Putting "ry" on the end of the word doesn't make it a plural, even in your two cases.
Well yes, that was my point after all.
Likewise, componentry is used in the fabrication of components.
OK, that sounds plausible at least. Now, are you able to back up your claim by providing some links where "componentry" is used in this sense, rather than in the "I think it's a more marketable word than components" sense? My random sampling of Google hits seems to favor the latter.
"Componentry?" Er, what? I'm going to label this one a bullshit buzzword. It does notseem to appear in the dictionary, and the obligatory GoogleFight would seem to confirm that "components" is the accepted term.
Timothy, perhaps you are confused by standard English usage patterns. You see,
Everyone complains about the indenting before they actually see how it works. Just try it once. You may find, as I have, that your indentation does not change at all. The only difference is that you get to drop the braces around your code blocks.
Also it hasn't been actively maintained for a year or more.
That's not entirely accurate. The creator of PWM is focusing his efforts on developing Ion, and it now supports PWM-like (floating) workspaces in addition to the tiling workspaces. In the future, the PWM package will simply be Ion with floating workspaces only.
Important note: With a single tuner Tivo (read: not one for satellite), you can watch one recorded program and record another; but you cannot watch live TV at the same time you're recording something.
I think this may have been true at one time, but with version 3 of the software you can just hit Messages & Setup->Standby. The TiVo will continue to silently record things in the background, but it will pass the unfiltered signal through to the TV so you can watch any channel live.
Re:Alternative Recommendations
on
Python in a Nutshell
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I cannot agree with the reviewer that M. Lutz's O'Reilly "Python" book is good. I disliked this book nearly all the way through. It jumped around too much, used too many words, and had insufficient detail on more advanced topics. Given that the book is about three inches thick (from memory -- I gave away my copy), there's enough room for details on everything.
Mark Lutz actually has two noteworthy Python books, "Programming Python" and "Learning Python." "Programming Python" would be the thick book you refer to; the author of the review recommends "Learning Python," a thin book for those just learning the language (or maybe still learning programming). It has been pretty well received.
Perhaps you will think about pledging some of that cash toward funding a fifth season of Farscape. If enough people participate, maybe it would sweeten the deal enough to get the show picked up by one of the networks.
Television that is funded purely by advertising is getting worse every year (witness the descent into "reality TV" hell). If the viewers care about having good shows to watch, it may be time that we step up and do something about it.
Your ideal GUI is out there, if you just put in the time looking for it. Maybe you want something like Ion. It lets you control all windowing operations with the keyboard, using whatever keybindings you desire.
I'm glad GNOME and KDE are there for people who want a Windows-like desktop, but I personally can't stand either one.
It's not useful at all, dude. The article's from CNet; perhaps you can see how it's a little bit different from all those oh-so-memorable case modding articles that get linked off of someone's 486 over an ISDN link.
Oh, and moderators: WTF? At the time of this posting, the (again, useless) article repost was rated +4. Surely there are a few other comments that were actually worth spending those modpoints on.
Right. When will the "_______ runs Linux" angle cease to be interesting? I think it's obvious that Linux has a lot of applications in specialized systems; do we need to hear about every single one?
I'd like to see a special "runs Linux" topic that I can remove from my homepage.
1) Photographer's camera embeds watermark into the image.
2) Photographs can be freely distributed to anyone. The watermark distortion is generally small, so the casual user would not notice it.
3) Anyone who is "authorized" (presumably has been given a key of some sort) is able to extract the watermark and view the original image. If the image has been manipulated (resized, airbrushed, etc.), the watermark will be corrupted and the authorized user will become aware of the alteration.
In the article's example, the camera belongs to a crime scene investigator, and the authorized user is someone assocated with the court system.
I'm not really sure why CNet picked up on this paper. I don't think it's particularly groundbreaking, and it's certainly not the only watermarking paper that was discussed at ICIP 2002. Wake me up when someone figures out how to watermark an image in a way that is robust to a wide variety of attacks (resizing, denoising/compression, pixel shifting, etc.), and is still invisible to the eye.
Unfortunately, general noise cancellation in three dimensions is a much more difficult problem than noise cancellation at a point or two (e.g. headphones).
Interesting read. Still, I would challenge all these numerical specialists to come up with a tome that is equally comprehensive and equally readable by scientists without extensive numerical analysis training. The book has been so successful because it hits the target audience perfectly.
Slashdot Mirror
3Dwm is the most promising to really alterate our human-computer interaction.
"You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride
Your choice of signature is apt.
Putting "ry" on the end of the word doesn't make it a plural, even in your two cases.
Well yes, that was my point after all.
Likewise, componentry is used in the fabrication of components.
OK, that sounds plausible at least. Now, are you able to back up your claim by providing some links where "componentry" is used in this sense, rather than in the "I think it's a more marketable word than components" sense? My random sampling of Google hits seems to favor the latter.
"Componentry?" Er, what? I'm going to label this one a bullshit buzzword. It does not seem to appear in the dictionary, and the obligatory GoogleFight would seem to confirm that "components" is the accepted term.
Timothy, perhaps you are confused by standard English usage patterns. You see,
toilet -> toiletry and
bigot -> bigotry,
but
apple -> apples and
component -> components.
The word "perogative" lost all its dignity when Will Smith explained it to the masses.
:-)
The word prerogative lost all its dignity when everyone started pronouncing it "perogative".
Everyone complains about the indenting before they actually see how it works. Just try it once. You may find, as I have, that your indentation does not change at all. The only difference is that you get to drop the braces around your code blocks.
Just to set the record straight:
Silly Putty
silly Puddy
Also it hasn't been actively maintained for a year or more.
That's not entirely accurate. The creator of PWM is focusing his efforts on developing Ion, and it now supports PWM-like (floating) workspaces in addition to the tiling workspaces. In the future, the PWM package will simply be Ion with floating workspaces only.
Ion is excellent. It's also very actively developed; the latest releases have featured PWM-like (floating) workspaces and Lua scripting. Good stuff.
Important note: With a single tuner Tivo (read: not one for satellite), you can watch one recorded program and record another; but you cannot watch live TV at the same time you're recording something.
I think this may have been true at one time, but with version 3 of the software you can just hit Messages & Setup->Standby. The TiVo will continue to silently record things in the background, but it will pass the unfiltered signal through to the TV so you can watch any channel live.
I cannot agree with the reviewer that M. Lutz's O'Reilly "Python" book is good. I disliked this book nearly all the way through. It jumped around too much, used too many words, and had insufficient detail on more advanced topics. Given that the book is about three inches thick (from memory -- I gave away my copy), there's enough room for details on everything.
Mark Lutz actually has two noteworthy Python books, "Programming Python" and "Learning Python."
"Programming Python" would be the thick book you refer to; the author of the review recommends "Learning Python," a thin book for those just learning the language (or maybe still learning programming). It has been pretty well received.
Perhaps this would interest you.
Perhaps you will think about pledging some of that cash toward funding a fifth season of Farscape. If enough people participate, maybe it would sweeten the deal enough to get the show picked up by one of the networks.
Television that is funded purely by advertising is getting worse every year (witness the descent into "reality TV" hell). If the viewers care about having good shows to watch, it may be time that we step up and do something about it.
Your ideal GUI is out there, if you just put in the time looking for it. Maybe you want something like Ion. It lets you control all windowing operations with the keyboard, using whatever keybindings you desire.
I'm glad GNOME and KDE are there for people who want a Windows-like desktop, but I personally can't stand either one.
As much as I hate the site, it does provide a lot of information that is difficult to get elsewhere.
But I still hate it.
It's not useful at all, dude. The article's from CNet; perhaps you can see how it's a little bit different from all those oh-so-memorable case modding articles that get linked off of someone's 486 over an ISDN link.
Oh, and moderators: WTF? At the time of this posting, the (again, useless) article repost was rated +4. Surely there are a few other comments that were actually worth spending those modpoints on.
God I hate this site.
Wait, let me get this straight, they have two programmers?
Right. When will the "_______ runs Linux" angle cease to be interesting? I think it's obvious that Linux has a lot of applications in specialized systems; do we need to hear about every single one?
I'd like to see a special "runs Linux" topic that I can remove from my homepage.
I watched every episode of every Star Trek series and I found DS9 to be the least satisfying. It was Days Of Our Lives In Space.
I was going to say Love Boat in Space, but otherwise agree wholeheartedly.
From dictionary.com:
postulate (n):
(3) [Mathematics] An axiom.
What are you talking about? Exentuated is a perfectly cromulent term.
While I like Tivo, if they fail or not is really not a big thing.
You don't own a TiVo, do you?
Here's an application as I see it:
1) Photographer's camera embeds watermark into the image.
2) Photographs can be freely distributed to anyone. The watermark distortion is generally small, so the casual user would not notice it.
3) Anyone who is "authorized" (presumably has been given a key of some sort) is able to extract the watermark and view the original image. If the image has been manipulated (resized, airbrushed, etc.), the watermark will be corrupted and the authorized user will become aware of the alteration.
In the article's example, the camera belongs to a crime scene investigator, and the authorized user is someone assocated with the court system.
I'm not really sure why CNet picked up on this paper. I don't think it's particularly groundbreaking, and it's certainly not the only watermarking paper that was discussed at ICIP 2002. Wake me up when someone figures out how to watermark an image in a way that is robust to a wide variety of attacks (resizing, denoising/compression, pixel shifting, etc.), and is still invisible to the eye.
Unfortunately, general noise cancellation in three dimensions is a much more difficult problem than noise cancellation at a point or two (e.g. headphones).
It really makes you wonder why noone implemented it before.
FYI: Type Ahead Find is inherited from Mozilla. Under Mozilla you need to activate it by editing a preferences file.
Interesting read. Still, I would challenge all these numerical specialists to come up with a tome that is equally comprehensive and equally readable by scientists without extensive numerical analysis training. The book has been so successful because it hits the target audience perfectly.