Possibly because humans would be better able to endure a long term stay in a spinning space station with earth-like "gravity" than a long term stay in the moon's low gravity?
Winamp still has one advantage--the huge collection of plugins. I'm a video game music junkie, and the only reason I still run winamp is to play SPCs, NSFs, PSFs--the dumps from the audio processing of emulated games. If iTunes could use winamp input plugins, I'd use it all the time.
This hits the nail on the head. Google, Wikipedia, and the internet in general make traditional encyclopedias completely useless for anyone old enough to be allowed to search the internet without adult supervision. Does Wikipedia have every strength that Encyclopedia Britannica has? Of course not. Do DVDs have every advantage that VHS cassettes have? No. But the advantages of the new outweigh the disadvantages in both cases.
Bush has lied to America so many times, there really isn't anyway to tell if there will be a draft or not. You sure can't go by what Bush said he would do. The next four years are going to be completely unrelated to his campaign. Big issue pre-November: Terrorism. Big issue post-November--privatizing Social Security. You wouldn't expect all those old retirees and baby boomers to vote for taking 2 trillion dollars out of the system, would you? In the 2006 congressional elections, we'll find out if the elderly aren't too senile to know that they've been stabbed in the back.
No, actually, it's not. First off, it's no better than "American", because other governments throughout history after the Revolutionary War have named themselves the United States of X. Brazil is one example (maybe the only one), though it eventually renamed.
Secondly, it's not acceptable because it tends to be used by non-Americans. There's a word for when you give a cultural group a name that the cultural group referred to does not approve of--epithet. USian is only an appropriate turn when you are attacking Americans--which considering that this poster (possibly you) was actually defending Americans in general from one specific American, makes that use incorrect.
There is very little need to refer to all residents of North and South America (or did you just mean North America?) as one short word, since the people of that great expanse have little in common. Sometimes language rules value efficiency over consistency--and "American" is one of those times.
Finally, I've yet to come across a Canadian or Mexican who insists on being called American. I think it's likely to offend them, actually.
It's great fun watching pretentious elitists talk about the USian public being mindless sheep when they can't even spell simple words like 'ridiculous'.
It's just as much fun to see the mindless sheep misspell "American".
Well, I'll keep that in mind if I decide to stand up in front of a room full of finkployds, but in the real world that's what's likely to happen if you just stand up in front of a crowd pissing them off. It's possibly a disingenuous ploy--you may not intend to physically threaten someone, but you know someone else will. What the heck else could cowardly mean--afraid of social ostracism in a crowd of likely strangers?
Sorry dude, people who determine their worth as a person by their ability to punch people are obsolete. Obviously no one has the right to turn off someone else's TV. I don't support this particular technology--but I *DO* support the idea that violence is made worthless. If you can't see who is fumbling with the keychain in their pocket, you can't punch 'em. As Colt famously advertized "God made men, but TV-B-Gone made them equal." There's all these people here who are so pissed off--like "oh man wtf if i c u use this i'm gonna KICK YOUR BUTT!!!!!! i'm so mad". Folks, this isn't Junior High. These aren't caveman days. Physical strength no longer translates into social status. You know what DOES translate into social status? Having enough brains to tape up the infrared receiver of the television if this bothers you.
This device is pure vandalism. But it's mostly harmless vandalism (unless you get caught by the caveman--the prepare to be harmed, nerd!) and it targets something that every decent person knows in their heart is terrible--television.
What's also interesting is that Gore is now more liberal than Gore. I think his rhetoric for the past couple years has been more impassioned than his campaign (though he tried a "the people or the powerful" meme near the end). He even endorsed Dean back in the primary.
CARLSON: People watch Crossfire to be entertained. You do news comedy on the Daily Show while on Crossfire we do news drama.
There's no "Gathering of wits" about it--Carlson would never, ever admit that. They consider it a real news show that hold people accountable. But it's just theater. As Stewart said.
I used to think NPR was really awesome, but I've come to agree with your point of view. Sure, all the SIGGRAPH demos look really awesome for five minutes. But after watching a full length movie of any particular NPR style or playing an NPR game for an extended period of time, it starts to sink in--I'm just watching another kind of 3d rendering, not 2d animation.
The reason drawings are more appealing than 3d renderings isn't just a matter of graphic style--it's because every human drawn line is an act of communication between one human being and another. The type and placement of shading and even systematic error in perspective are the results of a complicated thought process in a human beings head.
Some of these algorithms try to trick human beings by adding such imperfections with randomized algorithms. But that effect wears off eventually--because those imperfections are not merely noise, they are actually signal.
OTOH, I'm hard pressed to call the outsourced drawing of inbetween frames "art". If there was a computer algorithm that could take the keyframes and generate in-between frames with the same craft that a human could, that would be really awesome. There's a massive amount of "non-art" work that goes into any serious animation.
And I'm sure there's a place in graphic design for NPR renderings. Perhaps the choice of algorithm and associated parameters will in some way make a "new" art that many will experiment with, though serious examples of that beyond graphics demos seem lacking.
The government STILL won't police spam, and they do crap like this. There's clearly no connection. The government WILL try to censor political speech because thats what governments like to do, regardless of the existence of any other perceived "anarchy". If the government has taught us anything, it is that they will do absolutely anything they can get away with.
So if we want to have free speech on the internet, the only possible solution is to make censorship impossible. Make it so the government can't find who or where information is coming from. An that's ALL information--both political speech and copywritten files. Censorship is censorship. Make government censorship impossible, make "self-policing" impossible. And above all make sure stockholm syndrome sufferers like yourself remain unheeded. Make sure that if Alice wants to give a file, and Bob wants to get that file, they can always succeed. The only permissible censorship is by Alice and Bob themselves. Let cryptographic noise fill the vaccuum, and no State will be able to enter. Please notice that most of the universe is a vaccuum.
419 scams and spam are completely different--that is Bob receiving an unwanted file. In the case of the scams, they should be completely traceable, if the government actually cared--how can you get someone's money without people knowing who you are?
I agree with you that algorithmic district drawing is the only real solution, and with the Dems being disingenuous (this favors neither Dems nor Republicans--only incumbents).
But this is a NEW big deal. Not because gerrymandering is new, but because its become so very powerful and accurate. It used to be that the House was the agent of change and the Senate was supposed to be the cautionary brake. Now the House has become gerrymandered so badly its considered even more stable for incumbents than the Senate. The House of Representatives has basically lost all purpose--in the space of a few decades of computer modelling, the House has become almost invulnerable to popular will. Much like the Senate pre-17th amendment, representatives are de facto appointed by the state legislatures. Except that those same legislatures are gerrymandering themselves as well. Without correction, we will have a self appointed Politburo running state governments and the House.
Hey, I'm an American, and you know what? Our TV sucks huge swine ass. I OFFICIALLY give all Europeans the right to make fun of American TV, not just because the BBC is way the fuck better, but because there is no possible way for any serialized sequence of broadcast images coupled with sound to be worse than what is broadcast over our airwaves. I encourage Europe to start jamming our signals with "Radio Free America" broadcasts of cult BBC hits and French pornography. An Iron Curtain has fallen over the Atlantic Ocean, and I come begging to our friends still living in the free world to help us tear it down!
Wasn't the gag order given to Rackspace, not Indymedia? IMC may know, they may not know. There are plenty of illegitimate reasons for a gag order, too.
If a treaty is merely signed, then no, it does not supercede the constitution or even simple laws. If the treaty is ratified on Constitution, I believe that DOES override the Constitution, as the Constitution itself insists.
Article VI, Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
I'm not certain, but I think that means a treaty is essentially a new amendment to the constitution.
No, I'm going to rely on interaction with other players. Have you noticed how few adventure games are sold these days? Fewer and fewer people actually want to play "Hamlet on the Holodeck", as the famous metaphor promises. So, I think you've got it backwards--as technology improves, pre-written stories start to look silly and ridiculous. Players want to create their own stories as they play--that is, if story can be said to have any purpose in games at this point.
I'm sure plenty of recluse geeks have cried when their elf girlfriends broke up with them. I think that's the fundamental misunderstanding that both sides of this debate are missing--video games are better thought of as a PLACE than a STORY. Developers define a set of rules, and players--both human and automaton--interact within that set of rules.
Now, it might be an open question whether we can ever make a tear jerker game that involves only one human player, but that seems like more of a Turing Test question than an aspiration for art. In fact, in recent days I've come to the conclusion that creating computer games is no more art than building football stadiums. Computer games are becoming even more dominated by huge corporations and board rooms than cinema, television, or music. While there is plenty of room for art within video games, viodeo games themselves may not be art, and designing game play is not a job for dramatists. Designing gameplay is a matter of mechanics, not narrative.
Slashdot Mirror
Possibly because humans would be better able to endure a long term stay in a spinning space station with earth-like "gravity" than a long term stay in the moon's low gravity?
Winamp still has one advantage--the huge collection of plugins. I'm a video game music junkie, and the only reason I still run winamp is to play SPCs, NSFs, PSFs--the dumps from the audio processing of emulated games. If iTunes could use winamp input plugins, I'd use it all the time.
This hits the nail on the head. Google, Wikipedia, and the internet in general make traditional encyclopedias completely useless for anyone old enough to be allowed to search the internet without adult supervision. Does Wikipedia have every strength that Encyclopedia Britannica has? Of course not. Do DVDs have every advantage that VHS cassettes have? No. But the advantages of the new outweigh the disadvantages in both cases.
Bush has lied to America so many times, there really isn't anyway to tell if there will be a draft or not. You sure can't go by what Bush said he would do. The next four years are going to be completely unrelated to his campaign. Big issue pre-November: Terrorism. Big issue post-November--privatizing Social Security. You wouldn't expect all those old retirees and baby boomers to vote for taking 2 trillion dollars out of the system, would you? In the 2006 congressional elections, we'll find out if the elderly aren't too senile to know that they've been stabbed in the back.
Secondly, it's not acceptable because it tends to be used by non-Americans. There's a word for when you give a cultural group a name that the cultural group referred to does not approve of--epithet. USian is only an appropriate turn when you are attacking Americans--which considering that this poster (possibly you) was actually defending Americans in general from one specific American, makes that use incorrect.
There is very little need to refer to all residents of North and South America (or did you just mean North America?) as one short word, since the people of that great expanse have little in common. Sometimes language rules value efficiency over consistency--and "American" is one of those times.
Finally, I've yet to come across a Canadian or Mexican who insists on being called American. I think it's likely to offend them, actually.
It's great fun watching pretentious elitists talk about the USian public being mindless sheep when they can't even spell simple words like 'ridiculous'. It's just as much fun to see the mindless sheep misspell "American".
See response to other reply.
Well, I'll keep that in mind if I decide to stand up in front of a room full of finkployds, but in the real world that's what's likely to happen if you just stand up in front of a crowd pissing them off. It's possibly a disingenuous ploy--you may not intend to physically threaten someone, but you know someone else will. What the heck else could cowardly mean--afraid of social ostracism in a crowd of likely strangers?
This device is pure vandalism. But it's mostly harmless vandalism (unless you get caught by the caveman--the prepare to be harmed, nerd!) and it targets something that every decent person knows in their heart is terrible--television.
Would someone like to explain what meme actually means?
What's also interesting is that Gore is now more liberal than Gore. I think his rhetoric for the past couple years has been more impassioned than his campaign (though he tried a "the people or the powerful" meme near the end). He even endorsed Dean back in the primary.
No, but with luck he might learn that on November 2.
There's no "Gathering of wits" about it--Carlson would never, ever admit that. They consider it a real news show that hold people accountable. But it's just theater. As Stewart said.
The reason drawings are more appealing than 3d renderings isn't just a matter of graphic style--it's because every human drawn line is an act of communication between one human being and another. The type and placement of shading and even systematic error in perspective are the results of a complicated thought process in a human beings head.
Some of these algorithms try to trick human beings by adding such imperfections with randomized algorithms. But that effect wears off eventually--because those imperfections are not merely noise, they are actually signal.
OTOH, I'm hard pressed to call the outsourced drawing of inbetween frames "art". If there was a computer algorithm that could take the keyframes and generate in-between frames with the same craft that a human could, that would be really awesome. There's a massive amount of "non-art" work that goes into any serious animation.
And I'm sure there's a place in graphic design for NPR renderings. Perhaps the choice of algorithm and associated parameters will in some way make a "new" art that many will experiment with, though serious examples of that beyond graphics demos seem lacking.
So if we want to have free speech on the internet, the only possible solution is to make censorship impossible. Make it so the government can't find who or where information is coming from. An that's ALL information--both political speech and copywritten files. Censorship is censorship. Make government censorship impossible, make "self-policing" impossible. And above all make sure stockholm syndrome sufferers like yourself remain unheeded. Make sure that if Alice wants to give a file, and Bob wants to get that file, they can always succeed. The only permissible censorship is by Alice and Bob themselves. Let cryptographic noise fill the vaccuum, and no State will be able to enter. Please notice that most of the universe is a vaccuum.
419 scams and spam are completely different--that is Bob receiving an unwanted file. In the case of the scams, they should be completely traceable, if the government actually cared--how can you get someone's money without people knowing who you are?
This seems to contrast with Sinclair's attempt to classify this as "news"--if they're free to do as they choose, why bother with such euphemisms?
1 is irrelevant, 2 and 3 are contrary to Equal Time laws.
Nonsense, incumbents are better able to raise funds than challengers. Gerrymandering isn't the only way--but it's quickly becoming the most powerful.
But this is a NEW big deal. Not because gerrymandering is new, but because its become so very powerful and accurate. It used to be that the House was the agent of change and the Senate was supposed to be the cautionary brake. Now the House has become gerrymandered so badly its considered even more stable for incumbents than the Senate. The House of Representatives has basically lost all purpose--in the space of a few decades of computer modelling, the House has become almost invulnerable to popular will. Much like the Senate pre-17th amendment, representatives are de facto appointed by the state legislatures. Except that those same legislatures are gerrymandering themselves as well. Without correction, we will have a self appointed Politburo running state governments and the House.
Hey, I'm an American, and you know what? Our TV sucks huge swine ass. I OFFICIALLY give all Europeans the right to make fun of American TV, not just because the BBC is way the fuck better, but because there is no possible way for any serialized sequence of broadcast images coupled with sound to be worse than what is broadcast over our airwaves. I encourage Europe to start jamming our signals with "Radio Free America" broadcasts of cult BBC hits and French pornography. An Iron Curtain has fallen over the Atlantic Ocean, and I come begging to our friends still living in the free world to help us tear it down!
Wasn't the gag order given to Rackspace, not Indymedia? IMC may know, they may not know. There are plenty of illegitimate reasons for a gag order, too.
No, I'm going to rely on interaction with other players. Have you noticed how few adventure games are sold these days? Fewer and fewer people actually want to play "Hamlet on the Holodeck", as the famous metaphor promises. So, I think you've got it backwards--as technology improves, pre-written stories start to look silly and ridiculous. Players want to create their own stories as they play--that is, if story can be said to have any purpose in games at this point.
I'm sure plenty of recluse geeks have cried when their elf girlfriends broke up with them. I think that's the fundamental misunderstanding that both sides of this debate are missing--video games are better thought of as a PLACE than a STORY. Developers define a set of rules, and players--both human and automaton--interact within that set of rules. Now, it might be an open question whether we can ever make a tear jerker game that involves only one human player, but that seems like more of a Turing Test question than an aspiration for art. In fact, in recent days I've come to the conclusion that creating computer games is no more art than building football stadiums. Computer games are becoming even more dominated by huge corporations and board rooms than cinema, television, or music. While there is plenty of room for art within video games, viodeo games themselves may not be art, and designing game play is not a job for dramatists. Designing gameplay is a matter of mechanics, not narrative.
Does anyone have an example of a big PC maker selling Linux PCs but no OS-less PCs?