blocks in JPEG compression? That's from the DCT. The DWT is more circular so you'll never see square blocking with JPEG2000.
Dude not quite you gotta know about the subband thresholds and the (subjective) reaction people have to an image! This ain't no copy paste shiat yo, you gotta get your wavelets to work for YOU. Just cause you ain't grasp'n doesn't mean my gears ain't spinning.
Slashdot Mirror
psssst.... you can use a mouse with vi..
This is exactly how I feel about relativity in general. I believe that yes, it passes every test we can throw at it right now, but one day it'll be shown that it's just plain silly. I don't have a better idea but do not prescribe to relativity.
(Time dilation due to speed? Pft hardly. Maybe there are subatomic particles such as electronics whose movement becomes dampened when approach speed because they have a fixed absolute speed, or even slow downs at the quantum level [maybe], but that doesn't mean time actually moves at a different speed. It just means that below our current ability to understand things are working more slowly so everything that we do understand seems be slower. Time warp? I think not.) Oh egocentric humans amuse me.
The brain is really screwy. If I see a vehicle, or anything of an obvious color, and I am not looking directly at it, while I know what color it was, I cannot connect it to the word. It feels like when you just can't remember the word for something. It's kind of fun to play with and almost 100% reliable. In this case I can see the color, and I can differentiate it, however not with my speech.
Interestingly enough (to me) if the color on the edge of my vision is a significant light source, say, an LED in a dark room, I have no problem identifying the color by name. Now I'm willing to accept that I am screwed up on many levels, but I'd wager a lot of people actually are the same way, just they never noticed or put much thought into it.
Oh and by the way I have to type the word "enemas" below so that slashdot knows I'm not a bot.
I know what you're saying, but I disagree.
Before you do something, think about how you'd feel if it was reported on the front page of cnn.com, or on the nightly news. If you'd be ashamed if it were public, why aren't you if it's private? Is it something that you actually find morally acceptable, or is it something that is simply easy?
Come on there is one very obvious flaw in the way that Wikipedia is cited. I don't know off bat if what you need to do can be done, but, Wikipedia is moving, therefore, you need another dimension in your citation: time.
Author. "Article Title", date, Wikipedia. URL: [url for citation as appeared on "date" which remains forever archived, never ever changing with revision]
Once you can do that in your references, Wikipedia will be valuable for this use. On the other hand, you can always backtrack the references to whatever Wikipedia references, and use those. Those are usually far more static.
Well, I have a Trolltech Greenphone on my desk because we develop software for it. And while it is hackable, Linux based, and a nice geek gizmo, there is no way I'm going to use it as my primary mobile phone. Teeeeny stuff to hit with the stylus. Lots of buttons that you don't really know what they do. Difficult to enter text. (It's a development platform after all.)
Methinks you speak too much for own good. A marketing failure could be blamed on anything, such as a comment. Should that comment come from a developer before release...
I dunno, I try to be cautious about what I say. When I worked at Intel I didn't run out and blurt online that the project I was on was doomed, upper management wasn't listening, and it'd go down in a firey explosion in several months after tons of wasted money. That part didn't happen until I left but boy did it happen.
I refer to it as the Wiines. Does that add anything to your count?
That's what I was thinking until I read your comment and realized it's wrong. This wouldn't be nanniesm (sp?). We're not protecting your dumb drunk self from yourself, we're protecting everyone else from your dumb drunk self.
If you want to make damn sure that it isn't nanniesm, we'll put a boxing glove in ontop of the airbag to give you a broken nose if you try to operate while drunk. There. Not being a nanny, being the friend you should have with you.
No, I think it's a simple case of people thinking that the severity of an action determines guilt. It doesn't. This argument is the same as if it caused 1st degree burns, just the money amount is adjusted to reflect it. Blame is blame. How much is irrelevant until after guilt has been determined. Too bad it doesn't work this way and you can use emotions to sway courts.
Do they support file transfers yet, or still just pretend to?
It's rather sad when two computers with the same version of gaim and absolutely no firewalls can't use a file transfer. I think I've had it work when sending from Gaim to Aim, but never Aim to Gaim. Anyway their lack of a functioning file transfer system is the only thing keeping me off of Gaim.
So if I leave my iPod in a car, and it gets down to say just 20 degrees (instead of a more realistic -5 to -10), it will work? This goes directly against something I heard in the past week from a friend at work.
I don't think confirmation bias is it. IDNPTIF (I do not prescribe to iPod fanboyism), but my iRiver's shuffle seems to have a problem. It may or may not be nicely random, but the issue is that it's the same random. Granted, it's several years old now, but if I load songs on there, by the third or forth cycle through on random, I can tell which song leads into what. I don't know about others, but on a CD once I play it through a couple times, I just know at the end of a song which one comes next, and my head kinda links the songs. Well with the iRiver on shuffle the same happens, and while the list appears random to be a random order, it's always the same. I could give my playlist and my shuffled playlist from my head, but I haven't used my player for anything other than an FM radio for the past 6-8 months.
Gee, yes, I said forgive the troll (ok fine, forgive, but mod into oblivian anyway). Does anyone have any actual ANSWERS? Or just fanboys?
But I don't understand the attraction to begin with. As far as I know, the iPod currently (or used to) has these problems:
1. It cannot be treated as a USB harddrive
2. It can only use MP3's.
3. It is highly overpriced compared to its competitors.
4. The batteries are of extremely low quality (talked to someone at work just this last week, he said everyone in the family got one for last christmas (5 iPods), and 3 were dead by then).
5. It does not work in cold weather (say, jogging in the winter).
In addition I've used iPod's belonging to others. I didn't really like the UI (if I'm spinning my finger around a circle of sorts, when do I stop to make it get where I want?). I suppose I'd get used to it, but the UI seemed terrible to me compared to my iRiver. With my iRiver, I can change the song or volume without taking it out of my pocket.
So, what's the allure of an iPod if I can buy a rival for $100 with a better battery, better temperature immunity, better UI (to perspective), better compatability (ogg, treated as a harddrive)? I want an honest answer actually.
Oh and once again, forgive the "troll".
Actually you should be able to take them on just fine. There's plenty of healing stuff. Perception doesn't matter so eat it up. The only hard part is the guy at the end, and if your INT is high enough you can bluff your way out. Don't get any weapons, just use fists.
Melee (fists), Small Guns, Throwing. The only three you need.
No no. This is just why you never make a character with more than 4 strength; it's just a waste. The suit gives you plenty to hold the largest weapons with no penalties and lets you put points into the far more valuable int and agi.
Despite living in a democracy, over 50% of the population saying that the Earth is flat, that evolution is false, or that toilets spin opposite directions in different hemispheres is correct. Same goes for murder-for-murder. Popular support has no sway on any concept of "right" or "just". Maybe "allowable". These aren't variant concepts, there's just what we perceive at the time and our difference from that and the truth is how much we are wrong. We're getting closer, though.
I don't think you can make any logical argument for the death penalty as a general punishment, even in the case that one person killed a billion. Now if there was good chance that the person being alive would somehow cause more deaths, then it would be logical to do so. In other cases the act of murdering-them-back (which you can only really do once anyway) may cause even more murders and make it therefore unjust.
There's just a lot to look at that we choose to ignore right now. One thing we have a good track record for is taking three steps forward but only one step back on the process of advancing the concept of justice. Well, maybe in this country we just took a few steps back but relatively speaking if you're white, you'll get a fairly fair trial (although you may be bankrupted by the "justice").
When a Civic and an H3 crash. the H3 gets destroyed, the Civic, not so much. Granted this is an extreme example (H3's totally blow), but H3's are sold as being tough, so it's valid.
The problem with the argument that you need to have a vehicle at least as big as anyone else's is of course escalation. If that mentality is common, then people will buy larger and larger vehicles to no end, after all that is how these things work. Any safety you have is short term. On the other hand if you support the mentality that paying attention while you drive is more important, then there will be no escalation, people will drive smaller vehicles, and there will be less carnage on th road.
Now you're a have-not so I'm certainly not picking on you. Just everyone else who thinks that driving an SUV makes them safer.
I can't quite understand it but I think that spelling implies a Scottish accent to me. I think the future of the internet is destined to be controlled by our kilt-wielding overlords.
Don't you mean tasty joking?
I could tell you were born in '82 from your slashdot ID. I'm pretty obviously '83. Anyway when I look at "1985" I don't think "WOW! Old!" yet, but 1982 is so very long ago, you old person. The 70's? I can't imagine a world with disco and without an internet on which to complain about it.
Either you are an idiot or you have big balls. Or you're an idiot with big balls. At any rate I wish to subscribe to your idiotic large testicled newsletter.
My previous employer boasted the best yields in IC manufacturing, but I never heard what any competition got. I don't know if anyone could tell me if yields this low are somewhat normal, but I'd like an idea.
Actually it does create a circular pattern of distortion (in each frequency). Wavelets of course have the quality of being of finite energy and of a location. It's not terribly visibly circular, but given the right image and compression, it'll be pretty plainly visible. I'm not saying it's intrinsically circular, it will just appear this way on a 2nd image. If you had a 3d image, it'd appear spherical, although I can't begin to guess how to show that. I'm also a little drunk right now but that makes math more meaningful, if not clear.
Ok fine no one gets it. A banddand is a range of frequencies you will find in an image. As it turns out, we don't respond to error in an image by the image itself, but by the frequency that the error in the image disrupts. We're worse at seeing disruptions in the high and low range of frequencies, and better in the midrange. Somewhat ironically that means we can take advantage of the high and low and compress more inside those frequency ranges. A DWT or DCT wil give you component pieces for various frequencies which you can simply or delete to form the compression (DCT is JPEG, DWT is JPEG2000). Remember the square blocks in JPEG compression? That's from the DCT. The DWT is more circular so you'll never see square blocking with JPEG2000.
l er_5749_40.pdf
If anyone is interested and wants some not-so-light reading, check out http://foulard.ece.cornell.edu/publications/chand
It'd be awesome if someone made a compressor for regular images using this technique.
Dude not quite you gotta know about the subband thresholds and the (subjective) reaction people have to an image! This ain't no copy paste shiat yo, you gotta get your wavelets to work for YOU. Just cause you ain't grasp'n doesn't mean my gears ain't spinning.