Strangely you ignore the retarded. Maybe you don't think they're "disabled" as you are. Life isn't equal. Get over it. There are no different "levels" of disability. There are just different kinds.
Oh please. That's the biggest load of malarky I've heard this week. If you can't even accept that some people are more disabled than others, you've gone off the deep end of reality. You can play with your word definitions forever, but at the end of the day a quadrapalegic is a lot more handicapped and can do a lot less things than someone who's deaf.
Which is very interesting. What's not at all clear is if this data is from all first run theaters, or all theaters. These prices are obviously the average price, though I don't know any first run, non-matinee theater around my area (Minneapolis) that's only $6.21. Around here typically ticket prices for first run theaters are around $8. The matinee is $6.00.
Can anyone find any more conclusive prices that are only first-run theaters?
Here's a news flash. Life isn't equal. Retarded people also have a disability. Should movies be required to have a subtext so retarded people can understand what's going on? The retarded who can't read will need an extra audio stream. How about blind people? Should all movies be required to have another audio stream describing what's going on in each scene?
I take "equal opportunity" to mean basic human needs. That means access to public transportation, grocery stores, equal job opportunities, etc. Subtitles on movies are not in any way a basic human need.
doesn't mean that we aren't just as disabled as those people, and therefore are no less deserving.
You're trying to tell me that someone who (before ADA) couldn't go to the grocery store because they couldn't get INTO it is just as disabled as someone who can do most anything but understand what's going on in a movie? Try to accept the fact that there's different levels of "disability".
I reckon it's because so many programmers have at least a touch of Asperger's.
So I guess this off handed comment now makes it official. Aspergers is now the default explanation for anyone in the tech industry who acts a little different from the general public. I'm glad we finally have this "explanation".
Next step, anyone that questions authority has a touch of "oppositional defiance disorder". Soon all behaviours people don't like will be defined as an illness.
And most of the trip is uninhabitated tundra, or ocean. Alter the course a little and fly over Hudson bay, and you can make even more of the flight supersonic without pissing anyone off with sonic booms.
I'd still guess they plan to try to solve the boom problem though. Milk runs between Tokyo and NYC won't pay for the development of this thing, and there aren't that many places to go between where booms won't be a problem.
Re:So... how does it compare to H.264?
on
DivX 6.0 is Out
·
· Score: 1
I've already been blown away by what H.264 can do at low bitrates--should I prepare to be blown away again?
I doubt it. Divx doesn't attempt to be a good codec at low bitrates. Comparing Divx to H.264 is like comparing an SUV to a hybrid. If you value low bitrates, H.264 is your man. If you value high quality, Divx will beat H.264.
Re:Tom's Hardware is slipping.
on
DivX 6.0 is Out
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Agreed. Toms Hardware is nothing but a big ad for the products it reviews. It was a good site years ago, but now it's just an advertising site with little integrity left.
Then you have a piece of shit nic. You are talking about (in some cases) DOUBLING the price for everyone else, to sell to someone who wants to support 10% of his chines.
I guess, though I'm not exactly certain why the percentage change in price is relevent for a single component. If I could buy shitty capacitors for 1 cent, and good capacitors for 2 cents to make an end product I sell for $100, why would I ever bother going with the shitty 1 cent capacitors? When you're talking about only $5 more on a computer that costs a few hundred, that's just not very significant. I suppose there's a few penny-pinchers that the extra $5 might be too much.
Anyway, the $5 figure was completely made up. The costs of releasing specs are probbably much closer to 10 cents/unit than $5.
Not buying broadcom hardware is a tall order when it comes integrated in a laptop
I didn't think buying a different laptop was that difficult. I believe Intel has release the centrino drivers into open source if you want a laptop with integrated WiFi and linux support.
I'm sure you already realize this, but you're an insignificant part of their market. Your lost sales don't matter because they're making plenty elsewhere.
Actually I don't think Linux is an insignificant part of the market, at least in terms of the effort hardware companies have to go through to document an interface. Hardware companies tend to have razor thin margins, and even 2% of the market is significant if they can spend just $100,000 to document a hardware interface, and then have some open source developer write and maintain the drivers. Also, even though Linux might be only 2% of the market, that doesn't mean it's only 2% of the decision makers are choosing hardware that supports Linux.
If you're buying 1000 nics, but you also want to run Linux on just 10% of those machines, well you're going to get the nic that's supported under Linux. It might cost you an extra $5 per nic, but really that's peanuts compared to the extra support costs of having two different nics.
Why would they spend all the extra time and money to do that when it doesn't bring them any more profit?
I'm sure there are companies out there that actually believe this, but it's extrememely short sighted. When picking hardware, I'll pick the hardware that's well suppported by linux every time. That means companies like Broadcom (they tend to not have any drivers for linux) won't get chosen by anyone wanting to run Linux, and thus will lose money as people will chose non-Broadcom hardware. It also tends to leave a bad taste in peoples mouths when your hardware doesn't work with Linux, so you wind up alienating a lot of users against your company. Documenting the interfaces has to be much cheaper than actually writing a driver, and the company also gets internal benefits as obviously anyone writing drivers inside the company would be able to reference that same documentation.
Then end effect is more profit for the company, not just more costs. It's obvious a lot of hardware companies have come to realize this as there's a LOT of nics (for example) out there that work just fine under Linux.
Thus he works for Microsoft. I imagine he is sadly bitter about it all.
Why bitter? I don't know him personally, but bitter doesn't sound like someone who hasn't suceeded at a project should feel. It seems a bit silly to discuss how someone I don't know would feel about a failed business, but it seems to me the more common emotion would be sadness, dissapointment, etc. Bitter makes it sound like someone betrayed him personally.
Obviously he didn't have to choose to work for Microsoft. He's obviously a very talented guy, and likely could have gotten a good job at any top company. The fact that he chose Microsoft sounds like he doesn't have any personal problems with them as a company. A lot of people are making it sound like working for Microsoft is some sort of ultimate failure. (No I don't work for Microsoft).
This threat is not any different than the threat that almost all wireless users at cafes have faced for years....
This threat is completely different from wireless cafes. At a wireless cafe if you're using your own machine, all you have to do is be sure to use the SSL protected https site when checking mail, doing bank transactions (which should be SSL only anyway). If you're using a public terminal, there's basically nothing you can do to protect any sensitive information.
My advice is buy a portable PDA with wireless capability if you need to do anything involving sensitive information while away on vacation.
There are inumerable young attractive women married/engaged/attached to ugly old successful men who have money.
And there are innumerable young attractive women married/engaged/attached to beautiful young losers who have no money. What's your point? Some women are attracted to successful men? So what?
Obviously it's hard to find someone famously attracted to a loser, but I think this qualifies. Of course neither of these examples are proof of anything.
And how is ANY of what you said relevant to the GP post which is complaining about Tiger Woods not actually beeing a geek? take an anthropology lesson from society. Women are looking for providers. They can't help it. It makes sense.
A lot of theories that sound just great turn out to be completely wrong. Do you have any actual evidence to back up this claim? Show me a woman who's looking for a "provider", and I'll show you a woman that's married to a total loser who works at burger king. Science requires evidence, not just neat sounding theories.
I think it depends on the environment. Is your router in a secure enough location that writing down the password and taping it to the bottom going to make it secure? If so, then by all means do it. This also allows you get select better passwords that you don't have to remember. Personally I think selecting a good password and taping it to the bottom of the router is far more secure than selecting your house number, or dogs name and not writing it down.
Netgear routers are inexpensive, and low on features and are generally bought by individuals, and small businesses. They don't have super-high security needs, so the physical security of the router itself is usually enough. If you have physical access to the router itself, you could just as easily push the configuration reset button on it, or steal the router and replace it with a duplicate.
but folks should start considering, "block all outbound ports except port 80"
Right, and what will happen with people running services that are blocked? That's right, they'll just start using the "magical" port 80 that lets people connect to it.
I think some port blocking makes sense. It certainly makes sense for large, tightly controlled organizations to block port 25. No one but legit mail servers should be trying to connect to port 25. That would at least protect against spreading viruses and spam.
It depends on what you mean by god. If you mean guy who creates the physical world, is all knowing, all seeing, etc, etc.. then no. I think that's what most people mean when they say the word god.
If you mean control of yourself, then maybe yes. I don't think that's a very common definition of the word god though. I find the whole "we're all gods" buddhism definition to be misleading. I only seem to hear that definition from Christians who want to dismiss buddhism as wrong, invalid, etc. They just get born into a lower life the next time around, which makes it much harder to become Buddha.
Buddhism is extremely varied. Probbably more so than all the sects of Christianity. Christians at least all believe in one god, in Jesus, ten commandments, etc. Christianity relies on texts, and that tends to limit belief creep. Of course that didn't stop the Mormons from getting some new texts, but then again a lot of Christians don't think Mormons are Christians.
Not really, Chrisitanity has the devil for example, Judasim doesn't belive he exits.
That doesn't mean Judaism doesn't have a concept of evil. And your other arguments are weak: singular God? What about the trinity?
The trinity is only different aspects/parts/whatever of the same god. Christians still believe in only one god. Just about every religion has a concept of Sin (even if it's as weak as "it's better not to do this"), so it's hardly a comparision.
"it's better not to do this" isn't the same thing as sin. If you water any two things down enough they start looking the same. Take it down to the level of "it's better not to do this" and that's exactly what you've done. The concept of sin between christianity and judaism is largely the same. That's just not plain true between other religions. Afterlife? Again almost all religions have some concept of a soul, or some part of the spirit that lasts after death.
Again, water the comparisons down enough, and everything is similar. You have not mentioned anything that is similar between Judasim and Christianity that is not also found in most (or at least some) other religions.
The Genesis creation story is the same. I'd say that's one that's not in all other religions. They share many of the same literature. It's funny how Christianity shares no books with Buddhism. To say Christianity is as different from Judaism as it is from Buddhism is just preposterous. Obviously you're going to get much of the same structure if one religion evolved from another.
Chrisitanity and Judaism don't have much to do with each other, except for their common history and father figures. Their philosophy and belief set is as different as Buddhists are from Christians.
I don't know about all that. Christianity and Judaism are quite similar in a larger sense. They both have a singular, vengefull god. They both have a concept of sin. They both have a god that's all powerfull. Both have an afterlife. The similiarity between them is far greater than between any other two major world religions. Buddhism doesn't even have a god, has no concept of evil, and really has a completely different concept of the world.
I guess I don't understand why you think latency would be a problem. The service is likely going to NOT rely on geo-stationary satelite links, so there's no speed of light issues to geo-stationary orbit 32,000 miles away. Communicating that far away requires pointing a parabolic satelite dish precicely at a single point in the sky. That would be rather difficult in an airplane moving side to side, up and down, etc.
What's far more likely is they'll use existing cellphone towers, and possibly the same LEO (low earth orbit) satelites that satelite phones use. Planes fly at only 40,0000 feet or so, so that's only about 8 miles up. LEO is only about 200-500 miles, so the lightspeed time is rather short at 500/186,0000 seconds. Really they'd only need to use LEO sats flying over remote parts of the US, or over the ocean.
Should this technology materialize I see the biggest application in the tourism industry. Think the Great Barrier Reef, or Hawaii, or the Cayman Islands. I think this would most likely replace snorkelling as a recreation at a tourist location.
I'd still think even this device might be a little too dangerous for neophyte tourists to use in place of snorkling. How deep is the great barrier reef, etc? Wouldn't there be concerns with inexperienced divers getting the bends when they used this thing for half a day, then came up just expecting everything to be fine?
Slashdot Mirror
Strangely you ignore the retarded. Maybe you don't think they're "disabled" as you are. Life isn't equal. Get over it.
There are no different "levels" of disability. There are just different kinds.
Oh please. That's the biggest load of malarky I've heard this week. If you can't even accept that some people are more disabled than others, you've gone off the deep end of reality. You can play with your word definitions forever, but at the end of the day a quadrapalegic is a lot more handicapped and can do a lot less things than someone who's deaf.
I've always been curious as to how much movie ticket prices have gone up over the years. Here's a quick analysis taken from
http://www.natoonline.org/statisticstickets.htm
and then adjusted for inflation at:
http://www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm in 2004 dollars:
2004: $6.21
2002: $6.09
2000: $5.91
1998: $5.44
1996: $5.32
1994: $5.20
1992: $5.59
1990: $6.10
1988: $6.56
1986: $6.39
1984: $6.11
1982: $5.72
1980: $6.17
1978: $6.78
1976: $7.07
1974: $7.24
1971: $7.70
1967: $6.90
1963: $5.31
1958: $4.44
1954: $3.44
1948: $2.82
Which is very interesting. What's not at all clear is if this data is from all first run theaters, or all theaters. These prices are obviously the average price, though I don't know any first run, non-matinee theater around my area (Minneapolis) that's only $6.21. Around here typically ticket prices for first run theaters are around $8. The matinee is $6.00.
Can anyone find any more conclusive prices that are only first-run theaters?
But we don't have equal opportunity.
Here's a news flash. Life isn't equal. Retarded people also have a disability. Should movies be required to have a subtext so retarded people can understand what's going on? The retarded who can't read will need an extra audio stream. How about blind people? Should all movies be required to have another audio stream describing what's going on in each scene?
I take "equal opportunity" to mean basic human needs. That means access to public transportation, grocery stores, equal job opportunities, etc. Subtitles on movies are not in any way a basic human need.
doesn't mean that we aren't just as disabled as those people, and therefore are no less deserving.
You're trying to tell me that someone who (before ADA) couldn't go to the grocery store because they couldn't get INTO it is just as disabled as someone who can do most anything but understand what's going on in a movie? Try to accept the fact that there's different levels of "disability".
I reckon it's because so many programmers have at least a touch of Asperger's.
So I guess this off handed comment now makes it official. Aspergers is now the default explanation for anyone in the tech industry who acts a little different from the general public. I'm glad we finally have this "explanation".
Next step, anyone that questions authority has a touch of "oppositional defiance disorder". Soon all behaviours people don't like will be defined as an illness.
When he mentioned the Internets last year in the debate. I guess he was just ahead of his time.
And most of the trip is uninhabitated tundra, or ocean. Alter the course a little and fly over Hudson bay, and you can make even more of the flight supersonic without pissing anyone off with sonic booms.
I'd still guess they plan to try to solve the boom problem though. Milk runs between Tokyo and NYC won't pay for the development of this thing, and there aren't that many places to go between where booms won't be a problem.
I've already been blown away by what H.264 can do at low bitrates--should I prepare to be blown away again?
I doubt it. Divx doesn't attempt to be a good codec at low bitrates. Comparing Divx to H.264 is like comparing an SUV to a hybrid. If you value low bitrates, H.264 is your man. If you value high quality, Divx will beat H.264.
Agreed. Toms Hardware is nothing but a big ad for the products it reviews. It was a good site years ago, but now it's just an advertising site with little integrity left.
and if I can get new nics for less than 5$ each?
Then you have a piece of shit nic.
You are talking about (in some cases) DOUBLING the price for everyone else, to sell to someone who wants to support 10% of his chines.
I guess, though I'm not exactly certain why the percentage change in price is relevent for a single component. If I could buy shitty capacitors for 1 cent, and good capacitors for 2 cents to make an end product I sell for $100, why would I ever bother going with the shitty 1 cent capacitors? When you're talking about only $5 more on a computer that costs a few hundred, that's just not very significant. I suppose there's a few penny-pinchers that the extra $5 might be too much.
Anyway, the $5 figure was completely made up. The costs of releasing specs are probbably much closer to 10 cents/unit than $5.
Not buying broadcom hardware is a tall order when it comes integrated in a laptop
I didn't think buying a different laptop was that difficult. I believe Intel has release the centrino drivers into open source if you want a laptop with integrated WiFi and linux support.
I'm sure you already realize this, but you're an insignificant part of their market. Your lost sales don't matter because they're making plenty elsewhere.
Actually I don't think Linux is an insignificant part of the market, at least in terms of the effort hardware companies have to go through to document an interface. Hardware companies tend to have razor thin margins, and even 2% of the market is significant if they can spend just $100,000 to document a hardware interface, and then have some open source developer write and maintain the drivers. Also, even though Linux might be only 2% of the market, that doesn't mean it's only 2% of the decision makers are choosing hardware that supports Linux.
If you're buying 1000 nics, but you also want to run Linux on just 10% of those machines, well you're going to get the nic that's supported under Linux. It might cost you an extra $5 per nic, but really that's peanuts compared to the extra support costs of having two different nics.
Why would they spend all the extra time and money to do that when it doesn't bring them any more profit?
I'm sure there are companies out there that actually believe this, but it's extrememely short sighted. When picking hardware, I'll pick the hardware that's well suppported by linux every time. That means companies like Broadcom (they tend to not have any drivers for linux) won't get chosen by anyone wanting to run Linux, and thus will lose money as people will chose non-Broadcom hardware. It also tends to leave a bad taste in peoples mouths when your hardware doesn't work with Linux, so you wind up alienating a lot of users against your company. Documenting the interfaces has to be much cheaper than actually writing a driver, and the company also gets internal benefits as obviously anyone writing drivers inside the company would be able to reference that same documentation.
Then end effect is more profit for the company, not just more costs. It's obvious a lot of hardware companies have come to realize this as there's a LOT of nics (for example) out there that work just fine under Linux.
Depending on where his computer is, I could see that as very sane. Who wants to sit in a computer chair and watch a movie?
What he should do is buy a DVD player that plays Divx movies. They can be had for under $100.
Thus he works for Microsoft. I imagine he is sadly bitter about it all.
Why bitter? I don't know him personally, but bitter doesn't sound like someone who hasn't suceeded at a project should feel. It seems a bit silly to discuss how someone I don't know would feel about a failed business, but it seems to me the more common emotion would be sadness, dissapointment, etc. Bitter makes it sound like someone betrayed him personally.
Obviously he didn't have to choose to work for Microsoft. He's obviously a very talented guy, and likely could have gotten a good job at any top company. The fact that he chose Microsoft sounds like he doesn't have any personal problems with them as a company. A lot of people are making it sound like working for Microsoft is some sort of ultimate failure. (No I don't work for Microsoft).
This threat is not any different than the threat that almost all wireless users at cafes have faced for years....
This threat is completely different from wireless cafes. At a wireless cafe if you're using your own machine, all you have to do is be sure to use the SSL protected https site when checking mail, doing bank transactions (which should be SSL only anyway). If you're using a public terminal, there's basically nothing you can do to protect any sensitive information.
My advice is buy a portable PDA with wireless capability if you need to do anything involving sensitive information while away on vacation.
There are inumerable young attractive women married/engaged/attached to ugly old successful men who have money.
And there are innumerable young attractive women married/engaged/attached to beautiful young losers who have no money. What's your point? Some women are attracted to successful men? So what?
http://www.franksreelreviews.com/shorttakes/stratt on.htm
Obviously it's hard to find someone famously attracted to a loser, but I think this qualifies. Of course neither of these examples are proof of anything.
And how is ANY of what you said relevant to the GP post which is complaining about Tiger Woods not actually beeing a geek?
take an anthropology lesson from society. Women are looking for providers. They can't help it. It makes sense.
A lot of theories that sound just great turn out to be completely wrong. Do you have any actual evidence to back up this claim? Show me a woman who's looking for a "provider", and I'll show you a woman that's married to a total loser who works at burger king. Science requires evidence, not just neat sounding theories.
I think it depends on the environment. Is your router in a secure enough location that writing down the password and taping it to the bottom going to make it secure? If so, then by all means do it. This also allows you get select better passwords that you don't have to remember. Personally I think selecting a good password and taping it to the bottom of the router is far more secure than selecting your house number, or dogs name and not writing it down.
Netgear routers are inexpensive, and low on features and are generally bought by individuals, and small businesses. They don't have super-high security needs, so the physical security of the router itself is usually enough. If you have physical access to the router itself, you could just as easily push the configuration reset button on it, or steal the router and replace it with a duplicate.
but folks should start considering, "block all outbound ports except port 80"
Right, and what will happen with people running services that are blocked? That's right, they'll just start using the "magical" port 80 that lets people connect to it.
I think some port blocking makes sense. It certainly makes sense for large, tightly controlled organizations to block port 25. No one but legit mail servers should be trying to connect to port 25. That would at least protect against spreading viruses and spam.
It depends on what you mean by god. If you mean guy who creates the physical world, is all knowing, all seeing, etc, etc.. then no. I think that's what most people mean when they say the word god.
If you mean control of yourself, then maybe yes. I don't think that's a very common definition of the word god though. I find the whole "we're all gods" buddhism definition to be misleading. I only seem to hear that definition from Christians who want to dismiss buddhism as wrong, invalid, etc.
They just get born into a lower life the next time around, which makes it much harder to become Buddha.
Buddhism is extremely varied. Probbably more so than all the sects of Christianity. Christians at least all believe in one god, in Jesus, ten commandments, etc. Christianity relies on texts, and that tends to limit belief creep. Of course that didn't stop the Mormons from getting some new texts, but then again a lot of Christians don't think Mormons are Christians.
Not really, Chrisitanity has the devil for example, Judasim doesn't belive he exits.
That doesn't mean Judaism doesn't have a concept of evil.
And your other arguments are weak: singular God? What about the trinity?
The trinity is only different aspects/parts/whatever of the same god. Christians still believe in only one god.
Just about every religion has a concept of Sin (even if it's as weak as "it's better not to do this"), so it's hardly a comparision.
"it's better not to do this" isn't the same thing as sin. If you water any two things down enough they start looking the same. Take it down to the level of "it's better not to do this" and that's exactly what you've done. The concept of sin between christianity and judaism is largely the same. That's just not plain true between other religions.
Afterlife? Again almost all religions have some concept of a soul, or some part of the spirit that lasts after death.
Again, water the comparisons down enough, and everything is similar.
You have not mentioned anything that is similar between Judasim and Christianity that is not also found in most (or at least some) other religions.
The Genesis creation story is the same. I'd say that's one that's not in all other religions. They share many of the same literature. It's funny how Christianity shares no books with Buddhism. To say Christianity is as different from Judaism as it is from Buddhism is just preposterous. Obviously you're going to get much of the same structure if one religion evolved from another.
Chrisitanity and Judaism don't have much to do with each other, except for their common history and father figures. Their philosophy and belief set is as different as Buddhists are from Christians.
I don't know about all that. Christianity and Judaism are quite similar in a larger sense. They both have a singular, vengefull god. They both have a concept of sin. They both have a god that's all powerfull. Both have an afterlife. The similiarity between them is far greater than between any other two major world religions. Buddhism doesn't even have a god, has no concept of evil, and really has a completely different concept of the world.
I guess I don't understand why you think latency would be a problem. The service is likely going to NOT rely on geo-stationary satelite links, so there's no speed of light issues to geo-stationary orbit 32,000 miles away. Communicating that far away requires pointing a parabolic satelite dish precicely at a single point in the sky. That would be rather difficult in an airplane moving side to side, up and down, etc.
What's far more likely is they'll use existing cellphone towers, and possibly the same LEO (low earth orbit) satelites that satelite phones use. Planes fly at only 40,0000 feet or so, so that's only about 8 miles up. LEO is only about 200-500 miles, so the lightspeed time is rather short at 500/186,0000 seconds. Really they'd only need to use LEO sats flying over remote parts of the US, or over the ocean.
Should this technology materialize I see the biggest application in the tourism industry. Think the Great Barrier Reef, or Hawaii, or the Cayman Islands. I think this would most likely replace snorkelling as a recreation at a tourist location.
I'd still think even this device might be a little too dangerous for neophyte tourists to use in place of snorkling. How deep is the great barrier reef, etc? Wouldn't there be concerns with inexperienced divers getting the bends when they used this thing for half a day, then came up just expecting everything to be fine?