I am 100% confident a girl(-geek) can do/accomplish the same things as a boy(-geek), and vice versa.
But, the main question I think is "where does one passion lie in"?
I have a sister whom I thought "real computer geeky things". And she could do it with fliyng colors. But she didn't have the passion to embrace the things I thought her and learn more on her own. So she stopped evolving into a geek'ets:).
I as a boy-geek, I do what I do because of the passion that drives me. There is no need for someone coming along and motivating me to do what I do, because I do it on my own. [they come to motivate me to do other things too : )]
When I first learned my first thing about/in computers, [do the cd-command], something in me just wanted to know what more there is that the computer can do, and showed intressed in that I wanted to learn more... and look several years have passed and I still have my craving for more : )
I recon: Everyone has the potential to become anything they want -- but, what is that "thing?" you want to be?
That said, it doesn't mean/have to be a 50%-50% gender orientated workplace in every segment or any for that matter. Not every segment out there is or will ever by a equriblium. It just is what it is, who has the more passion for something will strive toward it more than the other. Think Darwin put it short&nice "Survival of the fittest".
How about letting people understand? Instead of banning them from understandment?
It seems to me that all these law and orders we make on a daily basis is trying to "Prohibit" those of us who are curious of the next thing laying infront of our path.
All may not cross the path at once, but sooner or laytor [time will tell] all may walk the path. So wouldn't it be handy-dandy if someone did this "homework" for us? Instead of stumbling around with something that might just be extremly lethal for you?
Hmm; now that I said it, I seems to me that we live in a stubborn society were we want to make our own "homework[s]" [our own way[s]!]
Very well, *\\//_* may it bring you prosperity.
-- Guns aren't lethal, we are; they are mere toys we play with.
= = = =
W A R N I N G - This comment is filled with all kinds of non-related information
So READ Accordingly!:
A] IF YOU are a "talky" person, please read the whole comment; from top to bottom.
B] IF YOU are somewhat like me, then read only the Bolded text, the rest is just "unessential" for us.
= = = =
Not everyone in this world is someone who loves to read books (and I'm one of them;), so pointing to some nice big/fat/large books "that have everything in them" won't make me tick one sec (quite the opposite).
"It's not the quantaty that matters, its the quality", you've all heard that one.
As in life I'm not much of a talker [Hmm, associate me to vulcans; were not that damn talky are we?:)], meaning I don't like my books "talky". A commond trademark I've repeatedly found in books I've read, their "too damn talky" for my taste. I.e. meaning; instead of reading 60 pages writers have become so skilled in the arts of book-crafting that they can spread those 60 pages into 300 [or more] with their thoughts and the convincing "this is the ultimate book avalible", "it's this good", "it's changed so, and so, and so may lives" etc etc....
In summary their filled with all kinds of non-related information [every slashdoter knows this *I think*; guess why I love the-slashdot-concept?:)]
What I'm trying to put into context is; First develope your in-Learing capabilities [don't "Learn", but try to learn how you've Learned, learn the method how _you_ learn stuff; Everyone has his/her own in-learning method; Common ground they all have, but differ they do; Meaning not everyone learns by reading books, sitting still in class, paying 100% attention to the teacher etc etc;] before trying to learn anything else first.
Accelerated Learning is the word you should be ogle'ing around for beforehand learning liunx/giving advice[that's my advice to you; you slashdoters my disagree;]
The Book I link to isn't in english, so it will not be much of use for non-swedish-reading-people.
ISBN: 91-630-8899-1 "Gör studierna enklare och förbered dig för livet i kunskapssamhället", by Christer Westlund.
But it derives from the "Accelerated Learning" concept, just written in swedish, so search the web for english once.... [Isn't that a typical advice from a *nix user; saying "RTFM!" in a nice way?:)]
[Some time has past, you've aged (a bit), and you've masterd the skills in-learnig]
Now, you're ready to step inside the *nix world.
A] Sit down, and formulate a bunch of questions [what _you_ want to know about!]. i.e "I wonder how do I run a webserver?", "I wonder, how do I start linux?", "I wonder, how do i INSTALL *nix!?"
B] At random, go to the library, pick out any *nix book, read the contents until you find something that lures you [like you _want_ to know how to do that/how it works].
C] Those were just mere examples, so if non of them suits you, feel free to experiment your way forward to something that does.
So depending on your lifestile [Free-Sourcer, or Buy-Sourcer], find either a Nice [free] jucy Manual/how-to/book to *nix or buy a book you can read.
And start applying all your in-Learnig skills and start learning yourself.
[That's it! THE END]
!ps - notice how I counted "Manual/how-to/book" in that order? - now that's my way of learning, books come last, first comes the "man" - command, then the web [usual I get all the info I need here]... and usually no books:) - but it happens when I do read one, but only If I _RRReally_ like the "non-related information of all kinds":)
This is just me, and my style; as I wanted to show you an example; So you go now and do your style and leave me alone! It's time for my daily meditation
[All who know Vulcans, know we need meditation or we agitated & rood...: ) *hehe*]
"Special Offer: Windows XP Embedded for Only $995 US
For a limited time only, get Windows XP Embedded for a special price.
Unlock the power of Windows XP Embedded for only $995 US estimated retail price (ERP), which represents a savings of up to 65% off of the Microsoft standard retail price. This offer is valid through March 31, 2003. Contact your authorized Windows XP Embedded distributor for details.
This offer applies only to the Windows XP Embedded development tools and not to runtimelicenses."
That's like a fancy new über PC assembled....and they want so much for a OS, (HA!), as a customer I sure would want every businnes to follow this example, because the money comes from my spending pocket (not theirs), and I don't want to pay for this sort of coasts when there are alternatives which do the same job...
...not to troll or anything, but why would someone need a tablet? Aren't we right back where we started from...?
I try to escape from writing with a (ball) pen as much as I can, just because a) I write solw b) uggly c) i get cramps after awhile d) can't read any good handwriting (compare to computerized-text).
Why do I escape to a keyboard-enviorment (notebook in my case) you may ask?. Well plain simple a) I write faster b) fancier/good-looking- writting c) no more cramps (I don't use One hand, I use 10 fingers, meaning 10 times less strains; And did I mention, I write dvorak; so even less strains).
I understand why artists use (want to use) a Wacom-board; I myself use one in photoshop (and the like...); but other uses in the writting-sector i prefer my keyboard.
"A planet's magnetosphere is provided through its magnetic field. To create a magnetic field, a planet or moon must have magnetic material such has iron, which is warm enough to move around to form currents within the planet."
And isn't earth(s core) cooling down? - Can't this affect our magnetosphere? If the magnetic materail stop flowing?
My imaginary plot (IMHO):
Now I'm thinging that when earth switched poles, the core coold down, reversal happened, sometime after that earth got hit by a large enough meteor to restart our core (how elese could the core be restarted? there wasn't atomic weapons and the like back in those days, no! Good ol' fashion meteors had to suffice : )). Then earth keept it's (reverse) position till it coold down again, and re-reversed itself again. Sometime after, BAda'BOOM eine large enough meteor struck again, restarted our engine, and we keept on ticking.... untill soon enough (if we think 1000 year or more is soon..) when our core will stop flowing.
Can someone please look up how long ago earth was struck by a large enough meteor to turn earth in to a giant blob of lava? : ) I put my money on lets say 780 000 to one millon years ago:) (when the last revelsal was presumed to have happened.)
Earth cooling down:
Here's the tricky part; How much must the earth's core cool down for reversal to happen? Because for it to cool down entirilely it will take more than 1000 years.
Doesn't this sound like a lot as "hunting witches"?, like say back in the 1430-1530 years, when someone said someone was a witch, and the mere accusation was enough, and we burnt them at the stake; contrary to what the facts showed?
ok, now it isn't witches, we call them "terrorists". Soon even then faintest wispher of the word "terrorist" and you'll get hunted down and shot to death (in contrary to burnt at the stake)
Maybe we aren't there yet, but it sure looks like we are hedding towards that direction. Reading a post a while ago (to lazy to find the url, but it was about "how people that look the remotest arabic got pull a side or the like after 9/11, crossing borders, driving their cars...etc etc") sure makes you think scenarios like this.
Haven't we learned anything?
Well, it appears as we haven't; history repeats itself again. Kind of makes you think if history/time is recursive on itself, that we all live in a big "loop-of-some-kind".
I know I am; you know exactly what your software does, and how to "fiddle" with it. Add if it doesn't, you just add that "thing" too it to behave as YOU want.
From this post, to opperate closedSource (apple os x, $ms WinBlow...etc etc), you need to spend more $$$ just so you can save all your precious settings for the next update/upgarde/new system. I get the feeling that maybe they try and hide most of the settings&stuff so that plain users rather go out and buy "their software that will do that", instead of sitting down and learing how to opporate in their maze of a software. Were they give you that "it's for your own saftey"--reason of an answer.
And from were I stand, this is just the tip of the iceberg, for how much more $$$'s you would have to spend extra to accomplish what Openness does.
I've got to admit, Linux/Unix's was a somewhat of a hard-nutt to crack, but the peace of mind I got out of it was well worth it (no more BSOD, "can't do this, insert more money into cdrwdrive"-stuff). It's like learing Physics or Chemestry or Mathemathics; you have to learn the rules once, and then your set, you just apply them over and over and over again.
Why not MAC(or yet)? Well, I like challanges, mac is like 4:th grade math. How challenging is that?
You've got your predefinde lego bits, and that's (almost) it. I like to build my own "lego art", and MAC doesn't yet have that sort of a broad/open offering in hardware. Even though I've got to admit those PowerBooks are&look great. And if I know myself, I will proabably buy one far far way into the future; AND install Uni*'s on it:)
[Footnote] - I'm not saying "go over and use Linux/Unix or OpenSource", just givening you my oppinion of why people (thats me) use it:)
Intro
We could go out and buy fancy books like this, but let's not forget who sets the offical standards around here; the World Wide Web Consortium do. So reading their free version is as good as any other book (but maybe it may not be as "forth comming" in writting, as books tend to be, were they'll explain what the W3C first worte).
Short summary, W3C is for us (geeks with experience) wanting to know, without forking over money for it.
A quick look around, and no "DHTML"; but there's that "DOM" *click*.
We're now in DO[O]M land (here's were DOOM came to life, ya' know)..*ohh* I mean DOM! land : )
Here we find:
What is the Document Object Model?
The Document Object Model is a platform- and language-neutral interface that will allow programs and scripts to dynamically access and update the content, structure and style of documents. The document can be further processed and the results of that processing can be incorporated back into the presented page. This is an overview of DOM-related materials here at W3C and around the web.
Why the Document Object Model?
"Dynamic HTML" is a term used by some vendors to describe the combination of HTML, style sheets and scripts that allows documents to be animated. The W3C has received several submissions from members companies on the way in which the object model of HTML documents should be exposed to scripts. These submissions do not propose any new HTML tags or style sheet technology. The W3C DOM WG is working hard to make sure interoperable and scripting-language neutral solutions are agreed upon.
Now go one more block, till you come to"Public Release of Specifications", turn left at the "DOM Technical Reports".
Now we have a nice view of all DO[O]M land. *Pretty isn't it?:)*
Two more blocks, look out for "Document Object Model Level 3", and turn right at "Document Object Model Level 3 Core" [Now you are wondering why Level 3? Not 2? Well, if you would read Level 2 (and compare with 3), you would notice there's missing a _good_ explained section; and that's were we are heading:P]
Now park your quiche'ster mister/miss. And fork over the money!!!:)
What is the Document Object Model?
Editors:
Philippe Le Hégaret, W3C
Lauren Wood, SoftQuad Software Inc. (for DOM Level 2)
Jonathan Robie, Texcel (for DOM Level 1)
Introduction
The Document Object Model (DOM) is an application programming interface (API) for valid HTML and well-formed XML documents. It defines the logical structure of documents and the way a document is accessed and manipulated. In the DOM specification, the term "document" is used in the broad sense - increasingly, XML is being used as a way of representing many different kinds of information that may be stored in diverse systems, and much of this would traditionally be seen as data rather than as documents. Nevertheless, XML presents this data as documents, and the DOM may be used to manage this data.
With the Document Object Model, programmers can build documents, navigate their structure, and add, modify, or delete elements and content. Anything found in an HTML or XML document can be accessed, changed, deleted, or added using the Document Object Model, with a few exceptions - in particular, the DOM interfaces for the XML internal and external subsets have not yet been specified.
As a W3C specification, one important objective for the Document Object Model is to provide a standard programming interface that can be used in a wide variety of environments and applications. The DOM is designed to be used with any programming language. In order to provide a precise, language-independent specification of the DOM interfaces, we have chosen to define the specifications in Object Management Group (OMG) IDL [OMG IDL], as defined in the CORBA 2.3.1 specification [CORBA]. In addition to the OMG IDL specification, we provide language bindings for Java [Java] and ECMAScript [ECMAScript] (an industry-standard scripting language based on JavaScript [JavaScript] and JScript [JScript]).
What the Document Object Model is not
This section is designed to give a more precise understanding of the DOM by distinguishing it from other systems that may seem to be like it.
The Document Object Model is not a binary specification. DOM programs written in the same language binding will be source code compatible across platforms, but the DOM does not define any form of binary interoperability.
The Document Object Model is not a way of persisting objects to XML or HTML. Instead of specifying how objects may be represented in XML, the DOM specifies how XML and HTML documents are represented as objects, so that they may be used in object oriented programs.
The Document Object Model is not a set of data structures; it is an object model that specifies interfaces. Although this document contains diagrams showing parent/child relationships, these are logical relationships defined by the programming interfaces, not representations of any particular internal data structures.
The Document Object Model does not define what information in a document is relevant or how information in a document is structured. For XML, this is specified by the XML Information Set [XML Information set]. The DOM is simply an API to this information set.
The Document Object Model, despite its name, is not a competitor to the Component Object Model [COM]. COM, like CORBA, is a language independent way to specify interfaces and objects; the DOM is a set of interfaces and objects designed for managing HTML and XML documents. The DOM may be implemented using language-independent systems like COM or CORBA; it may also be implemented using language-specific bindings like the Java or ECMAScript bindings specified in this document.
Where the Document Object Model came from
The DOM originated as a specification to allow JavaScript scripts and Java programs to be portable among Web browsers. "Dynamic HTML" was the immediate ancestor of the Document Object Model, and it was originally thought of largely in terms of browsers. However, when the DOM Working Group was formed at W3C, it was also joined by vendors in other domains, including HTML or XML editors and document repositories. Several of these vendors had worked with SGML before XML was developed; as a result, the DOM has been influenced by SGML Groves and the HyTime standard. Some of these vendors had also developed their own object models for documents in order to provide an API for SGML/XML editors or document repositories, and these object models have also influenced the DOM.
Now you find yourself all alone on the road again.....
*em* a monitor (display), were instead of pointing around with a mouse, you have two cameras traking your eyes? With some fancy-smancy transparent stereoscopic LCD "that makes the picture come alive"?
Couldn't they say it plain-simple? Or must they "puff-it-up" so it sounds waayyy-more Cool than it is?... well, well, I gues that's modern capitalism for you.... trying to deceive you too screw you over for [some] more $$$-signs.
Just wanted to squeeze in an alternative thought between the "fuel cells" & "batteries" arg[s].
There are two solutions to this problem/dilema (well actually three, but the third one is to not use your dear laptop [or what you now use your batteries for...so I won't consider this as a valid option]).
1] Fuel Cells or Batteries
2] Having/making ultra-low-consumtion appliance.
My money is on Nr2, case if we reach that marker, one could eventually get rid of the battery [or fuel cell] charging and make them run on solar-power [or something like that, that doesn't cost the user any more operation costs [no more buying gas/electricity]). I mean if; under one day earth gets bombarded by the sun with the equivalent of power that could sustain our need us for one year... why not learn how use that? if it just there, it's like an unexplored gold mine *or something*.
[Maybe I'm of topic here; but I thought it's just a relevant thought... so be gentle moderators:)]
I recon it's like IRL: that every one should have the same opportunities like the other. Meaning that someone (a disabled, blind in this case) shouldn't somehow be discriminated someway (like not beeing able to access a public place, or site in this case).
From what I know this rule applies here in sweden to all public [access] places...and ends at your home.
Here are a few examples (where it [should] applies):
Schools, Banks, any-sort-of-Stations & transportation, postoffice, restaurants, airlines, airports, airplanes, companies (!$ms too), malls, the beach, ya' you get the idea...
..and I recon he sues the airline because he feels (somehow) discriminated that he can't use the same public site as you do... to book his ticket.
I interpret his claim as "all physical public [access] places with internet sites/service should comply by/with ADA".
So you can feel safe you won't don't get sued to have to modify your personal-p00rn site, nope : )
[*hum... wonder how this applies to PlayBoy.com, and the works...*]
...wondered how you would do the physics part of you 3D Animation App.
Are you going to gather all the physics laws and apply them to your vertices/polygons of your model(s)?
I just thought if you were going to 1} do-it-your-self 2) from scratch, do something new:). Like instead of doing physics-to-polygons/vertices/splines/etcetc..; sratch that and built around molecule/"atoms". Let me explain myself a bit...
If you read Chemistry/Physics, you know the whole world is based around atoms that fore molekyles, that eventually fore us and the rest of the world. Every 3D Animation Package out there are striving everyday to make 3D look more and more realystic. And just they'll ever get (if they continue to strive that way) "something that may look real, but isn't real" - other words - nonreal.
I'm one of those, "if you do something, then at least do it rigth", whereby, "if you are going to do something realistic, at least make it real":). And IMO (copying) mother natures structure is the only way to get to "realistic-real". To date I don't think I've seen a sceen where I haven't been able to spot where they've used 3D illusion(s)/didn't use (yepp, even ILM's fancy-smancy illusion are noticeable to the human eye).
To got to my point; materials with a molecular structure are bound to become realistic-real, while material with a polygon/splines/vertecies/etcetc are bound to [just] become realistic how much one strives.
Not to mention, that there are a lot of other things that are going to get hell of a lot diffrent. E.g, applying texutre, light, rendering:) hehe....
But as an outcome you are bond for the future... where we (I) want things like a holodeck [try using polygons there.. hehe)
[This just my opinion, so take it with a pinch of salt, my brain can output the oddest thing to mainkind, but but, "everything is possible", right??]
There is something that sounds "bad" in my ears when I hear BIG! companies complain that $xxxx-million isn't enougt profit. It just sounds "strangly odd/un-logically odd" to me, IMO.
If we look back, wayyy back, poor people with no money complained (I can understand that, they didn't have much/anything); now wealthy (_big_ pocketed) people complain that $xxx profit isn't enough.
They do what physicist just learn to accept, that in every reaction there will be some loss, shrug, blink, and accept; because there isn't anything anyone can do about it, absolutly anything, it's just one of these laws that exist.
Well, I'm not an apple user (as of yet), but they do sound better (in my ears), so maybe when Intel, AMD, and $ms have out-baned regular CPU, Os, maybe then I'll take a BIG bite of an apple:)
True, I didn't say it had. Just that IMO we are going to mars in the future...and repeat the process over again.
But I ask you again; "haven't you been following" the stories on slashdot? (and other news sources)
They apear to be more and more confident that there may be water on mars (as ice...under the surface... a recent link ).
and, here is how to terraform mars, so it may sustain "terran life". (BBC, discovery.. and countless other TV stations broadcasted this schemes for quit a while ago (and maybe they re-broadcast them in the future, who knows). But in theory they can do that (all the math, chemistry and physics add up, on paper:)). And the ingenious virus-like organism we are, will proabably make it work (purely?, out of selfintrest).
==============
They said "antibotica" would kill the viral bacteria - but we found a cure.
Slashdot Mirror
Your right. :)
:)
it was so long ago, that one starts to forget
frist they did it to betacam [old video standard] - they dropped it in favoure of VCR.
and now they are doing it again, dropping something far better in quality [picture weiss] for less.
I am 100% confident a girl(-geek) can do/accomplish the same things as a boy(-geek), and vice versa.
:).
But, the main question I think is "where does one passion lie in"?
I have a sister whom I thought "real computer geeky things". And she could do it with fliyng colors. But she didn't have the passion to embrace the things I thought her and learn more on her own. So she stopped evolving into a geek'ets
I as a boy-geek, I do what I do because of the passion that drives me. There is no need for someone coming along and motivating me to do what I do, because I do it on my own. [they come to motivate me to do other things too : )]
When I first learned my first thing about/in computers, [do the cd-command], something in me just wanted to know what more there is that the computer can do, and showed intressed in that I wanted to learn more... and look several years have passed and I still have my craving for more : )
I recon:
Everyone has the potential to become anything they want -- but, what is that "thing?" you want to be?
That said, it doesn't mean/have to be a 50%-50% gender orientated workplace in every segment or any for that matter. Not every segment out there is or will ever by a equriblium. It just is what it is, who has the more passion for something will strive toward it more than the other. Think Darwin put it short&nice "Survival of the fittest".
thats like signing their own extinction (death). No new customers will want their services, and old once one-by-one will eventually leave.
...and pretty soon they will be out of business.
So i doubt they will change their TOS... just because of the RIAA & co whats it so.
Is it to hard to embed "ssl tunnel" into a pice of software? www.stunnel.org is opensource, just needs YOU to embed it :)
:)
and start encrypting the packets....
the ISP's can't block/filter packets they can't understand (descramble, decode... etc etc).
PS - And don't say your brand new snazy 1+ Ghz computer will not cope!
yeepp, a quick search @ www.uspto.gov doesn't show there is a patent registered to him....maybe his got it registerd in/for an other country :)
How about letting people understand?
Instead of banning them from understandment?
It seems to me that all these law and orders we make on a daily basis is trying to "Prohibit" those of us who are curious of the next thing laying infront of our path.
All may not cross the path at once, but sooner or laytor [time will tell] all may walk the path. So wouldn't it be handy-dandy if someone did this "homework" for us? Instead of stumbling around with something that might just be extremly lethal for you?
Hmm; now that I said it, I seems to me that we live in a stubborn society were we want to make our own "homework[s]" [our own way[s]!]
Very well, *\\//_* may it bring you prosperity.
-- Guns aren't lethal, we are; they are mere toys we play with.
W A R N I N G - This comment is filled with all kinds of non-related information
So READ Accordingly!:
A] IF YOU are a "talky" person, please read the whole comment; from top to bottom.
B] IF YOU are somewhat like me, then read only the Bolded text, the rest is just "unessential" for us.
= = = =
Not everyone in this world is someone who loves to read books (and I'm one of them;), so pointing to some nice big/fat/large books "that have everything in them" won't make me tick one sec (quite the opposite).
"It's not the quantaty that matters, its the quality" , you've all heard that one.
As in life I'm not much of a talker [Hmm, associate me to vulcans; were not that damn talky are we?
In summary their filled with all kinds of non-related information [every slashdoter knows this *I think*; guess why I love the-slashdot-concept?
What I'm trying to put into context is; First develope your in-Learing capabilities [don't "Learn", but try to learn how you've Learned, learn the method how _you_ learn stuff; Everyone has his/her own in-learning method; Common ground they all have, but differ they do; Meaning not everyone learns by reading books, sitting still in class, paying 100% attention to the teacher etc etc;] before trying to learn anything else first.
Accelerated Learning is the word you should be ogle'ing around for beforehand learning liunx/giving advice[that's my advice to you; you slashdoters my disagree;]
The Book I link to isn't in english, so it will not be much of use for non-swedish-reading-people.
ISBN: 91-630-8899-1 "Gör studierna enklare och förbered dig för livet i kunskapssamhället", by Christer Westlund.
But it derives from the "Accelerated Learning" concept, just written in swedish, so search the web for english once.... [Isn't that a typical advice from a *nix user; saying "RTFM!" in a nice way?
[Some time has past, you've aged (a bit), and you've masterd the skills in-learnig]
Now, you're ready to step inside the *nix world.
A] Sit down, and formulate a bunch of questions [what _you_ want to know about!].
i.e "I wonder how do I run a webserver?", "I wonder, how do I start linux?", "I wonder, how do i INSTALL *nix!?"
B] At random, go to the library, pick out any *nix book, read the contents until you find something that lures you [like you _want_ to know how to do that/how it works].
C] Those were just mere examples, so if non of them suits you, feel free to experiment your way forward to something that does.
:) - but it happens when I do read one, but only If I _RRReally_ like the "non-related information of all kinds" :)
So depending on your lifestile [Free-Sourcer, or Buy-Sourcer], find either a Nice [free] jucy Manual/how-to/book to *nix or buy a book you can read.
And start applying all your in-Learnig skills and start learning yourself.
[That's it! THE END]
!ps - notice how I counted "Manual/how-to/book" in that order? - now that's my way of learning, books come last, first comes the "man" - command, then the web [usual I get all the info I need here]... and usually no books
This is just me, and my style; as I wanted to show you an example; So you go now and do your style and leave me alone! It's time for my daily meditation
[All who know Vulcans, know we need meditation or we agitated & rood...: ) *hehe*]
sound like a lot like M$ Windows XP Embeded
but ha! read this quote from M$'s site:
"Special Offer: Windows XP Embedded for Only $995 US
For a limited time only, get Windows XP Embedded for a special price.
Unlock the power of Windows XP Embedded for only $995 US estimated retail price (ERP), which represents a savings of up to 65% off of the Microsoft standard retail price. This offer is valid through March 31, 2003. Contact your authorized Windows XP Embedded distributor for details.
This offer applies only to the Windows XP Embedded development tools and not to runtimelicenses."
That's like a fancy new über PC assembled....and they want so much for a OS, (HA!), as a customer I sure would want every businnes to follow this example, because the money comes from my spending pocket (not theirs), and I don't want to pay for this sort of coasts when there are alternatives which do the same job...
saw it at apple
...not to troll or anything, but why would someone need a tablet? Aren't we right back where we started from...?
I try to escape from writing with a (ball) pen as much as I can, just because a) I write solw b) uggly c) i get cramps after awhile d) can't read any good handwriting (compare to computerized-text).
Why do I escape to a keyboard-enviorment (notebook in my case) you may ask?. Well plain simple a) I write faster b) fancier/good-looking- writting c) no more cramps (I don't use One hand, I use 10 fingers, meaning 10 times less strains; And did I mention, I write dvorak; so even less strains).
I understand why artists use (want to use) a Wacom-board; I myself use one in photoshop (and the like...); but other uses in the writting-sector i prefer my keyboard.
So why switch back to a pen-enviorment?
Not that much money; was just a figure of speach.
l d=0&commentsort=0&tid=134&mode=thread&pid=4636856# 4638146
Instead of rewriting a reply to someone else I'll jsut add a link to it, the url-is: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=44670&thresho
That makes sence!
:)).
1 .htm
After I posted the comment I read some more, and came to the same conclusion (little to late to revice once post
Reference:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast15feb_
http://istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/earthmag/reversal.htm
Can this explain it?:
:) (when the last revelsal was presumed to have happened.)
/ interior.html / moon_magnetic_field.html&edu=high c ience/magnetism/magnetic_materials.html&edu=hi gh 9 92152 9 03,837058,00.html
"A planet's magnetosphere is provided through its magnetic field. To create a magnetic field, a planet or moon must have magnetic material such has iron, which is warm enough to move around to form currents within the planet."
And isn't earth(s core) cooling down? - Can't this affect our magnetosphere? If the magnetic materail stop flowing?
My imaginary plot (IMHO):
Now I'm thinging that when earth switched poles, the core coold down, reversal happened, sometime after that earth got hit by a large enough meteor to restart our core (how elese could the core be restarted? there wasn't atomic weapons and the like back in those days, no! Good ol' fashion meteors had to suffice : )). Then earth keept it's (reverse) position till it coold down again, and re-reversed itself again. Sometime after, BAda'BOOM eine large enough meteor struck again, restarted our engine, and we keept on ticking.... untill soon enough (if we think 1000 year or more is soon..) when our core will stop flowing.
Can someone please look up how long ago earth was struck by a large enough meteor to turn earth in to a giant blob of lava? : )
I put my money on lets say 780 000 to one millon years ago
Earth cooling down:
Here's the tricky part; How much must the earth's core cool down for reversal to happen? Because for it to cool down entirilely it will take more than 1000 years.
Reference:
http://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/moon
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/physical_s
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99
http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6
Doesn't this sound like a lot as "hunting witches"?, like say back in the 1430-1530 years, when someone said someone was a witch, and the mere accusation was enough, and we burnt them at the stake; contrary to what the facts showed?
ok, now it isn't witches, we call them "terrorists". Soon even then faintest wispher of the word "terrorist" and you'll get hunted down and shot to death (in contrary to burnt at the stake)
Maybe we aren't there yet, but it sure looks like we are hedding towards that direction. Reading a post a while ago (to lazy to find the url, but it was about "how people that look the remotest arabic got pull a side or the like after 9/11, crossing borders, driving their cars...etc etc") sure makes you think scenarios like this.
Haven't we learned anything?
Well, it appears as we haven't; history repeats itself again. Kind of makes you think if history/time is recursive on itself, that we all live in a big "loop-of-some-kind".
isn't it so?
:)
:)
I know I am; you know exactly what your software does, and how to "fiddle" with it. Add if it doesn't, you just add that "thing" too it to behave as YOU want.
From this post, to opperate closedSource (apple os x, $ms WinBlow...etc etc), you need to spend more $$$ just so you can save all your precious settings for the next update/upgarde/new system. I get the feeling that maybe they try and hide most of the settings&stuff so that plain users rather go out and buy "their software that will do that", instead of sitting down and learing how to opporate in their maze of a software. Were they give you that "it's for your own saftey"--reason of an answer.
And from were I stand, this is just the tip of the iceberg, for how much more $$$'s you would have to spend extra to accomplish what Openness does.
I've got to admit, Linux/Unix's was a somewhat of a hard-nutt to crack, but the peace of mind I got out of it was well worth it (no more BSOD, "can't do this, insert more money into cdrwdrive"-stuff). It's like learing Physics or Chemestry or Mathemathics; you have to learn the rules once, and then your set, you just apply them over and over and over again.
Why not MAC(or yet)? Well, I like challanges, mac is like 4:th grade math. How challenging is that? You've got your predefinde lego bits, and that's (almost) it. I like to build my own "lego art", and MAC doesn't yet have that sort of a broad/open offering in hardware. Even though I've got to admit those PowerBooks are&look great. And if I know myself, I will proabably buy one far far way into the future; AND install Uni*'s on it
[Footnote] - I'm not saying "go over and use Linux/Unix or OpenSource", just givening you my oppinion of why people (thats me) use it
Slashdot.org - You have 4 Moderator Points! Use 'em or lose 'em!
:)
bark.slashdot.org - You have 30 Moderator Points! Use 'em or lose 'em!
I really do like the new slashdot server : ), Now I can... *moohhahahaah*... some more.
Keep up the good job!
We could go out and buy fancy books like this, but let's not forget who sets the offical standards around here; the World Wide Web Consortium do. So reading their free version is as good as any other book (but maybe it may not be as "forth comming" in writting, as books tend to be, were they'll explain what the W3C first worte).
Short summary, W3C is for us (geeks with experience) wanting to know, without forking over money for it.
The info
So lets head over to: http//www.w3.org
A quick look around, and no "DHTML"; but there's that "DOM" *click*.
We're now in DO[O]M land (here's were DOOM came to life, ya' know)..*ohh* I mean DOM! land : )
Here we find:
The Document Object Model is a platform- and language-neutral interface that will allow programs and scripts to dynamically access and update the content, structure and style of documents. The document can be further processed and the results of that processing can be incorporated back into the presented page. This is an overview of DOM-related materials here at W3C and around the web.
Why the Document Object Model?
"Dynamic HTML" is a term used by some vendors to describe the combination of HTML, style sheets and scripts that allows documents to be animated. The W3C has received several submissions from members companies on the way in which the object model of HTML documents should be exposed to scripts. These submissions do not propose any new HTML tags or style sheet technology. The W3C DOM WG is working hard to make sure interoperable and scripting-language neutral solutions are agreed upon.
Now go one more block, till you come to"Public Release of Specifications", turn left at the " DOM Technical Reports ".
Now we have a nice view of all DO[O]M land. *Pretty isn't it?
Two more blocks, look out for "Document Object Model Level 3", and turn right at " Document Object Model Level 3 Core"
[Now you are wondering why Level 3? Not 2? Well, if you would read Level 2 (and compare with 3), you would notice there's missing a _good_ explained section; and that's were we are heading
Straigt forward, till "Table of contents", and make a turn at " What is the Document Object Model?
Now park your quiche'ster mister/miss. And fork over the money!!!
Editors:
Philippe Le Hégaret, W3C
Lauren Wood, SoftQuad Software Inc. (for DOM Level 2)
Jonathan Robie, Texcel (for DOM Level 1)
Introduction
The Document Object Model (DOM) is an application programming interface (API) for valid HTML and well-formed XML documents. It defines the logical structure of documents and the way a document is accessed and manipulated. In the DOM specification, the term "document" is used in the broad sense - increasingly, XML is being used as a way of representing many different kinds of information that may be stored in diverse systems, and much of this would traditionally be seen as data rather than as documents. Nevertheless, XML presents this data as documents, and the DOM may be used to manage this data.
With the Document Object Model, programmers can build documents, navigate their structure, and add, modify, or delete elements and content. Anything found in an HTML or XML document can be accessed, changed, deleted, or added using the Document Object Model, with a few exceptions - in particular, the DOM interfaces for the XML internal and external subsets have not yet been specified.
As a W3C specification, one important objective for the Document Object Model is to provide a standard programming interface that can be used in a wide variety of environments and applications. The DOM is designed to be used with any programming language. In order to provide a precise, language-independent specification of the DOM interfaces, we have chosen to define the specifications in Object Management Group (OMG) IDL [OMG IDL], as defined in the CORBA 2.3.1 specification [CORBA]. In addition to the OMG IDL specification, we provide language bindings for Java [Java] and ECMAScript [ECMAScript] (an industry-standard scripting language based on JavaScript [JavaScript] and JScript [JScript]).
What the Document Object Model is not
This section is designed to give a more precise understanding of the DOM by distinguishing it from other systems that may seem to be like it.
Where the Document Object Model came from
The DOM originated as a specification to allow JavaScript scripts and Java programs to be portable among Web browsers. "Dynamic HTML" was the immediate ancestor of the Document Object Model, and it was originally thought of largely in terms of browsers. However, when the DOM Working Group was formed at W3C, it was also joined by vendors in other domains, including HTML or XML editors and document repositories. Several of these vendors had worked with SGML before XML was developed; as a result, the DOM has been influenced by SGML Groves and the HyTime standard. Some of these vendors had also developed their own object models for documents in order to provide an API for SGML/XML editors or document repositories, and these object models have also influenced the DOM.
Now you find yourself all alone on the road again.....
*em* a monitor (display), were instead of pointing around with a mouse, you have two cameras traking your eyes? With some fancy-smancy transparent stereoscopic LCD "that makes the picture come alive"?
Couldn't they say it plain-simple? Or must they "puff-it-up" so it sounds waayyy-more Cool than it is?... well, well, I gues that's modern capitalism for you.... trying to deceive you too screw you over for [some] more $$$-signs.
Just wanted to squeeze in an alternative thought between the "fuel cells" & "batteries" arg[s].
:)]
There are two solutions to this problem/dilema (well actually three, but the third one is to not use your dear laptop [or what you now use your batteries for...so I won't consider this as a valid option]).
1] Fuel Cells or Batteries
2] Having/making ultra-low-consumtion appliance.
My money is on Nr2, case if we reach that marker, one could eventually get rid of the battery [or fuel cell] charging and make them run on solar-power [or something like that, that doesn't cost the user any more operation costs [no more buying gas/electricity]). I mean if; under one day earth gets bombarded by the sun with the equivalent of power that could sustain our need us for one year... why not learn how use that? if it just there, it's like an unexplored gold mine *or something*.
[Maybe I'm of topic here; but I thought it's just a relevant thought... so be gentle moderators
no, not all sites *i want to say*.
..and I recon he sues the airline because he feels (somehow) discriminated that he can't use the same public site as you do... to book his ticket.
I recon it's like IRL: that every one should have the same opportunities like the other. Meaning that someone (a disabled, blind in this case) shouldn't somehow be discriminated someway (like not beeing able to access a public place, or site in this case).
From what I know this rule applies here in sweden to all public [access] places...and ends at your home.
Here are a few examples (where it [should] applies): Schools, Banks, any-sort-of-Stations & transportation, postoffice, restaurants, airlines, airports, airplanes, companies (!$ms too), malls, the beach, ya' you get the idea...
I interpret his claim as "all physical public [access] places with internet sites/service should comply by/with ADA".
So you can feel safe you won't don't get sued to have to modify your personal-p00rn site, nope : )
[*hum... wonder how this applies to PlayBoy.com, and the works...*]
just wanted to clear a few misspellings.
Fore == Forge
And just they'll == And that's just they'll
To got to my point == to get to my point
bond == bound
This just == This is just
...wondered how you would do the physics part of you 3D Animation App.
:). Like instead of doing physics-to-polygons/vertices/splines/etcetc..; sratch that and built around molecule/"atoms". Let me explain myself a bit...
:). And IMO (copying) mother natures structure is the only way to get to "realistic-real". To date I don't think I've seen a sceen where I haven't been able to spot where they've used 3D illusion(s)/didn't use (yepp, even ILM's fancy-smancy illusion are noticeable to the human eye).
:) hehe....
Are you going to gather all the physics laws and apply them to your vertices/polygons of your model(s)?
I just thought if you were going to 1} do-it-your-self 2) from scratch, do something new
If you read Chemistry/Physics, you know the whole world is based around atoms that fore molekyles, that eventually fore us and the rest of the world. Every 3D Animation Package out there are striving everyday to make 3D look more and more realystic. And just they'll ever get (if they continue to strive that way) "something that may look real, but isn't real" - other words - nonreal.
I'm one of those, "if you do something, then at least do it rigth", whereby, "if you are going to do something realistic, at least make it real"
To got to my point; materials with a molecular structure are bound to become realistic-real, while material with a polygon/splines/vertecies/etcetc are bound to [just] become realistic how much one strives.
Not to mention, that there are a lot of other things that are going to get hell of a lot diffrent. E.g, applying texutre, light, rendering
But as an outcome you are bond for the future... where we (I) want things like a holodeck [try using polygons there.. hehe)
[This just my opinion, so take it with a pinch of salt, my brain can output the oddest thing to mainkind, but but, "everything is possible", right??]
There is something that sounds "bad" in my ears when I hear BIG! companies complain that $xxxx-million isn't enougt profit. It just sounds "strangly odd/un-logically odd" to me, IMO.
:)
If we look back, wayyy back, poor people with no money complained (I can understand that, they didn't have much/anything); now wealthy (_big_ pocketed) people complain that $xxx profit isn't enough.
They do what physicist just learn to accept, that in every reaction there will be some loss, shrug, blink, and accept; because there isn't anything anyone can do about it, absolutly anything, it's just one of these laws that exist.
Well, I'm not an apple user (as of yet), but they do sound better (in my ears), so maybe when Intel, AMD, and $ms have out-baned regular CPU, Os, maybe then I'll take a BIG bite of an apple
True, I didn't say it had. Just that IMO we are going to mars in the future...and repeat the process over again.
:)). And the ingenious virus-like organism we are, will proabably make it work (purely?, out of selfintrest).
But I ask you again; "haven't you been following" the stories on slashdot? (and other news sources)
They apear to be more and more confident that there may be water on mars (as ice...under the surface... a recent link ).
and, here is how to terraform mars, so it may sustain "terran life". (BBC, discovery.. and countless other TV stations broadcasted this schemes for quit a while ago (and maybe they re-broadcast them in the future, who knows). But in theory they can do that (all the math, chemistry and physics add up, on paper
==============
They said "antibotica" would kill the viral bacteria - but we found a cure.