Actually, functional programming is the answer. Unlike procedural code, you don't need to think of what you want the CPUs to do, but of the result you want them to achieve - in other words, "threads" are not necessary for your code to utilize multiple processors.
I don't see what the problem is.. it should just split off a sister project - the main site will stay more like a real encyclopedia and be a more trusted source of information -- and the spinoff can become a trivia book. Maybe that would even be for the best - articles could start out in MiscWiki, and once the sources have been verified, they can be copied to Wikipedia (in whatever chunks the editors think necessary).
The patents are tricky. They won't tell you the whole layout of the chip, because that's too specific. Otherwise you could alter one transistor and your copy is "different" - the patent doesn't hold. What usually gets patented are various tricks, e.g. performing an operation more efficiently, faster, etc. The trick is to find the ones that make the chip useless or vastly inferior if the trick is not used.
If you look at the video in the article, you can see that neon yellow and red fish were also created. The chef will become even more of an artist - imagine eating some famous painting;) Either way, I think this is somewhat better than ingesting food coloring (which is made from insects, IIRC).
I see you haven't tried playing HD content without hardware acceleration. I've got some video clips that can't be played on a reasonable-spec laptop (1.8G Core Duo, 2G RAM) unless I'm using the proprietary ATI driver - and even then, the only way to get nice-looking picture is to render to opengl interface.
I've got some mod points right now, but I'd like to point out to other mods that rating this reply "funny" might cause the users to look up the parent's url. Really with there was a "mod with comment" option... sigh...
Technically, whenever you don't know what the flying object is, it's a UFO:) But yeah, I agree that these rumors are very questionable, etc. Just saying they're out there.
Agreed. I've heard stories that imply that the true top speed of SR-71 is somewhere closer to M5 or M8 - as tested "unofficially" by the military sector. Most likely such speeds are attainable but not sustainable (fuel runs out, plane breaks in mid-air,..?). Maybe they used some experimental (or nonstandard) fuel -- then again, it may be a bunch of bullshit.
I've never been able to see any of videos posted using the shitty brightcove player. (Using Fedora Core 6 with Firefox 2.0.0.5 and Flash 9) Am I the only one?
But it does mean that it's the standard. And IE was the standard web browser. And most people lived with its UI. Except that Firefox came along and popularized tabs.
[I] still find the UI frustrating and stupid and completely ass-backwards. Name one thing.
Re:Ask artists, not geeks
on
GIMP 2.4 Released
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Ask artists, not geeks for feedback when you develop a paint program. Agree 75% Artists are not the only people who ever use Gimp. Many users only use it to crop/resize images and maybe tweak the color balance a little bit. In other words, make artists your primary target, but don't ignore geeks' opinion, either.
The GUI is horrible, and it only takes a five-minute interview with a Photoshop user to understand what needs to be done. Disagree 100% Here's why: just because Photoshop is the "industry leader" doesn't mean it's perfect - nor does it mean that the UI is perfect. What it means is simply this: it's the "industry leader". Gimp UI is actually pretty well thought out and is highly customizable. You can learn the UI inside and out in a day, even if you're really lazy/slow.
I think GIMP is suffering from a serious case of bad focus. Agree 100% As with many other open sourced projects, the developers don't follow the same common path, but instead spread out into their areas of interest. A perfect solution would be if some company used Gimp as a base and polished it to suit the most demanding users. Just like what CrossOver Office does with Wine.
Gimp had layers for as long as I can remember. You must be thinking of MS Paint:)
needs better tablet support
on
GIMP 2.4 Released
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I've recommended some artists to try gimp instead of proprietary stuff. The major complaints were about drawing tablet support. Gimp has tablet support, but the options available to the artist are very limited. Also, there are no smoothing algorithms for tablet-drawn strokes - a pretty major drawback if you draw on the computer instead of scanning things in. Other than that, gimp is awesome - and almost everything you can think of is available as a plugin - I've already tried the new context-sensitive resizing plugin (context-sensitive resizing has been mentioned a few months ago on/.)
That's actually part of the long-term strategy. Another part of it is the consumer's ability to choose the power supplier. In short, what this new plan does is, it increases the cost of running non-environment-friendly power plants, while staying away from the costs of "green" alternatives. The coal-burning company will raise their rates - and thus lose more customers to cleaner alternatives.
Granted, this will have a big effect on low-income households - but that can be helped with tax breaks & such.
This particular implementation of the idea, may not be all that useful. However, it's the first step towards a computer monitor that can 'see'. At that point, we'll be able to have real videoconferencing, rather than what we have now, where eye contact is impossible. You can't make eye contact if you have to look offscreen at a camera.
Eye contact is a very big deal -- its significance is woven deeply into our brain hardware. When the other party is forever looking away from you (i.e. they are watching their screen instead of their camera), it makes everything they say seem untrustworthy.
Couldn't agree more! I think this is a major part of the reason why videoconferencing hasn't caught on yet. I've tried it, and this is my reason.
if you need close-to 100% reliability, set up 3 different hardware platforms with different OSes - then run the program(s) on each and interpret the result as a system of experts (i.e. choose what the larger group suggested). If one goes down or starts spewing bad results, you'll be able to detect it....I think that's how it works:D
Oh, and I'd recommend miniature/low power PCs for obvious reasons. That, or laptops.
There are SO MANY problems with the system we have right now. Not the least of which is having to choose the lesser evil. For example, if I support Clinton's agenda for abortion & civil rights, but completely oppose her views on education, how the fuck am I supposed to vote? Why do I have to choose between my views? I want to vote for the policies, not for the people, dammit!
As it is now, the whole system is one big popularity contest. And they wonder why the voter turnout is so low...
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, functional programming is the answer. Unlike procedural code, you don't need to think of what you want the CPUs to do, but of the result you want them to achieve - in other words, "threads" are not necessary for your code to utilize multiple processors.
I don't see what the problem is.. it should just split off a sister project - the main site will stay more like a real encyclopedia and be a more trusted source of information -- and the spinoff can become a trivia book. Maybe that would even be for the best - articles could start out in MiscWiki, and once the sources have been verified, they can be copied to Wikipedia (in whatever chunks the editors think necessary).
The patents are tricky. They won't tell you the whole layout of the chip, because that's too specific. Otherwise you could alter one transistor and your copy is "different" - the patent doesn't hold.
What usually gets patented are various tricks, e.g. performing an operation more efficiently, faster, etc. The trick is to find the ones that make the chip useless or vastly inferior if the trick is not used.
Actually, so do I.
But on engadget, these text ads show up.
For the lazy (and in case it goes offline), quoted here: Attention: John B.!
Would you like to go to Winter Formal with me? Love, Claudia
In other words, you're wishing for a MemoRay. That'll take only a 1000 years to invent ;)
Yeah, but they will get the source code and lifetime warranty, for that price.
Wrong again: if you pay for a commercial QT license, you can develop ANYTHING YOU WANT on top of it.
If you look at the video in the article, you can see that neon yellow and red fish were also created. The chef will become even more of an artist - imagine eating some famous painting ;)
Either way, I think this is somewhat better than ingesting food coloring (which is made from insects, IIRC).
If you read Russian, check out When a crayfish whistled by Teffi
It's a Simpsons reference, you insensitive clod! :)
The Great Continent of Rand McNally
I see you haven't tried playing HD content without hardware acceleration.
I've got some video clips that can't be played on a reasonable-spec laptop (1.8G Core Duo, 2G RAM) unless I'm using the proprietary ATI driver - and even then, the only way to get nice-looking picture is to render to opengl interface.
I've got some mod points right now, but I'd like to point out to other mods that rating this reply "funny" might cause the users to look up the parent's url.
Really with there was a "mod with comment" option... sigh...
I've heard stories that UFOs are real.
Technically, whenever you don't know what the flying object is, it's a UFOBut yeah, I agree that these rumors are very questionable, etc. Just saying they're out there.
Agreed. ..?).
I've heard stories that imply that the true top speed of SR-71 is somewhere closer to M5 or M8 - as tested "unofficially" by the military sector.
Most likely such speeds are attainable but not sustainable (fuel runs out, plane breaks in mid-air,
Maybe they used some experimental (or nonstandard) fuel -- then again, it may be a bunch of bullshit.
I've never been able to see any of videos posted using the shitty brightcove player. (Using Fedora Core 6 with Firefox 2.0.0.5 and Flash 9)
Am I the only one?
Artists are not the only people who ever use Gimp. Many users only use it to crop/resize images and maybe tweak the color balance a little bit. In other words, make artists your primary target, but don't ignore geeks' opinion, either. The GUI is horrible, and it only takes a five-minute interview with a Photoshop user to understand what needs to be done. Disagree 100%
Here's why: just because Photoshop is the "industry leader" doesn't mean it's perfect - nor does it mean that the UI is perfect. What it means is simply this: it's the "industry leader".
Gimp UI is actually pretty well thought out and is highly customizable. You can learn the UI inside and out in a day, even if you're really lazy/slow. I think GIMP is suffering from a serious case of bad focus. Agree 100%
As with many other open sourced projects, the developers don't follow the same common path, but instead spread out into their areas of interest. A perfect solution would be if some company used Gimp as a base and polished it to suit the most demanding users. Just like what CrossOver Office does with Wine.
Gimp had layers for as long as I can remember. :)
You must be thinking of MS Paint
I've recommended some artists to try gimp instead of proprietary stuff. The major complaints were about drawing tablet support. Gimp has tablet support, but the options available to the artist are very limited. Also, there are no smoothing algorithms for tablet-drawn strokes - a pretty major drawback if you draw on the computer instead of scanning things in. /.)
Other than that, gimp is awesome - and almost everything you can think of is available as a plugin - I've already tried the new context-sensitive resizing plugin (context-sensitive resizing has been mentioned a few months ago on
That's actually part of the long-term strategy. Another part of it is the consumer's ability to choose the power supplier.
In short, what this new plan does is, it increases the cost of running non-environment-friendly power plants, while staying away from the costs of "green" alternatives. The coal-burning company will raise their rates - and thus lose more customers to cleaner alternatives.
Granted, this will have a big effect on low-income households - but that can be helped with tax breaks & such.
Reminds me of the "everything is okay" alarm, invented by Homer Simpson :D
This particular implementation of the idea, may not be all that useful. However, it's the first step towards a computer monitor that can 'see'. At that point, we'll be able to have real videoconferencing, rather than what we have now, where eye contact is impossible. You can't make eye contact if you have to look offscreen at a camera.
Eye contact is a very big deal -- its significance is woven deeply into our brain hardware. When the other party is forever looking away from you (i.e. they are watching their screen instead of their camera), it makes everything they say seem untrustworthy.
Couldn't agree more! I think this is a major part of the reason why videoconferencing hasn't caught on yet. I've tried it, and this is my reason.if you need close-to 100% reliability, set up 3 different hardware platforms with different OSes - then run the program(s) on each and interpret the result as a system of experts (i.e. choose what the larger group suggested). If one goes down or starts spewing bad results, you'll be able to detect it. ...I think that's how it works :D
Oh, and I'd recommend miniature/low power PCs for obvious reasons. That, or laptops.
There are SO MANY problems with the system we have right now. Not the least of which is having to choose the lesser evil.
For example, if I support Clinton's agenda for abortion & civil rights, but completely oppose her views on education, how the fuck am I supposed to vote? Why do I have to choose between my views? I want to vote for the policies, not for the people, dammit!
As it is now, the whole system is one big popularity contest. And they wonder why the voter turnout is so low...