Stop reading NZHerald and stop watching the televised news. That'll give you a lot more time to follow other news sources. To get more information about what the actual government is up to, follow the website of the opposition party. Admittedly there's a lot more wailing and hype, but they get a lot closer to the truth than the kids at nzherald.
NZHerald is not a newspaper, they're a distributor of press-releases.
Don't draw out the analogy. We don't need to get sidetracked in the history of something that was a bad analogy to begin with (see below for why I think that). My point is that you can't just throw education at the masses and expect a uniform increase in competency. If you don't agree with me, argue on that point.
I imagine the real reason IFR Pilots are 'relatively rare' is mainly because the world doesn't need all that many. There will be millions of people who could have been proficient IFR Pilots, but didn't because they chose a different career.
That's much more difficult that driving a car while texting, yet pilots are not rare.
Just how many IFR Pilots do you know? (assuming you're not an Aviator yourself and more likely to know a few).
Take a flight on a fully-loaded 747, I'll bet even money the only two people who can fly that plane are already in the cockpit. I don't know what definition you have of 'rare', but IFR Pilots are, IMO.
Clearly you know the AppleTV better than I do. I was only trying to clear up what seemed like a misconception that the AppleTV was limited to 720p. They're not my claims, but Apple's, and I'm only putting them out there. Thanks for the correction, however blunt.
Sincerely,
AppleTV user mixed up between 1080i output, and actual processing high bitrate 1080i.
In terms of picture quality, it's not like VHS where there were features that could make a huge difference (quad head, etc.).
This was always a misgiving, actually. Only two playback heads are required (one for the even field, one for the odd) for realtime playback, and adding extra heads won't improve anything. Extra heads only help when shuttling or in still-mode. Granted, they help a lot there, but they're not not used at all during playback.
Welcome the Internet. You'll find such subtleties often fail to come across in quite the way intended.
Usually only with people such as yourself, who persist with their deliberate misinterpretation even after they're corrected, which you do in your final sentence. Only an idiot or troll would have taken the quip as literally as you did.
Since every Windows since 98 (which did exist ten years ago) has supported dual head*, what exactly is relevant about your post?
*pretty well, apart from a couple of annoyances where your desktop icons are reordered if you plug/unplug the second monitor, and it never remembers whether it was on the right/left of your primary monitor. Still nowhere near as annoying or crippling than the X/Xorg/Xinerama problems.
It was just a quip - I didn't think for a minute anyone would take it literally.
But you've gone and done so, conveniently ignored the rest of my points, and made it the entire base of your argument. I guess I should be grateful you didn't merely write me off as a cretin based on the two grammatical errors I made in the post.
Before you humbly suggest one is "doing it wrong", why don't you try dual-head in another OS? You'll see it's impossible to "do it wrong".
Now, back to Linux.
Dialog boxes pop up half on one monitor, and half on the other, and I'm "doing it wrong"
Windows maximise across the entire desktop, not just one monitor, and I'm "doing it wrong"
Widgets appear on parts of the screen I can't even see/click on, and I'm "doing it wrong"
the X server doesn't even start if one of the monitors is disconnected, and I'm "doing it wrong". Other OSs notice the change, and reconfigure. Admittedly XP fucks it up a bit, by reordering all your desktop icons and forgetting whether the display was on left or right, but hey, it starts.
You're prepared to accept all these things from your Daily Desktop. I hope I won't sound too much like a zealot for saying this, but if that is your experience of Linux sir, then I humbly submit that you are doing it wrong.
2. If I forget to turn off Javascript window resizing in FireFox then it seems some web designers are morons and want to full-screen my browser when I visit their website. This invariably means they look at my desktop dimensions and adjust the window to fill it (splatting the browser across all the screens).
Thanks for proving my point. You don't have dual-head support. You have two monitors, which you drag windows kicking-and-screaming between. You've become a Human Window Manager.
Of course, if you're using an nVidia card then things get a bit more complicated because nVidia decided to reimplement their own Xinerama extensions in their drivers.
Did I say thanks for proving my point? I other OS's it's about as complicated as "Do I have more than one video output? Yes? Let's go, then."
Don't think I didn't use Linux as my primary desktop for years too. From 1999 up until about four months ago (guess what I replaced it with:).
Even though my first Xinerama setup was done back when editing the config file directly (still true for many dists) that wasn't a problem for me, I'm quite a capable Unix buff. The problem was the implementation. I probably had no more problems than you did, the difference seems to be what you and I are prepared to accept; I'm not prepared to accept any sort of fudging around turning things off and back on again just because none of the dozen different display toolkits can agree on how dual-head is going to work.
When I first did Xinerama, I was using the enlightenment window manager (probably only out of boycott of anything calling itself an 'environment' such as Gnome/KDE) - but had to drop it because (at the time) it had no notion of multiple displays. This, combined with the fact both displays weren't the same resolution) meant it was possible for windows to spring up in an area where I can't even see/drag them!
Again, Linux is a fantastic OS, with some excellent tools from video transcoders, to obscure compilers, scripting languages. The kernel is so rich with features you can do most anything you can conceive, a lot of which is difficult or impossible with the two 'other' OS's. I tried for almost a decade to make it work as a desktop. I've covered only Dual-Head here. I haven't even mentioned Sound "support", the utter lack of consistency between widget toolkits (variety is the spice of failure), all my apps being killed when I log out, rather than asking me if I'd like to save my work, the colossal waste of space (compare screen real estate between Photoshop and Gimp on the same display. Yeahhh.)
What really made me lose hope was all the folks like yourself, and the devs, that genuinely can't see anything wrong with it all.
I got multi-head working in Linux too - it doesn't mean the GP doesn't have a point.
Just because you can post a screenshot of a Linux machine running multi-head, doesn't rebut at all the fact that it's a pain in the ass to set up, doesn't work consistently between window managers. In short, your productivity on a Linux box is inversely proportional to the number of monitors you've got hanging off it, the very opposite of the point of having them.
Now I see Microsoft have finally decided to breathe some life into their dual-head code that they haven't touched since Windows 98, and come up with something that doesn't blow chunks. Bravo. Now their users can join the Mac users who have had dual head for longer than most of than remember.
Now don't get me wrong, I like Linux, I run it, and I will run it for as long as I need and can get it*. But I don't get all silly and got plugging displays and mice into it. Linux is not a desktop operating environment, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise (such as myself, two years ago, before I wised up).
* maybe another ten years? It'll more likely be outlawed than ever die.
What's more interesting: how long until they ban cryptography, or make using crypto a crime, unless you have a government license?
Never going to happen. It's too entrenched. Joe Sixpack uses it every day when he buys viagra using his credit card, and it would be unreasonable to deprive him of the security.
But why bother, when you can do what the UK, and other, countries have done: Make it a crime not to divulge encryption keys used when interrogated.
In counties like the UK, they'll just ask you for the encryption key used on 'scramble.bin' that you recently deleted.
Can't find/remember it? Deny it's an encrypted file, but merely the output of some "pseudo-random-number-generator*"? Ha! Have a couple of years in the slammer, see if that helps you remember, you terrorist.
*(I can see the eyes of the jury glazing over already)
...should suffice get our ass in the slammer, when we can't provide the "key" used to "encrypt" that DOD 7-pass erase. I'm never erasing with random data ever, ever again. It's just child porn you can't decrypt.
Slashdot Mirror
NZHerald is not a newspaper, they're a distributor of press-releases.
I imagine the real reason IFR Pilots are 'relatively rare' is mainly because the world doesn't need all that many. There will be millions of people who could have been proficient IFR Pilots, but didn't because they chose a different career.
That's such a terrible idea you should actually seek medical advice.
Just how many IFR Pilots do you know? (assuming you're not an Aviator yourself and more likely to know a few).
Take a flight on a fully-loaded 747, I'll bet even money the only two people who can fly that plane are already in the cockpit. I don't know what definition you have of 'rare', but IFR Pilots are, IMO.
Sincerely,
AppleTV user mixed up between 1080i output, and actual processing high bitrate 1080i.
This was always a misgiving, actually. Only two playback heads are required (one for the even field, one for the odd) for realtime playback, and adding extra heads won't improve anything. Extra heads only help when shuttling or in still-mode. Granted, they help a lot there, but they're not not used at all during playback.
Maybe you got it confused with iTunes rentals, which don't seem to be available higher than 720p. Hope this helps, anyway.
and did they calculate the total the same way as they do the "street value" of "drugs"? 34 gigs a day, come on...
Usually only with people such as yourself, who persist with their deliberate misinterpretation even after they're corrected, which you do in your final sentence. Only an idiot or troll would have taken the quip as literally as you did.
Since every Windows since 98 (which did exist ten years ago) has supported dual head*, what exactly is relevant about your post? *pretty well, apart from a couple of annoyances where your desktop icons are reordered if you plug/unplug the second monitor, and it never remembers whether it was on the right/left of your primary monitor. Still nowhere near as annoying or crippling than the X/Xorg/Xinerama problems.
But you've gone and done so, conveniently ignored the rest of my points, and made it the entire base of your argument. I guess I should be grateful you didn't merely write me off as a cretin based on the two grammatical errors I made in the post.
Before you humbly suggest one is "doing it wrong", why don't you try dual-head in another OS? You'll see it's impossible to "do it wrong".
Now, back to Linux.
You're prepared to accept all these things from your Daily Desktop. I hope I won't sound too much like a zealot for saying this, but if that is your experience of Linux sir, then I humbly submit that you are doing it wrong.
Thanks for proving my point. You don't have dual-head support. You have two monitors, which you drag windows kicking-and-screaming between. You've become a Human Window Manager.
Did I say thanks for proving my point? I other OS's it's about as complicated as "Do I have more than one video output? Yes? Let's go, then."
Don't think I didn't use Linux as my primary desktop for years too. From 1999 up until about four months ago (guess what I replaced it with :).
Even though my first Xinerama setup was done back when editing the config file directly (still true for many dists) that wasn't a problem for me, I'm quite a capable Unix buff. The problem was the implementation. I probably had no more problems than you did, the difference seems to be what you and I are prepared to accept; I'm not prepared to accept any sort of fudging around turning things off and back on again just because none of the dozen different display toolkits can agree on how dual-head is going to work.
When I first did Xinerama, I was using the enlightenment window manager (probably only out of boycott of anything calling itself an 'environment' such as Gnome/KDE) - but had to drop it because (at the time) it had no notion of multiple displays. This, combined with the fact both displays weren't the same resolution) meant it was possible for windows to spring up in an area where I can't even see/drag them!
Again, Linux is a fantastic OS, with some excellent tools from video transcoders, to obscure compilers, scripting languages. The kernel is so rich with features you can do most anything you can conceive, a lot of which is difficult or impossible with the two 'other' OS's. I tried for almost a decade to make it work as a desktop. I've covered only Dual-Head here. I haven't even mentioned Sound "support", the utter lack of consistency between widget toolkits (variety is the spice of failure), all my apps being killed when I log out, rather than asking me if I'd like to save my work, the colossal waste of space (compare screen real estate between Photoshop and Gimp on the same display. Yeahhh.)
What really made me lose hope was all the folks like yourself, and the devs, that genuinely can't see anything wrong with it all.
Just because you can post a screenshot of a Linux machine running multi-head, doesn't rebut at all the fact that it's a pain in the ass to set up, doesn't work consistently between window managers. In short, your productivity on a Linux box is inversely proportional to the number of monitors you've got hanging off it, the very opposite of the point of having them.
Now I see Microsoft have finally decided to breathe some life into their dual-head code that they haven't touched since Windows 98, and come up with something that doesn't blow chunks. Bravo. Now their users can join the Mac users who have had dual head for longer than most of than remember.
Now don't get me wrong, I like Linux, I run it, and I will run it for as long as I need and can get it*. But I don't get all silly and got plugging displays and mice into it. Linux is not a desktop operating environment, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise (such as myself, two years ago, before I wised up).
* maybe another ten years? It'll more likely be outlawed than ever die.
If the final "zero" pass is sufficient to overwrite the random data, one wonders why you bothered with the "random" pass in the first place, huh?
While that's probably true, there's certainly a hell of a lot fewer people believing that these days.
Never going to happen. It's too entrenched. Joe Sixpack uses it every day when he buys viagra using his credit card, and it would be unreasonable to deprive him of the security.
But why bother, when you can do what the UK, and other, countries have done: Make it a crime not to divulge encryption keys used when interrogated.
I meant: countries like the UK, of course.
Can't find/remember it? Deny it's an encrypted file, but merely the output of some "pseudo-random-number-generator*"? Ha! Have a couple of years in the slammer, see if that helps you remember, you terrorist.
*(I can see the eyes of the jury glazing over already)
Let me get this straight - we're talking porn, a visual substitute of a physical act, and you want to virtialize it further still?
It might take 45min to clear up a small prop - but if you foul a prop of a massive vessel like these you're in for a day's work
In retrospect, payroll records was a bad example on my part, and I kind of agree with your comment.
So you think I should be able to find your payroll records and criminal history on Google too, or is it a one-way street?
At this stage the joke [one of my favourite oldies] has been analysed so much it's now in negative funny territory. Thanks guys.