Intelligent Design could predict EVERYTHING. That's why it's a useless theory.
If you come up against anything you don't care to analyze, you can lump it in under, "oh-thats-clever-therefore-god-designed-it", and that's the end of it.
So we shouldn't try to figure out how the hell flagellum evolved, and just accept this axiomatic designation of "irreducibly complex"? I think that's a pretty piss-poor attitude.
If you take away any of the parts, it doesn't work. Okay genius... what if there were 4 components before, and one went away... or what if all three were changed from other things in one cataclysmic genetic event that propogated fast down because it was so successful?
I'm not even a microbiologist and this is pretty obvious to me.
Software RAID/LVM can detect which volumes go where by magic numbers written to them when you format them. But you still have to set up all the remote NBDs correctly on a new machine, and you need the old setup file from the old machine that tells it what block devices/partitions to use.
NOTE!
You shouldn't leave any NBD-exported volumes on the new master. Make it into a physical, local volume, but reference it in the "same place" in your RAID configuration.
The FFT (flicker fusion threshold) of the human eye varies between 15 and 20Hz (depending on light level and subject age). This is the minimum framerate that appears as multiple still images as opposed to reconstructed motion.
Your eyes also have a secondary process called saccadic movement. It has a varying frequency (4-5 times per second), where the eye makes sudden jerks and focus across your vision. You only see during intervals when the eye stops moving, the periods in between are blanked out by lower brain functions (which controls the eye movement).
Since there are multiple processes and response patterns involved, low framerates are detectable even if they appear to be moving.
But such lower framerates coupled with appropriate blurring and progressive-scan displays or LCDs can eliminate nearly all such senstations.
And citing that your statement was "proved" wrong on slashdot is not lending it much credibility.
It's called long long (64-bit). Claims that it is somehow slow is retarded since most checksumming algorithms can be written using MMX, so generating and handling up to 128-bit docIDs is trivial.
Hell, RPM uses 64-bit identifiers, ext2 supports 64-bit file offsets, so what about linux needing a special API?
Not for the last 3 years has that been an real issue, even on 32-bit archs.
The guy is a loon. Please disregard google-watch (or at least each a huge grain of salt first).
Sure something is funky, and everyone has their own pet conspiarcy theory. Maybe the IPO cash will help them fix it!
A polygon ray intersect calculation takes fewer calculations than a ray/box intersect.
Considering the rendering engine can pick out which polygons are even visible... and where they are... couple that with the known "crosshair" location and you can have polygon accurate hit detection. You might have on average a few more checks with this method than the previous single bounding box check, but it's better than having to check a bunch of invisible virtual polygons or smaller boxes individually.
Here's the thing: The "refresh rate" of the human eye is about 15Hz. It's not really fair to call it a refresh rate since different parts of the eye transmit light level changes at different rates (faster in your periphial vision). It's just that on average, the cones and rods in your eyes take about 60ms to "settle". Of course, the eye isn't taking snapshots, over this 60ms you're sort of summing the incoming light over the entire period, and transmitting the "average".
Thus, we see everything with motion blur pre-attached. Our brains and optical centers are wired to use that blurring to reconstruct the missing motion. Also used in the reconstruction: the fact that different parts of your eye can update independantly, so you have this distributed stream of information coming in whenever, and your brain is assimilating all of it and using all of it (including differences in timing) possible to get the best representation.
Okay, so then clearly, we need really high framerates because our eyes are not cameras telesynced to the monitor... we need to have the pixels as accurate as possible at every time because we never know when a cells in a region will want to transmit. We "figure out" that we are seeing stop frame animation, even if you saw the "snapshots" of the eye, it still would look somewhat blurred and layered. This is the brain postprocessing outsmarting our technology.
Easy fix? You can use a lower framerate if you add the blur. This is why we can sit through movies at 24 FPS, or TV at 30, since the recording equipment is averaging it for us. Of course, we can still sense the "syncronous" nature of the screen updating, especially when comparing camcoder stock at 60fps and movie stock at 24.
But you don't need to update the screen nearly as fast. 60fps with motion blur is about as realistic as one could ever hope for. Have you seen HDTV football broadcasts! My god!
So if Doom supports capping the output framerate at 60fps, but internally allows motion blurring by rendering at twice that followed averaging, I don't think you'll notice it at all. As far as your eyes are concerned, you're screaming at 120.
The one thing I think is a bad thing is that they chose 60. If this is vsynced on an analog monitor (necessitating a 60Hz vert refresh), it kind of sucks. I can "see" the refresh on lots of monitors at 60, but it goes away at 70. I'm sure many of you know what I mean.
I'd rather them cap it at 70, or 72. With 72 v. ref. you could update the screen at 24fps, tripling each frame, but rendering 3-6 frames when possible to create the blur.... LIKE WATCHING A REALTIME MOVIE. When it gets busy, just cut the number of frames you average.
This is to allow you to start up Mozilla with different personalities (default email addresses, bookmarks, theme, proxy settings) which may or may not be useful to you. It is particularly useful to use when multihoming your machine (your home directory, really) with Home/Work/School/Other configurations.
In order to make a secondary profile, you need to have installed the profile manager (and the users have to be able to get to it). Otherwise you use the default profile.
but anyhow, the largest reason open source [projects are] better... is because you have millions of people around the world looking at it, testing it, not just coders, but everyone.
Unless that project is XFree86... because looking at it just paralyzes you with FEAR.
Are you claiming the US and the USSR were both established by SCO? ::looks around, suddenly afraid:: The Canopy Group, the Umbrella Corporation -- it all makes sense. They ARE watching me! ::runs away::
the mozilla logo designer was a huge Raptors fan, and thus was so inspired. I think you're just trying to grab attention with controversial statements.
The red dinosaur design was adopted to satirize the supposed communist nature of open source.
This is the original post by Jamie announcing the open-sourcing of Mozilla. Communism joke from the beginning. Hehe. This is the first appearence of the red lizard, which he credits to Shepard Fairey of BLK/MRKT, who has done, among other commercial ventures, the whole wacky Andre the Giant has a posse/OBEY thing.
This one was a freebee. If you think it looks suspiciously like the Raptors logo, then he's to blame. But have you looked at the two side by side? Moz has a more imposing profile with cool scales down his neck, while the Raptors dino is sleeker, with a different profile. Clearly Fairey chose to depict Mozilla the Lizard in that industrial-looking, side profile as is the harsh, contrasting style that he uses in all his works.
Moreover, how is looking like the Raptors logo supposed to somehow make Mozilla better? Have they ever won a playoff title? (I jest, I jest)
The Mozilla "dinosaur" theme is older than the Raptors. Netscape was using the "Mo-zilla" character on it's site as early as Fall of '94, which, incidentally, was the same time the Raptors were having a contest to design their logo.
And at the time, they looked nothing alike anyway (Moz was green and anthromorphic).
Over time, the green guy logo evolved with the Moz project, notably turning Red (almost as a joke) to revel in the socialist nature of the Mozilla.org foundation when Gecko went open-source. It got pretty silly, Soviet-inspired designs with stars, sickles, and even fur hats.
I guessed the like the image of a Red, more realistic looking dino, with the flames and everything. I don't think it was because Mozilla.org members are all Toronto fans (Bulls I might believe).
And since no one could confuse a web browser with a basketball team in the marketplace anyway, I don't think we'll be seeing any trademark infrigment suits anytime soon.
No other software you run usually has it. It's a bit jarring. (Which is why I also cringe when I launch Adobe Acrobat... ugh) Although it is nice to know when you launch it whether or not another instance is already running (splash-screen, no existing instances, no splash, then you're just opening a new window).
than 2 CPUs in 1U. Not only do you get less granularity, but the 2U cases are just more natural to work with than 1U. You can actually use half-height PCI cards!
And don't get your signals crossed... Niagra is just the chip technology: it'll be here (since the USparc IV is crap) before this not-quite-proof-of-concept interconnect hits the market......dickweed!
even to this day the models that they offer linux on are such that all the hardware included works equally well in Windows or Linux. Did you think that was an accident? They actually bothered to get their configuration tools to detect and correct any potential hardware issues with multiple OS's. That was much more than I expected of them, and all I really expect.
I just want them to replace my hard drives when they die.
(I was sure that the Atheros chipset in particular handled a great deal of the nasty details of handling the 802.11x stack through logical USB frame commands, so that the driver would be pretty straightforward. Or maybe it was the opposite; it exposed the radio directly THROUGH USB to the driver, so it had to do all the work... in any case I was sure the chipset greatly simplified things from a design standpoint since it bridged USB to the netradio almost directly. I could be thinking of something else, this was almost 2 years ago. Oh dear.)
1) This is a significantly different product then the wireless bridge devices on the market (which WILL work with the XBox), as it lets you play with another person without additional hardware if she's got the adapter too.
2) I didn't say it was dumb for Microsoft to release it, but it would be dumb if they didn't release it, and I was complaining that they haven't given me anything to bitch about today.
Slashdot Mirror
Intelligent Design could predict EVERYTHING. That's why it's a useless theory.
If you come up against anything you don't care to analyze, you can lump it in under, "oh-thats-clever-therefore-god-designed-it", and that's the end of it.
So we shouldn't try to figure out how the hell flagellum evolved, and just accept this axiomatic designation of "irreducibly complex"? I think that's a pretty piss-poor attitude.
If you take away any of the parts, it doesn't work. Okay genius... what if there were 4 components before, and one went away... or what if all three were changed from other things in one cataclysmic genetic event that propogated fast down because it was so successful?
I'm not even a microbiologist and this is pretty obvious to me.
Software RAID/LVM can detect which volumes go where by magic numbers written to them when you format them. But you still have to set up all the remote NBDs correctly on a new machine, and you need the old setup file from the old machine that tells it what block devices/partitions to use.
NOTE!
You shouldn't leave any NBD-exported volumes on the new master. Make it into a physical, local volume, but reference it in the "same place" in your RAID configuration.
Everyone one of REAL IT-types us are heathen atheists. Sorry to burst your bubble. We likes our BSD naughty.
Mmmm... sacrilicious.
The FFT (flicker fusion threshold) of the human eye varies between 15 and 20Hz (depending on light level and subject age). This is the minimum framerate that appears as multiple still images as opposed to reconstructed motion.
Your eyes also have a secondary process called saccadic movement. It has a varying frequency (4-5 times per second), where the eye makes sudden jerks and focus across your vision. You only see during intervals when the eye stops moving, the periods in between are blanked out by lower brain functions (which controls the eye movement).
Since there are multiple processes and response patterns involved, low framerates are detectable even if they appear to be moving.
But such lower framerates coupled with appropriate blurring and progressive-scan displays or LCDs can eliminate nearly all such senstations.
And citing that your statement was "proved" wrong on slashdot is not lending it much credibility.
It's called long long (64-bit). Claims that it is somehow slow is retarded since most checksumming algorithms can be written using MMX, so generating and handling up to 128-bit docIDs is trivial.
Hell, RPM uses 64-bit identifiers, ext2 supports 64-bit file offsets, so what about linux needing a special API?
Not for the last 3 years has that been an real issue, even on 32-bit archs.
The guy is a loon. Please disregard google-watch (or at least each a huge grain of salt first).
Sure something is funky, and everyone has their own pet conspiarcy theory. Maybe the IPO cash will help them fix it!
You're a doodyhead.
Messanger has a perfectly legitimate use in any environment.
^Z
A polygon ray intersect calculation takes fewer calculations than a ray/box intersect.
Considering the rendering engine can pick out which polygons are even visible... and where they are... couple that with the known "crosshair" location and you can have polygon accurate hit detection. You might have on average a few more checks with this method than the previous single bounding box check, but it's better than having to check a bunch of invisible virtual polygons or smaller boxes individually.
Here's the thing: The "refresh rate" of the human eye is about 15Hz. It's not really fair to call it a refresh rate since different parts of the eye transmit light level changes at different rates (faster in your periphial vision). It's just that on average, the cones and rods in your eyes take about 60ms to "settle".
Of course, the eye isn't taking snapshots, over this 60ms you're sort of summing the incoming light over the entire period, and transmitting the "average".
Thus, we see everything with motion blur pre-attached. Our brains and optical centers are wired to use that blurring to reconstruct the missing motion. Also used in the reconstruction: the fact that different parts of your eye can update independantly, so you have this distributed stream of information coming in whenever, and your brain is assimilating all of it and using all of it (including differences in timing) possible to get the best representation.
Okay, so then clearly, we need really high framerates because our eyes are not cameras telesynced to the monitor... we need to have the pixels as accurate as possible at every time because we never know when a cells in a region will want to transmit. We "figure out" that we are seeing stop frame animation, even if you saw the "snapshots" of the eye, it still would look somewhat blurred and layered. This is the brain postprocessing outsmarting our technology.
Easy fix? You can use a lower framerate if you add the blur. This is why we can sit through movies at 24 FPS, or TV at 30, since the recording equipment is averaging it for us. Of course, we can still sense the "syncronous" nature of the screen updating, especially when comparing camcoder stock at 60fps and movie stock at 24.
But you don't need to update the screen nearly as fast. 60fps with motion blur is about as realistic as one could ever hope for. Have you seen HDTV football broadcasts! My god!
So if Doom supports capping the output framerate at 60fps, but internally allows motion blurring by rendering at twice that followed averaging, I don't think you'll notice it at all. As far as your eyes are concerned, you're screaming at 120.
The one thing I think is a bad thing is that they chose 60. If this is vsynced on an analog monitor (necessitating a 60Hz vert refresh), it kind of sucks. I can "see" the refresh on lots of monitors at 60, but it goes away at 70. I'm sure many of you know what I mean.
I'd rather them cap it at 70, or 72. With 72 v. ref. you could update the screen at 24fps, tripling each frame, but rendering 3-6 frames when possible to create the blur.... LIKE WATCHING A REALTIME MOVIE. When it gets busy, just cut the number of frames you average.
That would be fricking cool.
This is to allow you to start up Mozilla with different personalities (default email addresses, bookmarks, theme, proxy settings) which may or may not be useful to you. It is particularly useful to use when multihoming your machine (your home directory, really) with Home/Work/School/Other configurations.
In order to make a secondary profile, you need to have installed the profile manager (and the users have to be able to get to it). Otherwise you use the default profile.
but anyhow, the largest reason open source [projects are] better ... is because you have millions of people around the world looking at it, testing it, not just coders, but everyone.
Unless that project is XFree86... because looking at it just paralyzes you with FEAR.
Are you claiming the US and the USSR were both established by SCO?
::looks around, suddenly afraid::
::runs away::
The Canopy Group, the Umbrella Corporation -- it all makes sense. They ARE watching me!
and emcompassed Space.com.
God. Damn. It.
the mozilla logo designer was a huge Raptors fan, and thus was so inspired. I think you're just trying to grab attention with controversial statements.
The red dinosaur design was adopted to satirize the supposed communist nature of open source.
This is the original post by Jamie announcing the open-sourcing of Mozilla. Communism joke from the beginning. Hehe. This is the first appearence of the red lizard, which he credits to Shepard Fairey of BLK/MRKT, who has done, among other commercial ventures, the whole wacky Andre the Giant has a posse/OBEY thing.
This one was a freebee. If you think it looks suspiciously like the Raptors logo, then he's to blame. But have you looked at the two side by side? Moz has a more imposing profile with cool scales down his neck, while the Raptors dino is sleeker, with a different profile. Clearly Fairey chose to depict Mozilla the Lizard in that industrial-looking, side profile as is the harsh, contrasting style that he uses in all his works.
Moreover, how is looking like the Raptors logo supposed to somehow make Mozilla better?
Have they ever won a playoff title? (I jest, I jest)
Stop trying to cover your ass.
The Mozilla "dinosaur" theme is older than the Raptors. Netscape was using the "Mo-zilla" character on it's site as early as Fall of '94, which, incidentally, was the same time the Raptors were having a contest to design their logo.
And at the time, they looked nothing alike anyway (Moz was green and anthromorphic).
Over time, the green guy logo evolved with the Moz project, notably turning Red (almost as a joke) to revel in the socialist nature of the Mozilla.org foundation when Gecko went open-source. It got pretty silly, Soviet-inspired designs with stars, sickles, and even fur hats.
I guessed the like the image of a Red, more realistic looking dino, with the flames and everything. I don't think it was because Mozilla.org members are all Toronto fans (Bulls I might believe).
And since no one could confuse a web browser with a basketball team in the marketplace anyway, I don't think we'll be seeing any trademark infrigment suits anytime soon.
No other software you run usually has it. It's a bit jarring. (Which is why I also cringe when I launch Adobe Acrobat... ugh)
Although it is nice to know when you launch it whether or not another instance is already running (splash-screen, no existing instances, no splash, then you're just opening a new window).
than 2 CPUs in 1U. Not only do you get less granularity, but the 2U cases are just more natural to work with than 1U. You can actually use half-height PCI cards!
...you must pay an additional $240 (for the v65x). This price increases relative to price of the server.
At least Dell now has an online discussion forum free to everyone, even non-customers.
Oh wait, you just did!
My bad.
Is there a sarcasm escape character in English?
I feel I've read this post somewhere before.
::sticks tounge out::
...dickweed!
::giggles::
baka-karma-whorecunt
And don't get your signals crossed... Niagra is just the chip technology: it'll be here (since the USparc IV is crap) before this not-quite-proof-of-concept interconnect hits the market...
I still have a box they preloaded and didn't change much, and I never had that problem. I hardly needed to touch the machine for a long time.
They actually had a really decent setup (and drivers for a soundcard that weren't really available at the time).
even to this day the models that they offer linux on are such that all the hardware included works equally well in Windows or Linux. Did you think that was an accident? They actually bothered to get their configuration tools to detect and correct any potential hardware issues with multiple OS's. That was much more than I expected of them, and all I really expect.
I just want them to replace my hard drives when they die.
^_^
(I was sure that the Atheros chipset in particular handled a great deal of the nasty details of handling the 802.11x stack through logical USB frame commands, so that the driver would be pretty straightforward. Or maybe it was the opposite; it exposed the radio directly THROUGH USB to the driver, so it had to do all the work... in any case I was sure the chipset greatly simplified things from a design standpoint since it bridged USB to the netradio almost directly. I could be thinking of something else, this was almost 2 years ago. Oh dear.)
or you about to get p0wnz3d.
1) This is a significantly different product then the wireless bridge devices on the market (which WILL work with the XBox), as it lets you play with another person without additional hardware if she's got the adapter too.
2) I didn't say it was dumb for Microsoft to release it, but it would be dumb if they didn't release it, and I was complaining that they haven't given me anything to bitch about today.
Ooooooh, now I'm aggravated.