Dude just do a subband contrast threshold analysis on the image and you can often find that you can compress using the DWT (discrete wavelet transform) (JPEG2000) with ratios like 4:1 or better while still having a visually lossless compression. As long as the conrasts in the distortions in the various subbands are below the contrasts in the image data itself (in those subbands), the image is pretty much visually lossless.
Parrots are pretty smart. I don't remember the two fruits (or veggies), one but parrot made up a name for a new fruit based off of two previous fruits it tried. It was taught something like "Orange" and "Raspberry" and when presented with an apple, it called it a "Raspange" or something. I have my fruit all wrong but they ain't bird brains.
Well you'd have to rather deliberately remove it, which would be done to replace it. I mean it's not like it'd make it more comfortable to remove it since what you're feeling is the holder, not the chip. The idea is you'd remove it to change it. I mean, a keychain can be stolen or forgotten. This could be made extremely hard to steal by having unique device interfaces (holder and ejector matched).
I'm not arguing for it. It's creepy to me. I'm just throwing an alternative into the air because no one who has a chip in their skin right now will be happy with the same chip in 20 years (how about 5 years?).
How about instead of implanting chips, which can break or become obsolete easily, we implant something that can hold the chips? People get implants all the time which result in things like tubes sticking out, perhaps to regulate pressure or allow draining of some liquid. Pretty disgusting, but life saving.
Well how about an implant that (is hopefully not nearly as disgusting) which allows a chip to be slid in place or out of place? The implant could be a tiny flap of sorts which allows a film to be placed between it and you. That film would be a small flexible chip. Some sort of electric pulse could form an ejection system for removing the chip.
Now I don't know the exact physics of it, but I don't see a problem with it. Any number of ejection mechanisms could easily be tried. The only concern I'd have is infection, but someone out there is bound to have a solution for that, as well a solution to skin completely growing ontop of the device.
I demand the full functionality of a toaster wherever I go. Sure, the implant cost a lot and I had to give up a lung, but if I ever want a piece of toast all I need to do is lay down and pop a piece of bread in.
Not arguing that at all. Well, I've heard differently about the Apple thing from a source before, but I think they were lying. A nice 5% or so boost in sales will make them look better compared to AMD to give an impression of competing well while they get their next generation out. That will be interesting
As for what I was talking about, I just know that Intel learned a lesson previously from signing on with Microsoft and were not exactly thrilled for a second go. I don't know how Nintendo or Sony contracts go. I can't imagine a Nintendo contract would be too profitable (not because of sales, but because of Nintendo's style), but I could be entirely wrong on that.
Dick Butkus
That's funny on so many levels. Let's examine.
Taboo Body Parts: Not only have we the butt, quite possibility the funniest part of the body due to it's shape, and hysterical genre of gags which originate from it, but also we have the dick, which swings to and fro so jolly. Yes, this name combines two separate funny parts, but that's not all.
A dick and a butt implies, at this second level, a naked male. Naked men are either funny or disgusting, depending on hair, perhaps facial expression, and the quantity of food involved. Since disgusting is another word for misinterpreted hilariousness, we can eliminate that part all together and revel in what remains: pure comedy.
Now that "kus" looks benign but when combined with But, we have what can easily be pronounced as Butt Kiss, creating a delightful image as is often enjoyed as an insult. To have a name that is an insult surely gives us a 3rd level of wholesome goodness. Kiss my butt too!
The fourth and final utter joy to be extracted from this name is done with further research from the second level. If you look at the name, you'll see dick and butt are quite close indicating, you guessed it, gay! Gay is a widely used and respected comical tool, even enjoyed by the great Shakespeare (ever seen 12th Night?).
We have four clear levels of hilarity. If you're ever feeling down, just yell the name and drown your sorrows is this, the finest of all comedy.
Thank you parent, for giving me a chance to journey with people through the name.
I am reminded of the South Park episode where the local boys are playing baseball but want to lose because they don't want to play anymore because they find the game ruthlessly boring. Unfortunately for them all the other teams also want to lose for the same reason, and South Park keeps winning games and ends up having to play all summer to the delight of the parents, but not to the kids.
Stockholders = parents. Kids = Intel. A contract with Microsoft sounds great for a company, until you start reading into it. By the way that Microsoft does things, if the xbox 360 flops at any point Microsoft would be protected from losing capita by Intel and other contracted companies. The way they do it is that say they estimate 5M units to be sold in X time, they order that many units. If only 1M sells and they don't think they can sell the rest, by their contracts they do not have to, the contractors have to keep the parts that MS didn't sell and sell it themselves or take it as a loss. So if Intel took up the task and the 360 undersold (a very real worry if I was Intel), they would be at a loss of hundreds of millions to billions of dollars, while Microsoft would shrug it off and make an xbox 720 or something. Intel put the numbers in a calculator with some estimate of probability, and it came up sour. Microsoft wasn't willing to budge. To the best of my knowledge, this is what happened.
Signing a contract with Microsoft is like arguing on the Internet....
Sure. I challenge three of your assumptions.
You assume "low-prices" are good. Care to explain why, logically? Maybe from more than one viewpoint? As a retailer or competitor, I may disagree with that, so you can't assume that to be true.
You are indirectly assuming that consumerism is a good thing. Prove it.
Finally "wide selection of products in a single place" while this mist look benign at first, looking more into it this, this fragment seems to suggest that only one place is required, as if there is a wide selection in a single place, what's the need of another? Granted you don't directly say that, but isn't that the ultimate outcome?
I admit, you have to actually break these assumptions down into logical arguments for a fallacy to surface. I can't begin to guess at the logic to back up the first two, but I'll try.
Unless I've been living under a rock, Wal-Mart is, without a shred of bias, bad by many objective definitions of the word. No positive argument can be made in its defense without resorting to logical fallacies. Are there people out there who think that the article on slavery is biased against it, and that it needs to take a neutral view highlighting the benefits? What is the difference I am missing?
This whole tracking thing has me confused. People are worried about people tracking them with their own ID. Buddy, if I wanted to track you I'd put a gps tracker on your car or hell your shoe and get a lot more information than any ID system would. How do you propose I'd track you with a national ID system anyway, with what significant information. Ok let's say I hacked the system in every aspect. Perhaps I'd see that you went to a Walmart. Maybe I'd see how much you spent. A couple days later you went to a grocery store. Then a night club. Then you ordered pizza. Whoopty freaken do.
What the heck are you tinfoilers afraid of, people gaining illegal access, or people investigating you who have warrants? Pick your battle already.
You know what? I had plans for several parts of the game, but I just realized I'm in way over my head here. I'll just finish with the opera scene and leave it at that.
Why do we need to see the greatest heros of it? How about those who failed? Are they less interesting because they lose? I mean, there wasn't just one single movement that fought against impossible odds and won, right? There must be a bunch, a whole lot going on. When do the planets individually say "oops" about creating the empire? How do the hutts feel? Do they have any vested interest one way or another except to act is a middleman for supplying the empire on one side or possibly smuggling for rebels on the other (for heaps of cash of course)? Does the empire have a single political entity at all or is it just a fleet that stomps on people every once in a while? I mean, what the hell is going on? How did Han Solo get Chewbaca, exactly, freed from slavery I presume?
Obviously I speak from the perspective of people who have only seen movies, ever read any of the books, and this is the audience this series is targeted to.
Health care isn't that expensive, the industry is simply corrupt like so many others. Ever wondered about commercials for drugs that require a perscription that say "Ask your doctor"? Your doctor knows better than you which meds to try, if you just keep up good communications they'll offer to switch you over to new drugs if your current ones are having problems. The drug companies want you to bully your doctor into perscribing their medications over another and will raise the price of the drugs to extreme levels to pay for the advertisements.
As for actual procedures, these cost much less than people are billed for. You know how stores will raise their prices then lower it to the original and mark it as a sale increase profits? (especially car and furniture business) This is was hospitals do with health insurance companies. They give the insurance companies discounts on their procedures. How do they afford to do that? Simple, raise the price of procedures so the discounted price is the original price. If you don't believe me, know this: If you pay for a medical procedure out of pocket, you pay anywhere from a small amount more to several times what the insurance company pays the hospital for the same procedure. Here's a citation: MPR
Now here's another fact: If you pool together all the money that everyone in the US pays for medical expenses, you have enough money to buy everyone in the US the medical procedures they need. Duh? No wait, let's say 100,000,000 people paid for medical procedures and 150,000,000 needed it. I'm saying that the amount paid by the 100,000,000 is enough to cover the additional 50,000,000 that need it, just the original people were overcharged. I'd give you a citation for this one but I don't know how to arrange the search terms.
You go to a hardware store for a kitchen set. You can get the basic, the premium, or the delux (or something). Included are several flatware sets with competing styles, a few counter tops, etc. Anything you don't want to use you still need to buy, we'll just store them for you in case you ever decide you want to use it.
Ok that was an I'm-rushed-give-me-a-break example, but put simply, removing choice in a capitalist economy doesn't work. Every time you package two things together and say if you want one you must want the other, you alienate people.
Let wind speed be denoted w, bird speed b, and obviously the speed of light, c.
We can't tell if b > w will always be true, we're pretty sure b w will not always true, but I propose the most definitive statement I can on this subject is b c.
Yep I have no problem with at, as long as "trillions" means infinite. The point is that whatever existed before still exists the same way that a black hole does not remove information (as was recently popularly examined).
Well, I don't think you should dismiss him because of that, because there's absolutely no reason to decide that nothing happened before a big bang, such as a big crunch.
If it's impossible for information to be destroyed, then it's impossible for information to be created. Information just exists, and is manipulated. Therefore, (convinced in my mind at least), there is no "start of universe".
We do know things go faster than light. Since that breaks our theories, we make up crap about the things going backwards in time. Apparently that's OK but going faster than light isn't.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude just do a subband contrast threshold analysis on the image and you can often find that you can compress using the DWT (discrete wavelet transform) (JPEG2000) with ratios like 4:1 or better while still having a visually lossless compression. As long as the conrasts in the distortions in the various subbands are below the contrasts in the image data itself (in those subbands), the image is pretty much visually lossless.
Like, duh.
Imagine the graphics. How many years before Doom was that?
Parrots are pretty smart. I don't remember the two fruits (or veggies), one but parrot made up a name for a new fruit based off of two previous fruits it tried. It was taught something like "Orange" and "Raspberry" and when presented with an apple, it called it a "Raspange" or something. I have my fruit all wrong but they ain't bird brains.
If you're a teacher or a professor, you will get fired for saying that. You will get in trouble by context for saying that.
Well you'd have to rather deliberately remove it, which would be done to replace it. I mean it's not like it'd make it more comfortable to remove it since what you're feeling is the holder, not the chip. The idea is you'd remove it to change it. I mean, a keychain can be stolen or forgotten. This could be made extremely hard to steal by having unique device interfaces (holder and ejector matched).
I'm not arguing for it. It's creepy to me. I'm just throwing an alternative into the air because no one who has a chip in their skin right now will be happy with the same chip in 20 years (how about 5 years?).
How about instead of implanting chips, which can break or become obsolete easily, we implant something that can hold the chips? People get implants all the time which result in things like tubes sticking out, perhaps to regulate pressure or allow draining of some liquid. Pretty disgusting, but life saving.
Well how about an implant that (is hopefully not nearly as disgusting) which allows a chip to be slid in place or out of place? The implant could be a tiny flap of sorts which allows a film to be placed between it and you. That film would be a small flexible chip. Some sort of electric pulse could form an ejection system for removing the chip.
Now I don't know the exact physics of it, but I don't see a problem with it. Any number of ejection mechanisms could easily be tried. The only concern I'd have is infection, but someone out there is bound to have a solution for that, as well a solution to skin completely growing ontop of the device.
I demand the full functionality of a toaster wherever I go. Sure, the implant cost a lot and I had to give up a lung, but if I ever want a piece of toast all I need to do is lay down and pop a piece of bread in.
Oh shit, I need a breadmaker.
Pay $20+ for an ad infused FBI warning with regioning, or virtually nothing for no ads or FBI warnings or regioning.
Remove the warning, remove the ads, charge $10 max. I can live without movies if you force me to.
Not arguing that at all. Well, I've heard differently about the Apple thing from a source before, but I think they were lying. A nice 5% or so boost in sales will make them look better compared to AMD to give an impression of competing well while they get their next generation out. That will be interesting
:)
As for what I was talking about, I just know that Intel learned a lesson previously from signing on with Microsoft and were not exactly thrilled for a second go. I don't know how Nintendo or Sony contracts go. I can't imagine a Nintendo contract would be too profitable (not because of sales, but because of Nintendo's style), but I could be entirely wrong on that.
Me? I use an AMD
Dick Butkus
That's funny on so many levels. Let's examine.
Taboo Body Parts: Not only have we the butt, quite possibility the funniest part of the body due to it's shape, and hysterical genre of gags which originate from it, but also we have the dick, which swings to and fro so jolly. Yes, this name combines two separate funny parts, but that's not all.
A dick and a butt implies, at this second level, a naked male. Naked men are either funny or disgusting, depending on hair, perhaps facial expression, and the quantity of food involved. Since disgusting is another word for misinterpreted hilariousness, we can eliminate that part all together and revel in what remains: pure comedy.
Now that "kus" looks benign but when combined with But, we have what can easily be pronounced as Butt Kiss, creating a delightful image as is often enjoyed as an insult. To have a name that is an insult surely gives us a 3rd level of wholesome goodness. Kiss my butt too!
The fourth and final utter joy to be extracted from this name is done with further research from the second level. If you look at the name, you'll see dick and butt are quite close indicating, you guessed it, gay! Gay is a widely used and respected comical tool, even enjoyed by the great Shakespeare (ever seen 12th Night?).
We have four clear levels of hilarity. If you're ever feeling down, just yell the name and drown your sorrows is this, the finest of all comedy.
Thank you parent, for giving me a chance to journey with people through the name.
I am reminded of the South Park episode where the local boys are playing baseball but want to lose because they don't want to play anymore because they find the game ruthlessly boring. Unfortunately for them all the other teams also want to lose for the same reason, and South Park keeps winning games and ends up having to play all summer to the delight of the parents, but not to the kids.
Stockholders = parents. Kids = Intel. A contract with Microsoft sounds great for a company, until you start reading into it. By the way that Microsoft does things, if the xbox 360 flops at any point Microsoft would be protected from losing capita by Intel and other contracted companies. The way they do it is that say they estimate 5M units to be sold in X time, they order that many units. If only 1M sells and they don't think they can sell the rest, by their contracts they do not have to, the contractors have to keep the parts that MS didn't sell and sell it themselves or take it as a loss. So if Intel took up the task and the 360 undersold (a very real worry if I was Intel), they would be at a loss of hundreds of millions to billions of dollars, while Microsoft would shrug it off and make an xbox 720 or something. Intel put the numbers in a calculator with some estimate of probability, and it came up sour. Microsoft wasn't willing to budge. To the best of my knowledge, this is what happened.
Signing a contract with Microsoft is like arguing on the Internet....
Sure. I challenge three of your assumptions.
You assume "low-prices" are good. Care to explain why, logically? Maybe from more than one viewpoint? As a retailer or competitor, I may disagree with that, so you can't assume that to be true.
You are indirectly assuming that consumerism is a good thing. Prove it.
Finally "wide selection of products in a single place" while this mist look benign at first, looking more into it this, this fragment seems to suggest that only one place is required, as if there is a wide selection in a single place, what's the need of another? Granted you don't directly say that, but isn't that the ultimate outcome?
I admit, you have to actually break these assumptions down into logical arguments for a fallacy to surface. I can't begin to guess at the logic to back up the first two, but I'll try.
Unless I've been living under a rock, Wal-Mart is, without a shred of bias, bad by many objective definitions of the word. No positive argument can be made in its defense without resorting to logical fallacies. Are there people out there who think that the article on slavery is biased against it, and that it needs to take a neutral view highlighting the benefits? What is the difference I am missing?
This whole tracking thing has me confused. People are worried about people tracking them with their own ID. Buddy, if I wanted to track you I'd put a gps tracker on your car or hell your shoe and get a lot more information than any ID system would. How do you propose I'd track you with a national ID system anyway, with what significant information. Ok let's say I hacked the system in every aspect. Perhaps I'd see that you went to a Walmart. Maybe I'd see how much you spent. A couple days later you went to a grocery store. Then a night club. Then you ordered pizza. Whoopty freaken do.
What the heck are you tinfoilers afraid of, people gaining illegal access, or people investigating you who have warrants? Pick your battle already.
I present to you: FF6, as performed by meows.
meow meow meow meOW
meow? meow..
MEow! MEOW!
meow *rumble*
meow meow
(rushing water) meow
You know what? I had plans for several parts of the game, but I just realized I'm in way over my head here. I'll just finish with the opera scene and leave it at that.
Meow, meow, meOOOooweow, meow, meow meOOW MEOOOW! MEOW, MEOW meow, meowmEOW MEOWmeow meow meow.... meeooowmowmowmow, meooowmowmowmow, meeeoow,meeow, meeeeeeeeeeeooow.(etc)
When you get that replicator, could you make me one?
Why do we need to see the greatest heros of it? How about those who failed? Are they less interesting because they lose? I mean, there wasn't just one single movement that fought against impossible odds and won, right? There must be a bunch, a whole lot going on. When do the planets individually say "oops" about creating the empire? How do the hutts feel? Do they have any vested interest one way or another except to act is a middleman for supplying the empire on one side or possibly smuggling for rebels on the other (for heaps of cash of course)? Does the empire have a single political entity at all or is it just a fleet that stomps on people every once in a while? I mean, what the hell is going on? How did Han Solo get Chewbaca, exactly, freed from slavery I presume?
Obviously I speak from the perspective of people who have only seen movies, ever read any of the books, and this is the audience this series is targeted to.
Health care isn't that expensive, the industry is simply corrupt like so many others. Ever wondered about commercials for drugs that require a perscription that say "Ask your doctor"? Your doctor knows better than you which meds to try, if you just keep up good communications they'll offer to switch you over to new drugs if your current ones are having problems. The drug companies want you to bully your doctor into perscribing their medications over another and will raise the price of the drugs to extreme levels to pay for the advertisements.
As for actual procedures, these cost much less than people are billed for. You know how stores will raise their prices then lower it to the original and mark it as a sale increase profits? (especially car and furniture business) This is was hospitals do with health insurance companies. They give the insurance companies discounts on their procedures. How do they afford to do that? Simple, raise the price of procedures so the discounted price is the original price. If you don't believe me, know this: If you pay for a medical procedure out of pocket, you pay anywhere from a small amount more to several times what the insurance company pays the hospital for the same procedure. Here's a citation: MPR
Now here's another fact: If you pool together all the money that everyone in the US pays for medical expenses, you have enough money to buy everyone in the US the medical procedures they need. Duh? No wait, let's say 100,000,000 people paid for medical procedures and 150,000,000 needed it. I'm saying that the amount paid by the 100,000,000 is enough to cover the additional 50,000,000 that need it, just the original people were overcharged. I'd give you a citation for this one but I don't know how to arrange the search terms.
Well, I think the commercial needs to have some like this, in huge letters:
"This ad is paid for through voluntary donations by very satisfied users."
Or the like. Just throw out a claim like that that no one can ever possibly match.
What's there not to understand? At 20 years old the difference was 20 points. If that's not what he meant, I'm completely backwards in English.
Fine let's take the opposite approach.
You go to a hardware store for a kitchen set. You can get the basic, the premium, or the delux (or something). Included are several flatware sets with competing styles, a few counter tops, etc. Anything you don't want to use you still need to buy, we'll just store them for you in case you ever decide you want to use it.
Ok that was an I'm-rushed-give-me-a-break example, but put simply, removing choice in a capitalist economy doesn't work. Every time you package two things together and say if you want one you must want the other, you alienate people.
Let wind speed be denoted w, bird speed b, and obviously the speed of light, c.
We can't tell if b > w will always be true, we're pretty sure b w will not always true, but I propose the most definitive statement I can on this subject is b c.
Yep I have no problem with at, as long as "trillions" means infinite. The point is that whatever existed before still exists the same way that a black hole does not remove information (as was recently popularly examined).
Well, I don't think you should dismiss him because of that, because there's absolutely no reason to decide that nothing happened before a big bang, such as a big crunch.
If it's impossible for information to be destroyed, then it's impossible for information to be created. Information just exists, and is manipulated. Therefore, (convinced in my mind at least), there is no "start of universe".
We do know things go faster than light. Since that breaks our theories, we make up crap about the things going backwards in time. Apparently that's OK but going faster than light isn't.