Only a dickhead terrorist would invite attention to a bomb.
Not exactly. And maybe the term "terrorism" isn't correct in this case but...
About a year or so ago in the Pittsburgh area we had some dumbass make bombs out of flashlights. He used the battery cavity for the explosives and rigged the flashlight switch as a detonator. This way if someone found it and tried to turn it on it would go off. I think only one of these devices ever did any damage to anyone. But the idea of planting a device that someone might try to screw with/use as a bomb is a way to ensure that a "soft target" is on hand for when the explosive goes off.
And this isn't to give one bit of credit to the fine minds (*cough*) in the Boston incident but a random object with some flashing lights is going to draw attention. Making a device that can be detonated by what seems like a harmless action is the cornerstone of devices that aren't timed/remote detonated.
But at the same time this also reminds me of an local incident a few summers ago when a farmer was working his field and thought he had come across a land mine. When the bomb squad had shown up they took one look at the device and laughed at the old guy... it was an old automotive torque converter. I guess it's legitimate to be cautious of items like that if you don't know what they are but it's still funny.
I'm 33 and working on my CS degree and planning to work on a engineering degree soon. I'll probably be in my early 40s by the time I get done with my masters. Will I ever get anywhere with this degree? My guess is probably not as far as if I'd leave school altogether with a CS degree.
The thing is that I want to take on this engineering education for myself. It's not really a career move. If I'm fortunate enough I may have the option to turn it into a career but I still don't see myself getting the educational investment back over my lifetime in the face of continuing to do IS work. It doesn't bother me.
If that kind of thinking bothers you maybe it's not the wisest move to make.
The Great, Glorious Cthulhu existed without the benefit of Alhazrad. I'm living proof. They call me insane? Someday they'll find out the hard way how sane I really am.
With an AWP you don't need to be good at head shots. Center mass is where it's at with a rifle of that nature; bigger hit box with the same end result.
If you only want a really basic phone, then you can buy one without a camera. But, if you want one with other features (like WAP, which I use to check my email), it's almost always bundled with a camera.
Yeah but that's not the issue. The issue was that the original poster wanted a phone with no crap with a good battery life. At the point where you're going to be willing to carry a phone with extra features who cares if there is a camera included? Don't use it.
I'll tell you the first time I bought a camera phone I had no desire to have the camera but it was the best all around choice I found in a phone so I excepted that there would be a camera involved... I will admit that I was very wrong and short sighted for thinking I'd never use the camera.
I hate to sound like a camera snob, but I really can see the difference between a 2 megapixel photo from a phone through a plastic-coated snap-on lens compared to my 8 megapixel canon SLR with an L-lens. Can't you?
Generally speaking we're not talking about taking wedding photos here. I'm in no way claiming that the camera phone is a replacement but it does hold a place. I still have my regular digital camera but again, I don't want to lug it around with me. It's not that it's heavy or bulky but that's true of most of my gadgets. the more I can leave at home the happier I am.
No, you've got the wrong end of the stick. I'm not a technophobe.
Sorry if you misunderstood what I was trying to say; I wasn't calling you a technophobe but rather your complaints being more about the general nature of technophobia in society and how it relates to people who actually use the technology. Again, sorry if there was a misunderstanding there.
What I'd like is a good, tiny phone, where the batteries last for ages.Not knowing what your definition of "ages" is makes this a hard point to talk over but I get 5 days of regular use (normally 15 minutes of talk a day, 24-7 standby) out of my Samsung (with a camera!)
If I want to take a photo I get out my digital SLR and a 700 euro lens, I don't think "ah, now I've got my phone, I can leave my camera at home".
If you're toting that thing around with you every and you don't do photography professionally that's just foolishness. Don't get me wrong, carry what you like, but Joe Sixpack (and 95% of all slashdotters for that matter) don't want to carry a normal camera around with them let alone a SLR. It's nice that you pat yourself on your back with all your fancy equipment but the fact is that it hurts your debate against cell phone/camera integration. That's akin to say "I own a pair of Sennheiser Prestige HD590s, why would I want a small pair of ear pods for when I'm out and about with my mp3 player?". Some people would be impressed that I own the Sennheiser, some people would understand that it would be incredibly stupid for me to lug around my headphones when I'm out walking the track.
Here's the problem. The cellphone was supposed to make it easy for people to be reached on-the-move. For "security" reasons we are not allowed to use our phone everywhere
I don't know where you are but in my local area I've never seen this. While I do understand and know of areas where photos are banned I've never heard of anyone getting harassed in these areas for using a cell phone.
The rest of your argument deals with general technophobia and has nothing to do with the camera aspect of a cell phone. Oh well...
upgrading the phone's camera just gives the mobile phone industry another excuse to charge you a higher subscription than the previous year.
Really? Again, not knowing your situation... My cell service provider's plans have decrease since the introduction of the camera phone. I don't think the camera aspect has anything to do with it, they do charge 0.10 USD per picture sent over the cellphone without an inclusive package. They charge the exact same for text messages too.
Furthermore, not to beat a subject to death, I have used my camera phone for productive reasons. There's a million times that I found myself saying, "if only I could get a picture of this". Digital cameras were nice because there was no processing time, but I didn't carry mine unless I really felt I was going to use it. Now I don't worry about it.
Not to dick on the submission but what slashdotter really thinks this is an issue today?
An OS that hasn't even been released to the home market yet has a LONG way to go before it has enough of a market-share to be competitive. It has nothing to do with the technical aspects of DX10 but rather commonsense economics.
It's suicidal to put out software that has such a high system demand that only the upper crust of users can run it.
Infact, I'd even predict that DX10 is going to be such a non-issue that DX11 (or a next gen technology replacement) will be out before DX10 (and Vista) have enough of a market-share to be considered a series developmental arena for game producers.
Stick with DX9. It's not a big deal. It probably won't be one in the near future either, if ever.
This should get the Revelations nutters foaming at the mouth.
Well, if you read the posts you'll note that this is also working the other side of the coin: the tin foil hat wearers who claim that Bush is behind this. These are normally the same people who blame the Christians for everything that goes wrong as well.
Ultimately these two groups are the same people with a different outlook on religion but the same type of paranoid hysterics that make the rest of us roll the eyes.
Sure both can program but who develops the sophisticated software that run super computer simulations?
The CS major.
Nonsense! I've found schooling has little to do with a coders ability.
Most coders I know who are extraordinary at the craft have a passion for it. If your interest in programming ends after you land your first job you're always going to be a shit coder.
Are you guys talking about the Wasteland that was done in a format simular to the early (C=64) Bard's Tale games? Yeah, that was a good game.
I love Thief. Love it like it was my own child. But with the downturn in the third of the series I'd rather not see them continue it. I hate to be a cynic about it but the new engine lost something in the translation for me. Maybe I'll go back and play it again and see if I feel better about it now.
Presence2 noted that MGM announced that the Stargate franchise will migrate to the big screen
And end up failing miserably like every other sci-fi tv to big screen endeavour outside of Trek TOS?
While the original SG movie was pretty good the TV series just doesn't have the same energy to it. And what makes this even worse is that just about everything that has gone from a TV series to the big screen in sci-fi just seems to have the same feel as a very long episode of the TV series. Trek at least put a few years between it's TV series and motion picture release, maybe that was the key to Trek's theater success versus everyone else's failures. Even the Trek TNG films just seemed like long episodes to me.
My problem with sequels is that it's just way too easy to botch a good thing.
There's a ton of games I'd like to see either updated editions of or new maps/missions for but at the same time my initial reaction would be somewhere between fear and anxiety.
And as for updating older games... sometimes it's the nostalgic effect of playing it on the old systems that make it better than what the game really is.
I want her to get us off of using Oil, not worrying about Podcasts.
How about getting YOURSELF off of oil? Waiting around for the government to do this work for you is insane and a mark of laziness.
If you really think the US of A is controlled by corporate interests and you want to see the us move away from oil than cast your votes with your dollars.
GOP dont have the votes in congress so if you dont want it get on the horns people and let democrats know that drm will get them outted form office.
Uh, AC, do you realize that Biden and Feinstein are fairly prominent DEMOCRATS?
we did it here in canada
That explains the ignorance but doesn't excuse it.
Please, stop acting like one party has the public's interest in mind more than the other. Too many people in the states already "think" like this, why do you think we're so screwed no matter what we do anymore?
Slashdot Mirror
Only a dickhead terrorist would invite attention to a bomb.
Not exactly. And maybe the term "terrorism" isn't correct in this case but...
About a year or so ago in the Pittsburgh area we had some dumbass make bombs out of flashlights. He used the battery cavity for the explosives and rigged the flashlight switch as a detonator. This way if someone found it and tried to turn it on it would go off. I think only one of these devices ever did any damage to anyone. But the idea of planting a device that someone might try to screw with/use as a bomb is a way to ensure that a "soft target" is on hand for when the explosive goes off.
And this isn't to give one bit of credit to the fine minds (*cough*) in the Boston incident but a random object with some flashing lights is going to draw attention. Making a device that can be detonated by what seems like a harmless action is the cornerstone of devices that aren't timed/remote detonated.
But at the same time this also reminds me of an local incident a few summers ago when a farmer was working his field and thought he had come across a land mine. When the bomb squad had shown up they took one look at the device and laughed at the old guy... it was an old automotive torque converter. I guess it's legitimate to be cautious of items like that if you don't know what they are but it's still funny.
I think that this has less to do with "protecting your rights" than it does with states keeping their archaic way getting you licenced.
Not to mention the dollars they would lose having the feds taking the fees involved with drivers licenses and renewal fees.
There hasn't been a national speed limit for over a decade now.
I'm 33 and working on my CS degree and planning to work on a engineering degree soon. I'll probably be in my early 40s by the time I get done with my masters. Will I ever get anywhere with this degree? My guess is probably not as far as if I'd leave school altogether with a CS degree.
The thing is that I want to take on this engineering education for myself. It's not really a career move. If I'm fortunate enough I may have the option to turn it into a career but I still don't see myself getting the educational investment back over my lifetime in the face of continuing to do IS work. It doesn't bother me.
If that kind of thinking bothers you maybe it's not the wisest move to make.
The Great, Glorious Cthulhu existed without the benefit of Alhazrad. I'm living proof. They call me insane? Someday they'll find out the hard way how sane I really am.
With an AWP you don't need to be good at head shots. Center mass is where it's at with a rifle of that nature; bigger hit box with the same end result.
Been teaching artificial brains how to think since 1984, commercially since '86 (hey, that's over a querter of a century! ;)
So much for teaching how to think... at most you've been in the "field" for 23 years, that's less than a quarter of a century... So much for AI.
Your question is clearly excessively vague, but I'll bite
I never asked a question.
If you only want a really basic phone, then you can buy one without a camera. But, if you want one with other features (like WAP, which I use to check my email), it's almost always bundled with a camera.
Yeah but that's not the issue. The issue was that the original poster wanted a phone with no crap with a good battery life. At the point where you're going to be willing to carry a phone with extra features who cares if there is a camera included? Don't use it.
I'll tell you the first time I bought a camera phone I had no desire to have the camera but it was the best all around choice I found in a phone so I excepted that there would be a camera involved... I will admit that I was very wrong and short sighted for thinking I'd never use the camera.
I hate to sound like a camera snob, but I really can see the difference between a 2 megapixel photo from a phone through a plastic-coated snap-on lens compared to my 8 megapixel canon SLR with an L-lens. Can't you?
Generally speaking we're not talking about taking wedding photos here. I'm in no way claiming that the camera phone is a replacement but it does hold a place. I still have my regular digital camera but again, I don't want to lug it around with me. It's not that it's heavy or bulky but that's true of most of my gadgets. the more I can leave at home the happier I am.
No, you've got the wrong end of the stick. I'm not a technophobe.
Sorry if you misunderstood what I was trying to say; I wasn't calling you a technophobe but rather your complaints being more about the general nature of technophobia in society and how it relates to people who actually use the technology. Again, sorry if there was a misunderstanding there.
I HATE camera phones.
Hot ticket, pal: don't friggin buy one then.
What I'd like is a good, tiny phone, where the batteries last for ages.Not knowing what your definition of "ages" is makes this a hard point to talk over but I get 5 days of regular use (normally 15 minutes of talk a day, 24-7 standby) out of my Samsung (with a camera!)
If I want to take a photo I get out my digital SLR and a 700 euro lens, I don't think "ah, now I've got my phone, I can leave my camera at home".
If you're toting that thing around with you every and you don't do photography professionally that's just foolishness. Don't get me wrong, carry what you like, but Joe Sixpack (and 95% of all slashdotters for that matter) don't want to carry a normal camera around with them let alone a SLR. It's nice that you pat yourself on your back with all your fancy equipment but the fact is that it hurts your debate against cell phone/camera integration. That's akin to say "I own a pair of Sennheiser Prestige HD590s, why would I want a small pair of ear pods for when I'm out and about with my mp3 player?". Some people would be impressed that I own the Sennheiser, some people would understand that it would be incredibly stupid for me to lug around my headphones when I'm out walking the track.
Here's the problem. The cellphone was supposed to make it easy for people to be reached on-the-move. For "security" reasons we are not allowed to use our phone everywhere
I don't know where you are but in my local area I've never seen this. While I do understand and know of areas where photos are banned I've never heard of anyone getting harassed in these areas for using a cell phone.
The rest of your argument deals with general technophobia and has nothing to do with the camera aspect of a cell phone. Oh well...
upgrading the phone's camera just gives the mobile phone industry another excuse to charge you a higher subscription than the previous year.
Really? Again, not knowing your situation... My cell service provider's plans have decrease since the introduction of the camera phone. I don't think the camera aspect has anything to do with it, they do charge 0.10 USD per picture sent over the cellphone without an inclusive package. They charge the exact same for text messages too.
Furthermore, not to beat a subject to death, I have used my camera phone for productive reasons. There's a million times that I found myself saying, "if only I could get a picture of this". Digital cameras were nice because there was no processing time, but I didn't carry mine unless I really felt I was going to use it. Now I don't worry about it.
It's still pen and paper for me, just like d&d.
...enough of a market-share to be considered a series developmental arena...
Damn it! I meant serious, not series. Damn my eyes!
Not to dick on the submission but what slashdotter really thinks this is an issue today?
An OS that hasn't even been released to the home market yet has a LONG way to go before it has enough of a market-share to be competitive. It has nothing to do with the technical aspects of DX10 but rather commonsense economics.
It's suicidal to put out software that has such a high system demand that only the upper crust of users can run it.
Infact, I'd even predict that DX10 is going to be such a non-issue that DX11 (or a next gen technology replacement) will be out before DX10 (and Vista) have enough of a market-share to be considered a series developmental arena for game producers.
Stick with DX9. It's not a big deal. It probably won't be one in the near future either, if ever.
This should get the Revelations nutters foaming at the mouth.
Well, if you read the posts you'll note that this is also working the other side of the coin: the tin foil hat wearers who claim that Bush is behind this. These are normally the same people who blame the Christians for everything that goes wrong as well.
Ultimately these two groups are the same people with a different outlook on religion but the same type of paranoid hysterics that make the rest of us roll the eyes.
Can mine look like a dragon or a skull? That would kick ass d00d.
Sure both can program but who develops the sophisticated software that run super computer simulations?
The CS major.
Nonsense! I've found schooling has little to do with a coders ability.
Most coders I know who are extraordinary at the craft have a passion for it. If your interest in programming ends after you land your first job you're always going to be a shit coder.
Are you guys talking about the Wasteland that was done in a format simular to the early (C=64) Bard's Tale games? Yeah, that was a good game.
I love Thief. Love it like it was my own child. But with the downturn in the third of the series I'd rather not see them continue it. I hate to be a cynic about it but the new engine lost something in the translation for me. Maybe I'll go back and play it again and see if I feel better about it now.
Presence2 noted that MGM announced that the Stargate franchise will migrate to the big screen
And end up failing miserably like every other sci-fi tv to big screen endeavour outside of Trek TOS?
While the original SG movie was pretty good the TV series just doesn't have the same energy to it. And what makes this even worse is that just about everything that has gone from a TV series to the big screen in sci-fi just seems to have the same feel as a very long episode of the TV series. Trek at least put a few years between it's TV series and motion picture release, maybe that was the key to Trek's theater success versus everyone else's failures. Even the Trek TNG films just seemed like long episodes to me.
My problem with sequels is that it's just way too easy to botch a good thing.
There's a ton of games I'd like to see either updated editions of or new maps/missions for but at the same time my initial reaction would be somewhere between fear and anxiety.
And as for updating older games... sometimes it's the nostalgic effect of playing it on the old systems that make it better than what the game really is.
clifford stoll is a buttwipe.
I want her to get us off of using Oil, not worrying about Podcasts.
How about getting YOURSELF off of oil? Waiting around for the government to do this work for you is insane and a mark of laziness.
If you really think the US of A is controlled by corporate interests and you want to see the us move away from oil than cast your votes with your dollars.
GOP dont have the votes in congress so if you dont want it get on the horns people and let democrats know that drm will get them outted form office.
Uh, AC, do you realize that Biden and Feinstein are fairly prominent DEMOCRATS?
we did it here in canada
That explains the ignorance but doesn't excuse it.
Please, stop acting like one party has the public's interest in mind more than the other. Too many people in the states already "think" like this, why do you think we're so screwed no matter what we do anymore?
0H WAIT, THEN THERE WOULD BE NO ONE LEFT T0 POST ON SHITD0T!!
You're plainly wrong, sir. I haven't owned a video game machine since the Atari 2600. I demand an apology; I'm an entirely different kind of fucktard.
Oh, Wait...
Doughnut encourage him.