" Someone find me ONE photorealistic painting done by a human that I can't tell is a painting. I've yet to see one."
I'll bite: You've already been fooled hundreds of times over. Matte paintings are in every movie, and I guarantee you that many if not all have escaped your perception.
Check out this example: http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s10matt es.html
This one's more detailed: http://fxtc.net/Matte_Paintings.html
"The only way to see an "evolutionary step" (itself a misnomer) is to see some variation that causes greatly enhanced success at breeding. Needless to say, we are not seeing that here."
Makes me wish my mouse was heavier so my right arm'd really bulk up. Boy I'd get the chicks then. In the mean time, I have to rely on cute emoticons to get them to smile.:))) -- Oprah Smiley, >:B -- Bunny Smiley,:ß -- British Smiley.
D'oh! THat reminds me, I forgot to credit Scott Addams (Creator of Dilbert) for that one. I was inspired to do that joke from his book 'The Joy of Work'. I think one of the people wrote in and described something like you just said.
Poop, I was gonna mention that and forgot. The only thing I did new with that joke was embellished it with the CNN health page spoof. Heh.
I played a joke on my company a few years ago. I screen capped and altered an error message to say "The radiation shielding on your monitor has failed, please do not sit directly in front of your monitor."
I placed this image in the middleof a copy of a page from our website, then sent a company-wide email exlaining the new update they needed to see. After a few people asked me about the error message (also asking me to order new monitors...), I copied a CNN health page and gave it a few minor alterations. I wrote a fake explanation of a new virus going around called the "Microwave Virus" that overloaded the UV guns in your monitor. This exposure can cause people to feel tired, irritable, and a few other normal things you feel while you're at work. I then renamed my computer to 'www.cnn-news.com' and posted the page using MS Personal Web Server. I sent out a 'Sysadmin Virus Warning' and went to lunch.
When I got back from lunch, a group of my coworkers were trying to figure out if they should go home or if they should see their doctors first. Heh.
They weren't so stunned that I faked the message, but rather that I had faked CNN's site so well. Pity they missed the typo in the error message.
"But first - why would you put them next to each other?"
What actually got me thinking down that line was that story a few weeks about about Starbuck's offering wireless service in Portland and it interferred with somebody providing free WS service in the same location. In essence, one was jamming the other.
I think that's why Nanogater brought it up.
I was a Ham Radio back in my youth (10 years old) and the FCC made a HUGE deal about jamming other people. One reason that the FCC tests devices so heavily (like your GameCube or your laptop) is to make sure they don't cause interference with things like TV's.
Now I'm not claiming to know anything about how the FCC works. It is my understanding (polite corrections invited) that a good chunk of what the FCC does is license frequences so that there isn't interference. If you get a Ham Radio license, that's not an instant "you can transmit anywhere!" license. It's a license to use a specific band. When you promote your license, you get access to more frequencies. You also have rules like "You must identify yourself with your call-sign every 5 minutes during a convo." My guess about the reasoning for that provision is to prove you're licensed. (again, polite corrections invited.)
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to read the article (no PDF viewer installed right now. Thus I look even less informed heh.) but I'm working under the assumption that free use of the air waves (at least in a particular band) is being advocated here. Assuming I'm understanding this guy (again, polite corrections or clarifcations invited, sorry I don't have Adobe installed) digital doesn't change the playing field that much.
It does allow one to make their broadcasts public or private. It does make it easier for devices to share a similar spectrum. But, there is still the jamming problem. To be honest, I'm surprised that the Starbuck's case hasn't caused an overblown case for regulation of the 2.4ghz band. The problem is that more and more devices are going to use this band, and people are actively seeking to boost the range of these devices.
If taken to an extreme, a city might Portland could end up with so much noise from that band that nobody'll get a clear signal. Is that likely to happen? I don't know... but it did happen with Starbuck's and... oh man I can't remember the name of the other place that was involved.
Anyway, that's my concern. I again point out my naievity. If there's a hole in my reasoning I'd really like to know what that is.
"it's been proven time and time again that a hacker can outfox Microsoft. Look at all the copies of windows and office and other MS products out there that have product activation. There were hacks and cracks for that technology out before the software's release date."
Heh yeah, script kiddies are executing DoS attacks with patents instead of packets.
Im considering a slightly different solution: VM-Ware. There's a spare copy floating around the office, I intend to give that a go and at least see if I can get used to the environment.
Thanks for the suggestion.:) *Taking it into consideration*
"b.) dumb the user down. don't underestimate this." -- Is this the 'make the interface dumb, make the user dumb' myth? Heh.
I think you make good points, but you also took my suggestion to an illogical extreme. I did like this point in particular:
"It's seems like the computer got a mind of his own sometimes..."
Microsoft has taught us the danger of this. I appreciate IE for executing bad HTML as smoothly as possible, but I don't appreciate Word's occasional altering of my grammar. I wrote a story once about an alien race called the 'Tahn'. Word, instead of scribbing a little line under it, changed it to 'Than'.
I think it's fine for Word to put little squiggly lines under the words it doesn't understand, but auto-correcting a word can be a major no-no. (Which is basically the point you made.)
I mentioned that you took my post to an illogical extreme. I figured now'd be as good of time as any to explain what I had in mind. Let's pretend that my error was a common error. Slashdot could make a couple of choices: A.) Accept the VB tags as a macro to the tags I'm really trying to do. or B.) When I preview the post, have it underline the tags that it spotted as a problem. "Oh, duh."
I did preview that post, but the reason I missed it is because it looked exactly like the text I was editing. Brain fart on my part, not denying that. It was like "yeah I typed that in." The error was caused by auto-pilot. Heh.
Now, here's another question: Should Slashdot implement that change? Nah. It'd have to be a pretty frequent problem.
"I'd recommend starting with Norman's The design of every day things...."
I wish the Slashdot coders had read that book. I got my butt jumped because I used ['s to encapsulate a bold tag instead of the typical HTML greater-than signs. According to some, my being used to VBulletin syntax (used by several forums I vist) is a sign of how truely stupid I am. I think it's a sign of how unfriendly Slashdot's interface can be.
It's not a poke at Slashdot, but rather an observation that book helped me make about UI. Slashdot's just a handy example. Now, when I write web pages, I have a better perspective of the things I should do to prevent mistakes like the bracket example from being irrecoverable.
Anybody who's interested in design should read that book, it helps you understand why humans make the mistakes they do and what you can do to accommodate them. Hint: It's not because we're all too stupid to read a manual.
... so could somebody who understands this processor tell me this:
Would a 3D rendering app such as Lightwave potentially see a huge benefit to this processor? I understand that it's up to the developer to tune it, yadda yadda yadda, I'm concerned with potential not real world numbers.
I'm trying to get an image in my mind about how the various processor descriptions (32-bit, 64-bit, Altivec, SimD, etc...) can radically change how an app like that would work.
Us vertex pushers have a substantial interest in machines that excel at that type of work...
Slashdot Mirror
Just wanted to thank you for posting those links. I'm finding them rather interesting. :)
*wish I could mod ya up.*
" Someone find me ONE photorealistic painting done by a human that I can't tell is a painting. I've yet to see one."
t es.html
I'll bite: You've already been fooled hundreds of times over. Matte paintings are in every movie, and I guarantee you that many if not all have escaped your perception.
Check out this example:
http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s10mat
This one's more detailed:
http://fxtc.net/Matte_Paintings.html
So.. yeah, keep ranting.
At least it's not another "Let's beat the dead horse about Microsoft!" article with 600 stale monopoly jokes.
"The only way to see an "evolutionary step" (itself a misnomer) is to see some variation that causes greatly enhanced success at breeding. Needless to say, we are not seeing that here."
:))) -- Oprah Smiley, >:B -- Bunny Smiley, :ß -- British Smiley.
Makes me wish my mouse was heavier so my right arm'd really bulk up. Boy I'd get the chicks then. In the mean time, I have to rely on cute emoticons to get them to smile.
D'oh! THat reminds me, I forgot to credit Scott Addams (Creator of Dilbert) for that one. I was inspired to do that joke from his book 'The Joy of Work'. I think one of the people wrote in and described something like you just said.
Poop, I was gonna mention that and forgot. The only thing I did new with that joke was embellished it with the CNN health page spoof. Heh.
I played a joke on my company a few years ago. I screen capped and altered an error message to say "The radiation shielding on your monitor has failed, please do not sit directly in front of your monitor."
I placed this image in the middleof a copy of a page from our website, then sent a company-wide email exlaining the new update they needed to see. After a few people asked me about the error message (also asking me to order new monitors...), I copied a CNN health page and gave it a few minor alterations. I wrote a fake explanation of a new virus going around called the "Microwave Virus" that overloaded the UV guns in your monitor. This exposure can cause people to feel tired, irritable, and a few other normal things you feel while you're at work. I then renamed my computer to 'www.cnn-news.com' and posted the page using MS Personal Web Server. I sent out a 'Sysadmin Virus Warning' and went to lunch.
When I got back from lunch, a group of my coworkers were trying to figure out if they should go home or if they should see their doctors first. Heh.
They weren't so stunned that I faked the message, but rather that I had faked CNN's site so well. Pity they missed the typo in the error message.
I got an error message once: The process completed successfully.
oo good idea, thank you. :)
"But first - why would you put them next to each other?"
... oh man I can't remember the name of the other place that was involved.
What actually got me thinking down that line was that story a few weeks about about Starbuck's offering wireless service in Portland and it interferred with somebody providing free WS service in the same location. In essence, one was jamming the other.
I think that's why Nanogater brought it up.
I was a Ham Radio back in my youth (10 years old) and the FCC made a HUGE deal about jamming other people. One reason that the FCC tests devices so heavily (like your GameCube or your laptop) is to make sure they don't cause interference with things like TV's.
Now I'm not claiming to know anything about how the FCC works. It is my understanding (polite corrections invited) that a good chunk of what the FCC does is license frequences so that there isn't interference. If you get a Ham Radio license, that's not an instant "you can transmit anywhere!" license. It's a license to use a specific band. When you promote your license, you get access to more frequencies. You also have rules like "You must identify yourself with your call-sign every 5 minutes during a convo." My guess about the reasoning for that provision is to prove you're licensed. (again, polite corrections invited.)
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to read the article (no PDF viewer installed right now. Thus I look even less informed heh.) but I'm working under the assumption that free use of the air waves (at least in a particular band) is being advocated here. Assuming I'm understanding this guy (again, polite corrections or clarifcations invited, sorry I don't have Adobe installed) digital doesn't change the playing field that much.
It does allow one to make their broadcasts public or private. It does make it easier for devices to share a similar spectrum. But, there is still the jamming problem. To be honest, I'm surprised that the Starbuck's case hasn't caused an overblown case for regulation of the 2.4ghz band. The problem is that more and more devices are going to use this band, and people are actively seeking to boost the range of these devices.
If taken to an extreme, a city might Portland could end up with so much noise from that band that nobody'll get a clear signal. Is that likely to happen? I don't know... but it did happen with Starbuck's and
Anyway, that's my concern. I again point out my naievity. If there's a hole in my reasoning I'd really like to know what that is.
What if both nodes are at 2.4 ghz?
"Heh yeah, script kiddies are executing DoS attacks with patents instead of packets."
Why is this 'flamebait'? Who read this and wanted to get shitty with me about it?
Oh.. wait.. never mind, the page loaded.
"it's been proven time and time again that a hacker can outfox Microsoft. Look at all the copies of windows and office and other MS products out there that have product activation. There were hacks and cracks for that technology out before the software's release date."
Heh yeah, script kiddies are executing DoS attacks with patents instead of packets.
"The socks come with a DEVASTATING biological weapon!
EWWWW!!!!!"
Funny maybe... but Informative? I mean if Al Bundy were somehow worked into that post, I could see that being informative...
Im considering a slightly different solution: VM-Ware. There's a spare copy floating around the office, I intend to give that a go and at least see if I can get used to the environment.
:) *Taking it into consideration*
Thanks for the suggestion.
"Postal have gone up more rapidly since AOL started sending these disks out than any other period in time?"
The scientific process in action, folks.
"Whatever... Maybe some lucky person can play "whack the american in retaliation for US foreign policy"
That wasn't retaliation for anything, it was fame-grabbing fanaticism. (Sp?)
Get with times dude. The lucky winner can play a game of "Brain the Hussein"!
"b.) dumb the user down. don't underestimate this." -- Is this the 'make the interface dumb, make the user dumb' myth? Heh.
I think you make good points, but you also took my suggestion to an illogical extreme. I did like this point in particular:
"It's seems like the computer got a mind of his own sometimes..."
Microsoft has taught us the danger of this. I appreciate IE for executing bad HTML as smoothly as possible, but I don't appreciate Word's occasional altering of my grammar. I wrote a story once about an alien race called the 'Tahn'. Word, instead of scribbing a little line under it, changed it to 'Than'.
I think it's fine for Word to put little squiggly lines under the words it doesn't understand, but auto-correcting a word can be a major no-no. (Which is basically the point you made.)
I mentioned that you took my post to an illogical extreme. I figured now'd be as good of time as any to explain what I had in mind. Let's pretend that my error was a common error. Slashdot could make a couple of choices: A.) Accept the VB tags as a macro to the tags I'm really trying to do. or B.) When I preview the post, have it underline the tags that it spotted as a problem. "Oh, duh."
I did preview that post, but the reason I missed it is because it looked exactly like the text I was editing. Brain fart on my part, not denying that. It was like "yeah I typed that in." The error was caused by auto-pilot. Heh.
Now, here's another question: Should Slashdot implement that change? Nah. It'd have to be a pretty frequent problem.
"...until the super-massive black hole eats up our galaxy, and do you think M$ will survive?"
It's nice to see that graduates from the Bob Saget School of Comedy are getting journalism work.
""Linux is so much better than windows that when I installed it, it fried my machine! This is concrete proof that Microsoft cannot write an OS""
:)
Actually I think he was saying "Windows is more efficient than Linux because it's getting stuff done so fast that the CPU is underutilized."
Heh. At least I got a laugh out of it.
"Nothing comes with Linux drivers, so the CD-ROM doesn't spin up as much.
Heh, it's a joke, laugh."
Heh! I got one:
RedHat doesn't support my sound card, so my speakers are off!
Ha! I kill me!
"I'd recommend starting with Norman's The design of every day things...."
I wish the Slashdot coders had read that book. I got my butt jumped because I used ['s to encapsulate a bold tag instead of the typical HTML greater-than signs. According to some, my being used to VBulletin syntax (used by several forums I vist) is a sign of how truely stupid I am. I think it's a sign of how unfriendly Slashdot's interface can be.
It's not a poke at Slashdot, but rather an observation that book helped me make about UI. Slashdot's just a handy example. Now, when I write web pages, I have a better perspective of the things I should do to prevent mistakes like the bracket example from being irrecoverable.
Anybody who's interested in design should read that book, it helps you understand why humans make the mistakes they do and what you can do to accommodate them. Hint: It's not because we're all too stupid to read a manual.
... so could somebody who understands this processor tell me this:
Would a 3D rendering app such as Lightwave potentially see a huge benefit to this processor? I understand that it's up to the developer to tune it, yadda yadda yadda, I'm concerned with potential not real world numbers.
I'm trying to get an image in my mind about how the various processor descriptions (32-bit, 64-bit, Altivec, SimD, etc...) can radically change how an app like that would work.
Us vertex pushers have a substantial interest in machines that excel at that type of work...
" In fact, some are suggesting the PPC 970 chip might be closely related to the PS3's 'Cell' processor...""
Ah, so it runs on vapor instead of smoke?
*wonders if anybody'll get that.*