I shoot raw + jpeg on a 12 megapixel Nikon, so I blow through memory space very quicky. I use 8 gig high-end cards (I paid about $100 each for them) at the moment, and some of my collegues laugh at me for putting so many eggs in one basket with those giant cards. They still use 1-4 gig cards so they won't lose so many pictures if a card fails.
Even raw + jpeg, I'll get about 250 images on a 4 gig (still a good 8 rolls of film before a change), so I don't see why you seem to think professionals want larger cards.
High speed is the reason to pay so much. In burst mode shooting raw, my camera's good for about 8 pictures with it's buffer and then I'm at the mercy of the SD card. Even a 20 MB/s card limits me to a couple of pictures per second.
He meant "human equivalent amount of biomass". But I don't think his number is anywhere near accurate because organisms don't use a constant amount of water per kilogram of mass regardless of size or any other factor, and humans are certainly not representative of all life that has existing on Earth for the past 3 billion years.
Thank you. Even for the one drop it's only a few orders of magnitude off of your gallon.
And I don't think his numbers are even close, I would guess the real water consumption is much larger. Generally, the smaller the organism the faster the metabolism. An 80 kg human may use a gallon of water a day. 80 kg of plankton would use a lot more than that. An elephant weighing 20 times as much a person doesn't need to drink 20 times the water. And taken over the past 3 billion years or so, most of the biomass that has existed on this planet has been single cellular and tiny multi-cellular.
Of course, since the space station inhabitants drink recycled urine, I'm still not totally convinced that I would want to try that cup.
And just what do you think that fresh spring water or tap water you're drinking is? There's been life on this planet for 3 billion years, every drop of water has been recycled urine more times than your human brain is able to comprehend.
The only real difference on the space station is that they do a much better job of purifying and testing the water than nature does.
I tend to agree, I have a 2004 Power Book (and much more modern PC desktops), and i was looking to upgrade, probably in the spring when they do the free iPod deal. But there's no way I'll buy one of these crippled machines.
If everyone does say they'll keep their last years models though, this will be a disaster for apple, especially with the current market, and they'll have to rethink DRM for their 2009 models. If the Fanbois buy the new garbage, it's what apple will keep churning out.
Society has a stigma about the "computer nerd", and woman are more concerned about how people see them than men.
That and computer science departments stink of body odour. There were hallways at my school I wouldn't walk down in the summer because of the smell of other students. Great way to repel women.
You can get your own domain name and an unlimited email plan for a few bucks a month from hundreds of highly reputable hosting companies.
And make sure you have access to their email and check it regularly.
Nah, they'll set a goal of 42 and then keep adding more and calling it an increasingly misnumbered series. They'll stop writing when they've reached the answer to ultimate question. (For the proper defination of ultimate -- "LAST").
So with windows bloat, won't this thing perform slightly slower than a Pentium 66 running the latest Ubuntu live CD?
And does MS still charge per CPU? That $25,000 could be just for the OS.
I'm sure it's got to hurt their sales figures. I really don't understand their logic since it's so easy to get a pirated version all they're doing is hurting the legitimate customers. It's like they'd rather have 2 people download pirate versions than 1 person pay for it and share it with a friend.
I'm not even sure I'll pick it up in the clearance bin in a few months because it will still have this DRM. I still have my original Sierra games (the floppies actually still work), and I play them from time to time. Why would I pay $50 or even $5 for a game I can't play in a few years if I get a craving for it?
Wow. And here I was hoping I'd still be able to pick up a couple at the newstand tomorrow before they sell out and I have to pay $20+ each on eBay.
Someone would have to be an idiot to throw these out when they can sell them for well over cover price. There's a large group of people who have been drooling over these for 2 months.
Say what? Anything you post to your own blog, barring some agreement to the contrary, is automatically copyright you, at least in Canada, and I'm pretty sure US law is comparable
Actually this is exactly what I was saying from the other point of view, I think you missed the earlier part of the thread. If you own a blog and somebody else posts on it, they, not you, retain copyright of their post because exactly as you say copyright is automatically created as soon as the work is. So from your point of view, if you post to any blog (your own or somebody else's), that post remains your intellectual property.
It's the poster I was replying to who seems to be under the impression that if you own a blog, you own all the posts on it, even those made by other people.
If someone mails you a package are you "requesting it" by opening it and therefore required to pay for it? You should read up on mail fraud law before answering.
When the radio station sends their EM waves into my house, I am in no way requesting it. And, in fact, when I host content on google, they explicitly are requesting it. They have web forms or whatever to upload my data which they welcome.
I explicitly said talk radio because it is mostly content that they do own (except for syndicated shows)...I was pre-answering that argument.
That EULA will never hold up in court because copyright law trumps and EULA. Otherwise I can build an EULA that says I own all music played on the radio I built...the only thing preventing me from doing so is that copyright trumps it.
Their arses are covered if you do anything illegal *because* you retain ownership, they are just a service provider. If you download child-porn over a phone line the phone company is not liable because they assume no ownership, they are just a data-transfer service. If they assert ownership, then they must make sure nothing illegal passes through their connection or they are liable. Same for google. If they claim ownership they're responsible, if they don't (which is the law), then they're not responsible.
You absolutely do not own posts to your blog (at least under US and Canadian copyright laws).
By what you said, when you upload to a paid host, you are adding content to THEIR webserver, the fact that you pay them has no impact on this. Google is ad-supported, so when you upload content to their website, you are paying them by viewing ads and proving content so that others will view ads. Of course payment simply doesn't matter.
If I take your arguement, the local radio talk show beams content that they own into my home without my consent. Can I simply claim that since they put their content in my house, I now own it?
I can understand anything I upload to google being google's property henceforth
How in the world can you understand that? If you take your pictures to be printed at a store, do the images become the store's property forever? If I use M$ Word to write a novel (or write a school essay), does the work become Microsoft's property forever? If I build my website on hosting account, does the website become the property of the host forever (if the host is not google)? If you hire an accountant to do your taxes, does your financial information become his property?
There are thousands of examples. It is total BS that google claims they own any rights to material uploaded to their servers, and I find it a very bleak commentary on our future that people like you are willing to take it for granted that they can and then see how much farther the slippery slope goes.
I went to a very good computer science school (University of Waterloo), and in a lot of courses we'd use books that were 8-10 years old. In 1999, we used a book called "Modern Operating Systems" published around 1993, in the DOS era, pre-linux 1.0 iirc. The fundamental theory just doesn't change that fast and you're not doing the students a service by teaching them the latest fads.
What year was "The Art of Computer Programming" written again? And it's as relevant today as it was the day it was written.
So to say the book is obsolete *only* because it's 4 years old makes no sense at all.
I used to do about 150 ebay auctions/month all in the $5-20 range, but I stopped a couple of years ago. They kept raising prices to the point I was making them more money than me (especially after paypal fees), and even then they were pushing aside the individual seller. They've raised fees since I stopped using them too.
Just recently I wanted to sell some computer equipment, and found their fees to be so high I'm better off not wasting my time listing it. They've priced themselves out of the market and alienated their core customer base at the same time. And they're surprised they're losing popularity?
The same wiki article talks about "Tycho's Geo-heliocentrism". As brilliant as he may have been, he tried to sabotage the progress of science. How can you count him among the ranks of some of the most brilliant scientific minds in history. Cataloging data is grunt work, and his contributions were trying to undo advance.
Yeah, losing his nose in a duel shows how classy he is.
Slashdot Mirror
I shoot raw + jpeg on a 12 megapixel Nikon, so I blow through memory space very quicky. I use 8 gig high-end cards (I paid about $100 each for them) at the moment, and some of my collegues laugh at me for putting so many eggs in one basket with those giant cards. They still use 1-4 gig cards so they won't lose so many pictures if a card fails.
Even raw + jpeg, I'll get about 250 images on a 4 gig (still a good 8 rolls of film before a change), so I don't see why you seem to think professionals want larger cards.
High speed is the reason to pay so much. In burst mode shooting raw, my camera's good for about 8 pictures with it's buffer and then I'm at the mercy of the SD card. Even a 20 MB/s card limits me to a couple of pictures per second.
But my SD cards are all black, you insensitive clod!
So use a silver sharpie, this isn't rocket science.
Is this something different from a volume name?
"Volume name" is an OS-specific term, this is Slashdot.
He meant "human equivalent amount of biomass". But I don't think his number is anywhere near accurate because organisms don't use a constant amount of water per kilogram of mass regardless of size or any other factor, and humans are certainly not representative of all life that has existing on Earth for the past 3 billion years.
Thank you. Even for the one drop it's only a few orders of magnitude off of your gallon.
And I don't think his numbers are even close, I would guess the real water consumption is much larger. Generally, the smaller the organism the faster the metabolism. An 80 kg human may use a gallon of water a day. 80 kg of plankton would use a lot more than that. An elephant weighing 20 times as much a person doesn't need to drink 20 times the water. And taken over the past 3 billion years or so, most of the biomass that has existed on this planet has been single cellular and tiny multi-cellular.
Of course, since the space station inhabitants drink recycled urine, I'm still not totally convinced that I would want to try that cup. And just what do you think that fresh spring water or tap water you're drinking is? There's been life on this planet for 3 billion years, every drop of water has been recycled urine more times than your human brain is able to comprehend.
The only real difference on the space station is that they do a much better job of purifying and testing the water than nature does.
I tend to agree, I have a 2004 Power Book (and much more modern PC desktops), and i was looking to upgrade, probably in the spring when they do the free iPod deal. But there's no way I'll buy one of these crippled machines.
If everyone does say they'll keep their last years models though, this will be a disaster for apple, especially with the current market, and they'll have to rethink DRM for their 2009 models. If the Fanbois buy the new garbage, it's what apple will keep churning out.
The point wasn't to use google to look it up. It was to point out how silly the wording was in the summary.
You're new to slashdot, aren't you?
Society has a stigma about the "computer nerd", and woman are more concerned about how people see them than men.
That and computer science departments stink of body odour. There were hallways at my school I wouldn't walk down in the summer because of the smell of other students. Great way to repel women.
How long is a soccer pitch? Why is it so hard to just give a size in meters?
;)
And just how many elephants is 300 tons?
I read about this in Scientific American several months ago.
Cell phone theft and street robberies are about to rise very rapidly in the UK.
You can get your own domain name and an unlimited email plan for a few bucks a month from hundreds of highly reputable hosting companies. And make sure you have access to their email and check it regularly.
Nah, they'll set a goal of 42 and then keep adding more and calling it an increasingly misnumbered series. They'll stop writing when they've reached the answer to ultimate question. (For the proper defination of ultimate -- "LAST").
So with windows bloat, won't this thing perform slightly slower than a Pentium 66 running the latest Ubuntu live CD? And does MS still charge per CPU? That $25,000 could be just for the OS.
I'm sure it's got to hurt their sales figures. I really don't understand their logic since it's so easy to get a pirated version all they're doing is hurting the legitimate customers. It's like they'd rather have 2 people download pirate versions than 1 person pay for it and share it with a friend.
I'm not even sure I'll pick it up in the clearance bin in a few months because it will still have this DRM. I still have my original Sierra games (the floppies actually still work), and I play them from time to time. Why would I pay $50 or even $5 for a game I can't play in a few years if I get a craving for it?
I was also looking forward to this game for ages but I'm not buying into the DRM crap.
Wow. And here I was hoping I'd still be able to pick up a couple at the newstand tomorrow before they sell out and I have to pay $20+ each on eBay.
Someone would have to be an idiot to throw these out when they can sell them for well over cover price. There's a large group of people who have been drooling over these for 2 months.
Say what? Anything you post to your own blog, barring some agreement to the contrary, is automatically copyright you, at least in Canada, and I'm pretty sure US law is comparable
Actually this is exactly what I was saying from the other point of view, I think you missed the earlier part of the thread. If you own a blog and somebody else posts on it, they, not you, retain copyright of their post because exactly as you say copyright is automatically created as soon as the work is. So from your point of view, if you post to any blog (your own or somebody else's), that post remains your intellectual property.
It's the poster I was replying to who seems to be under the impression that if you own a blog, you own all the posts on it, even those made by other people.
Wow...just wow.
If someone mails you a package are you "requesting it" by opening it and therefore required to pay for it? You should read up on mail fraud law before answering.
When the radio station sends their EM waves into my house, I am in no way requesting it. And, in fact, when I host content on google, they explicitly are requesting it. They have web forms or whatever to upload my data which they welcome.
I explicitly said talk radio because it is mostly content that they do own (except for syndicated shows)...I was pre-answering that argument.
That EULA will never hold up in court because copyright law trumps and EULA. Otherwise I can build an EULA that says I own all music played on the radio I built...the only thing preventing me from doing so is that copyright trumps it.
Their arses are covered if you do anything illegal *because* you retain ownership, they are just a service provider. If you download child-porn over a phone line the phone company is not liable because they assume no ownership, they are just a data-transfer service. If they assert ownership, then they must make sure nothing illegal passes through their connection or they are liable. Same for google. If they claim ownership they're responsible, if they don't (which is the law), then they're not responsible.
Actually, from the very bottom of every slashdot page "All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2008 SourceForge, Inc"
You absolutely do not own posts to your blog (at least under US and Canadian copyright laws).
By what you said, when you upload to a paid host, you are adding content to THEIR webserver, the fact that you pay them has no impact on this. Google is ad-supported, so when you upload content to their website, you are paying them by viewing ads and proving content so that others will view ads. Of course payment simply doesn't matter.
If I take your arguement, the local radio talk show beams content that they own into my home without my consent. Can I simply claim that since they put their content in my house, I now own it?
I can understand anything I upload to google being google's property henceforth
How in the world can you understand that? If you take your pictures to be printed at a store, do the images become the store's property forever? If I use M$ Word to write a novel (or write a school essay), does the work become Microsoft's property forever? If I build my website on hosting account, does the website become the property of the host forever (if the host is not google)? If you hire an accountant to do your taxes, does your financial information become his property?
There are thousands of examples. It is total BS that google claims they own any rights to material uploaded to their servers, and I find it a very bleak commentary on our future that people like you are willing to take it for granted that they can and then see how much farther the slippery slope goes.
I went to a very good computer science school (University of Waterloo), and in a lot of courses we'd use books that were 8-10 years old. In 1999, we used a book called "Modern Operating Systems" published around 1993, in the DOS era, pre-linux 1.0 iirc. The fundamental theory just doesn't change that fast and you're not doing the students a service by teaching them the latest fads.
What year was "The Art of Computer Programming" written again? And it's as relevant today as it was the day it was written.
So to say the book is obsolete *only* because it's 4 years old makes no sense at all.
I used to do about 150 ebay auctions/month all in the $5-20 range, but I stopped a couple of years ago. They kept raising prices to the point I was making them more money than me (especially after paypal fees), and even then they were pushing aside the individual seller. They've raised fees since I stopped using them too. Just recently I wanted to sell some computer equipment, and found their fees to be so high I'm better off not wasting my time listing it. They've priced themselves out of the market and alienated their core customer base at the same time. And they're surprised they're losing popularity?
Didn't Copernicus just say that so the Church wouldn't go Galileo on him?
The same wiki article talks about "Tycho's Geo-heliocentrism". As brilliant as he may have been, he tried to sabotage the progress of science. How can you count him among the ranks of some of the most brilliant scientific minds in history. Cataloging data is grunt work, and his contributions were trying to undo advance.
Yeah, losing his nose in a duel shows how classy he is.