If science involved the mere writing of papers, it would be politics, and I would be worried about this.
But, the Scientific Method is clearly not going anywhere, and reproduceability is a very strict standard.
Now, I agree that there would be some difference between the experimental sciences and the evidential sciences (archaeology, etc...) in this regard, where the temptation to "promote" an idea is not as tempered by the fear of immediate embarrassment.
However, certainly in experimental science, the lifespan of any unsupportable idea is inversely proportionate to the degree of interest in that idea, which is the perfect governor.
Maybe, but I've used a ReplayTV 2020 for over 3 years, consider myself "technically savvy", and am happy.
Maybe I'm too tolerant of minor flaws. Maybe I have an irrational commitment to an underdog platform. Maybe I'm beset by cognitive dissonance because to abandon ReplayTV is to admit I was wrong. Maybe I'm just happy enough with them for my own purposes and choose to support them because I value competition. Maybe I've made an emotional investment and feel certain the ReplayTV engineers will be able to justify my support. Maybe I feel ReplayTV is being condemned by the technical community for early problems which have long since been corrected.
From my point of view, Tivo dominates the discourse of the techical community at a rate of near 95%--maybe more. I simply don't believe it is that much better, and that everybody is way too starstruck and unadventurous, and the result is going to be another monopoly!
It is clear to me that moon exploration was abandoned not for political or scientific reasons, but because the critical resource sought--cheese--was found only in very small and unfonduable nuggets.
The 1953 development of Cheez-Whiz sparked an explosion in industrial demand for malleable cheese. Due to the perceived economic cheesemine in orbit, the space program was accelerated, principally by the ironically un-cheesy JFK.
By 1973, malleable cheese was reaching its zenith. Fondue pots outsold crockpots for the first--and last--time in US history.
Unfortunately, even with a trained geologist aboard and a specially-designed slightly cheesy vehicle at their disposal, the Apollo 17 mission was unable to find any sufficiently malleable cheese to justify future missions.
In a moderately successful effort to recoup their immense investment in cheese research, NASA leaked a derivative food-preparation technology to the market, leading to that year's introduction of the Cuisinart.
Subsequent experiments in using the Cuisinart to process traditional cheese have proven relatively disappointing.
"use" is more important to an engineer fundamentally than "sell,"
I disagree strongly with this. My job as an engineer, as I have been taught, and a critical point in distinguishing the engineer's work from that of the amateur or dilettante is that the engineer must make do with an economy of resources, be it time, money, materials, space, whatever.
This economy is a result of the engineer's mission to solve a problem well, elegantly and in a repeatable fashion, at minimal cost of production and distribution, and in the minimum amount of time. Without the fundamental goal of having to sell the product, or hold it accountable to some kind of economy, there would be no reason for the discipline of engineering.
No, I'm not kidding. I feel a little like I did in the early 80's, when I loved my Apple ][, but all these Commodore 64 fans would squinch up their noses at the Apple's graphics and sound. I couldn't really defend it, but I knew I was so much better off with that machine than I'd been without it that I felt a great loyalty to it.
Polish and user-friendliness, I think, matter much more to some people than others. To some, it is pure functionality that matters most. Usually, people settle for a compromise.
About the lock-ups, that is true. I would say maybe once every three to four months, for some reason, the thing stops responding to the remote and you have to pull out the power cord to reboot it. People are going to respond in different ways to this. As a developer, I can understand a flaw like that, and it's never been anything but a minor inconvenience. However, I also keep in mind that I'm using one of their first models, and they stopped doing firmware upgrades to it over a year ago. Maybe I'd be more upset if it were a newer model.
About recording at ~3AM, I don't know. That's about when it would call to update its guide. I've never tried to record something then, and I'd be pretty upset if it weren't smart enough to postpone the call (which can be done manually if you happen to be watching at that time).
All in all, I don't know if I'd say the Tivo is "infinitely" more polished, but it has always struck me as more polished and somewhat experimental in its UI, which I think is good. However, you might say that the 2003 Corvette is more polished than the 1953 Corvette, but as far as utility and style, both are way beyond a Model T (which might represent a VCR).
Anyway, what I'm getting down to is that I can't see much of a reason for you to switch camps now, just as I don't feel there's much reason to switch camps either. Cnet's reviews of the two lines are almost neck and neck.
I think Tivo has benefitted from better marketing, and a much better name. It has also benefitted from its quirky recommendation system which has been featured in sitcoms. In everything I've read, the ReplayTV has better image quality and has innovated in some important areas such as networking and commercial skipping.
What I still don't understand is why, among the most technically savvy, there is such a huge imbalance in support, when a site like Cnet rates them almost equal.
If you have set a show to record repeatedly, and have some number of episodes stored (1-99), the comparison doc says there is no way to stop recording the show while also preserving the episodes already recorded.
It says the only way to do this is to use the "Preserve" function on each episode (which makes a copy of that episode), then delete the original show (which will delete the original set of episodes). It further says that this will not work if your drive is close to full, which is true.
Now, I will admit that the best solution to this problem does require a small insight which, from a usability point of view should be considered unacceptable. (i.e. the first time I was faced with this dilemma, it took me a few minutes to hit upon the solution) However, it isn't that bad once you figure it out:
For every repeating record, the machine will automatically record that show on any day of the week where it shows up in that time slot. However, you can uncheck any day, and that day will be skipped. If you uncheck all the days, it won't record at all. So, that show will basically be frozen with all the episodes that it already contains.
So, the solution is to uncheck seven checkboxes. That is not particularly discoverable, but once discovered, it is quick and effective.
That's my musty tome on the grave injustice done by that comparison doc. Honestly, having not used a Tivo, I feel awkward even comparing to it, but my experience has been so good, I can't imagine how it could be much better!
I can't tell whether the strange tone of this piece is characteristic of British writing, or just this author.
Anyway, the story really should have been about getting the piano to the tribe. If I was writing a short story, the piano would have been the main character--
An aged instrument is torn against its will from a diginfied, but meaningless twilight in luxury, portaged by sweaty, cursing soldiers through the steaming jungle mud, and deposited amongst a people at whose foreign touch it cringed.
But, over the course of two years, even as its cladding peeled away in the humidity, and insects came to violate its works, the instrument found a new purpose, straining against its own years to learn a new repertoire, and inspire its new people, as it had long ago inspired its own.
Ok, bidding for movie rights starts at $20,000. All proceeds to benefit the Indigenous Peoples' Keyboardists' Club.
Thanks for pointing me to that site. I've read a bit of it, and it didn't mention much about unexpected non-records on the ReplayTV, except if a program changes its time schedule significantly (which Survivor never has done).
Anyway, I am a ReplayTV partisan. Why? Because since November of 1999, I have never been disappointed in any way by my machine!
Now, I have never tried a Tivo, so maybe there is something I'm missing. But my ReplayTV has never skipped a show, I can search for shows easily, timeshifting and zipping back and forth is a no-brainer, the picture is great, it has a large enough hacking community that there are solutions for expansion and tweaking, and on and on.
Even some of the limitations mentioned in the comparison site I know to be false, even for my machine which is over three years old.
So, again, thank you for the resource, but I'm a demanding user, and I'm impressed that an early-model machine has satisfied me for over three years.
Yes, of course you are correct. You know it, I know it. But to the voters who must choose between $5 billion to build a supercollider or $5 billion in freeways and bridges, will they choose the scientist or the engineer?
I wrote my post poorly, so let me clarify. I was attempting to portray the dilemma of obtaining public funds for scientific research.
The perfect example is NASA. What do most people ask? "How is that going to help us?" Most people aren't satisfied by knowledge for its own sake, especially when their tax money is involved.
This is why, in my opinion, the public understands engineers better than scientists.
From what I have heard, this movie is a triumph of style over substance.
I loved TNG. I have a signed picture of the crew including the annoying kid, darnit!
But what made it so great were the characters and the dialog. All the actors grew so dramatically in those first three seasons, it more than redeemed those of us who endured jeers in the beginning. Captain Picard is a broad, cultural icon because of Patrick Stewart's famously modulated portrayal.
Unfortunately, and to my great chagrin, it sounds as though this delicate treasure has been defiled by the ruthless forces of Hollywood into a product that looks good on a poster, but lacks its essential soul.
I don't need more movies. I can just look at my autographed photo and smile.
Well, he was nominally a mathematician, but he was also a philosopher, computer scientist, cryptographer, and biologist.
I guess I was trying to be a bit controversial by pitting engineers against scientists. Clearly, it is a chicken and egg relationship.
My main thought was that I think the general public has a much better grasp of the role of the engineer than the scientist, which likely affects public funding for "pure" science.
As for myself, my actual degree is in "computer systems engineering", though my degree was similar to my friends' "computer science" degrees. Both were granted by the Department of Engineering.
Just the way you describe your job, I personally think most science and engineering involves a combination of both disciplines.
Does engineering eat science's crumbs, or does science serve engineering's beck and call?
Of course the two are inderdependent. To a huge majority of people, most of whom have some kind of say in how resources are allocated, the goals of the scientist, however, often seem esoteric and even blasphemous.
However, the goals of the engineer are very clear: envision, design, implement, sell. Cars, computers, bridges, perfume bottles, guns.
Which is more important, Ms. Voter, the Scientist or the Engineer? Now, don't go thinking too much!
I want to second these points, and just ask: why does everybody, especially slashdotters focus so much on the Tivo, when ReplayTV is, technically, a superior product?
Its menus and program guide are perhaps a bit more traditional, and it doesn't try to out you unnecessarily (which may titillate some potential users), but ReplayTV has had some of these "new" Tivo features for months if not years.
Is it something aesthetic about the system? Is it the admittedly ingenious name? The remote? Constant references by comics and sitcoms?
Tell me!
I love my ReplayTV 2020 which I bought 3 years ago for $700 (before Tivo was a verb), then swapped in an 80GB drive for $300 20 months ago. My dog ate my first remote, so I got a new one ($40), but this expense has all been richly repaid in great functionality, and I am now a devoted fan.
The Viewer I'd rate "good", because it shows a path to potential interface improvements in the future, but not something I'd use today.
The WebQuotes is "better" because it leverages the architecture that Google is based on, and lets you see some of the reasons why that link is near the top.
But the Froogle service is clearly the "best". It has the potential to centralize the Internet's consumer marketplaces, enhancing competition and value. My only concern is that the big retailers will put up walls to Froogle's spiders. However, if Froogle becomes popular, they may be forced to join the party, or lose access to a growing meta-internet market.
Ladies and gentlemen, Google is reminding us that we live in exciting times.
US drivers (for some reason) have the right to refuse to wear seatbelts
I'm not sure where you got this impression. The US makes traffic laws on a state-by-state basis, so it does vary, but almost every state requires seat belt use.
Following is a "talking point" from buckleupamerica.org, which addresses seat belt laws in the US.
As of the year 2002, 18 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have safety belt laws with primary enforcement. A primary seat belt law allows officers to stop and ticket drivers for violating the safety belt law without observing any other infraction. The remaining states (except New Hampshire) have secondary laws. Secondary laws allow officers to give tickets for safety belt violations only after a car is stopped for some other violation.
And by the way, every private driver in the world has the ability to refuse to wear a seat belt, just as they have a ability to speed or make an illegal U turn. The issues of laws and enforcement of those laws just make those choices more or less likely.
In the US they are designed to try and save people who refuse to wear seat belts. Over here most people wear them
I'm always a little curious about broad statements, especially when comparing the habits of different societies.
I live in California, which is the most populous state, and has by far the most cars of any state, as well as the most stringent emissions laws. It turns out that, at least as of 1999, it also had the highest rate of seat belt use, nearly 90%. (Buckle up America Report, 2001)
At a national level, that 90% is considered a target number for 2005. As of 2002, national usage is at 75%, which was a sad surprise to me. Of course, each state has its own laws.
It isn't surprising to me that less than half of North Dakotans wear a seat belt, considering the rural environment and culture, but I would have thought the national average would be higher by now.
Interestingly, all the states that border California are also very high.
I got excited there for a minute! (What kind of machine could he have built in 1987?)
I'll respond assuming you'd honestly like to know what the big deal is vis-a-vis PVRs vs. VCRs.
I've owned a Replay 2020 for several years (since before Tivo was a verb), and upgraded the drive, wore out one remote going on two, so I think I would be considered a somewhat knowledgeable user of PVRs.
In theory, you are right. What PVRs do is to take the 1970's architecture of the home VCR and incorporate 25 years of usage experience. The result is a machine which does (almost) everything a VCR can do, but much more quickly and conveniently, plus many other peripheral features which are only possible with modern technology.
For instance, to record a show while you're on vacation, you have to insert a tape, make sure it doesn't have anything useful on it, consult your TV Guide, then either program start and stop times manually for each show to record or enter VCR+ codes. Now, you can go away on vacation and your machine will record all these disparate programs onto a single tape, ready for your enjoyment.
This was fantastic for the 70's, but not for the 90's. These days, it's almost universally considered a pain in the neck.
The PVR incorporates an up-to-date onscreen program guide with a week or two of programming, which lets you simply flip around and mark shows of interest. You can search all the programs for certain actors, topics, or titles, and set up special "channels" that the machine will fill with shows you like.
Once captured, programs are stored in such a way that they are automatically organized, can easily be preserved or deleted, and can be watched endlessly with no loss of quality.
Both devices can speed through commercials, though the Replay 4000, 4500 and 5000 machines are the only ones that can automatically skip all commercials, if you choose. Or, you can skip 30 seconds at a time. Or, you can fast forward through them at various speeds up to 20x.
The only thing VCRs have over PVRs, and this is changing, is the ability to archive shows for longer periods of time.
I currently have 40 hours (80GB) of storage. I rarely approach this limit, even with my large collection of Primetime Glick episodes, assorted other series, movies, etc... However, when I do want to "save" something or give it to somebody else, I must record it from my ReplayTV to my VCR.
New PVRs such as the ReplayTVs I mentioned do have a peer-to-peer exchange capability. Unfortunately, very few people have upload bandwidth to the net that would make this very useful. It takes like 8 hours to send one episode of Giligan's Island to your friend Bob Denver. Within a household, where network speeds can soar, this is not a problem. However, even then, your PC will not be recognized as a client, so playback there or archival to DVD is impossible right now.
These things will change, however.
What I would say in closing, is that it is very easy to get used to having a PVR. The reason they haven't caught on is because they are expensive, and people figure they have all the functionality they need with a VCR. But the people who take the plunge and start using them get hooked. They'd sooner give up their microwaves.
Hey, why do I need a microwave oven, anyway? I love Mac and Cheese!
Well how does it work with UT2003 and all the settings up in an intense CTF?
I don't play shooters, so I don't have a good idea of how it would do.
What I was more getting at, though, that, aside from sheer polygons per second, cards are gaining exponentially in the ability to approach true realism by other means (pixel shaders, bump mapping, texture mapping, etc...) which require special code.
I agree with what you're saying about the complexity of software. New generations of GPUs come out every 6 or 8 months, while a major game can take two years.
OK, all kidding aside, compared to $50 + $10/mo like most mmorpgs, the numbers aren't that different.
Just charging $50+$20/mo for a dazzling mmorpg could be one solution: Build a pretty but smallish world at first, then expand it quarterly on the revenue stream. Something like that could limit risk.
What you're suggesting is interesting, but just basically a toy, I think? Maybe just include some unbelievable screensavers or something, since gamers might blow back at you hard for an "extended demo," unless you were really clear about it.
That's actually one of the idea behing nVidia's whole CG thing.
Yeah, that is a very cool technology. As I understand it, it maps to an equivalent pixel shader language in DirectX 9 (but I think it goes further than DirectX).
Well, what I've heard is that it will make it much easier for developers to take advantage of the GPU's features, and I guess those elements just wouldn't run on an older card.
It's good in the long run, but after spending $200 on my new card, I guess I won't get the benefits until sometime down the road.
Heh--- funny you should mention that. That nature scene is the most stunning realtime rendering I've seen. I thought of mentioning it in my original post, but I didn't want to go on and on.
Honestly, it's the first time I've seen into a virtual world that I really wanted to visit.
I recently replaced my GeForce2 MX with a GeForce4 Ti 4200. I have a P3-1000.
Of course, the first thing I did was to download some of the NVidia demos, so I could witness the awesome power of my new card. I was especially interested in the wolfman demo.
Well, it was spectacular. You could drive him around, make his hair longer or shorter, change the lighting, etc... And the characterization was lightyears beyond anything in Dungeon Siege, Warcraft III, or any other current game.
Then, I hit escape, and I was back to reality.
That was three or four months ago. Realistically, I imagine I'll have to wait until Doom III, maybe 5 or 6 months more, before I can actually play a game which will take advantage of a non-trivial part of my new GPU's power.
How long will it be before an FX board will be taxed by a new game?
If people will pay $399 for a state of the art card, I suggest that some game publisher consider developing a game at the $199 or $249 price point which will really take advantage of these cards.
Otherwise, the best we can hope for is a few more frames of the same ugly polygons.
Slashdot Mirror
If science involved the mere writing of papers, it would be politics, and I would be worried about this.
But, the Scientific Method is clearly not going anywhere, and reproduceability is a very strict standard.
Now, I agree that there would be some difference between the experimental sciences and the evidential sciences (archaeology, etc...) in this regard, where the temptation to "promote" an idea is not as tempered by the fear of immediate embarrassment.
However, certainly in experimental science, the lifespan of any unsupportable idea is inversely proportionate to the degree of interest in that idea, which is the perfect governor.
Maybe, but I've used a ReplayTV 2020 for over 3 years, consider myself "technically savvy", and am happy.
Maybe I'm too tolerant of minor flaws. Maybe I have an irrational commitment to an underdog platform. Maybe I'm beset by cognitive dissonance because to abandon ReplayTV is to admit I was wrong. Maybe I'm just happy enough with them for my own purposes and choose to support them because I value competition. Maybe I've made an emotional investment and feel certain the ReplayTV engineers will be able to justify my support. Maybe I feel ReplayTV is being condemned by the technical community for early problems which have long since been corrected.
From my point of view, Tivo dominates the discourse of the techical community at a rate of near 95%--maybe more. I simply don't believe it is that much better, and that everybody is way too starstruck and unadventurous, and the result is going to be another monopoly!
Don't blame me when it happens!
It is clear to me that moon exploration was abandoned not for political or scientific reasons, but because the critical resource sought--cheese--was found only in very small and unfonduable nuggets.
The 1953 development of Cheez-Whiz sparked an explosion in industrial demand for malleable cheese. Due to the perceived economic cheesemine in orbit, the space program was accelerated, principally by the ironically un-cheesy JFK.
By 1973, malleable cheese was reaching its zenith. Fondue pots outsold crockpots for the first--and last--time in US history.
Unfortunately, even with a trained geologist aboard and a specially-designed slightly cheesy vehicle at their disposal, the Apollo 17 mission was unable to find any sufficiently malleable cheese to justify future missions.
In a moderately successful effort to recoup their immense investment in cheese research, NASA leaked a derivative food-preparation technology to the market, leading to that year's introduction of the Cuisinart.
Subsequent experiments in using the Cuisinart to process traditional cheese have proven relatively disappointing.
"use" is more important to an engineer fundamentally than "sell,"
I disagree strongly with this. My job as an engineer, as I have been taught, and a critical point in distinguishing the engineer's work from that of the amateur or dilettante is that the engineer must make do with an economy of resources, be it time, money, materials, space, whatever.
This economy is a result of the engineer's mission to solve a problem well, elegantly and in a repeatable fashion, at minimal cost of production and distribution, and in the minimum amount of time. Without the fundamental goal of having to sell the product, or hold it accountable to some kind of economy, there would be no reason for the discipline of engineering.
Ick. You've got to be kidding.
No, I'm not kidding. I feel a little like I did in the early 80's, when I loved my Apple ][, but all these Commodore 64 fans would squinch up their noses at the Apple's graphics and sound. I couldn't really defend it, but I knew I was so much better off with that machine than I'd been without it that I felt a great loyalty to it.
Polish and user-friendliness, I think, matter much more to some people than others. To some, it is pure functionality that matters most. Usually, people settle for a compromise.
About the lock-ups, that is true. I would say maybe once every three to four months, for some reason, the thing stops responding to the remote and you have to pull out the power cord to reboot it. People are going to respond in different ways to this. As a developer, I can understand a flaw like that, and it's never been anything but a minor inconvenience. However, I also keep in mind that I'm using one of their first models, and they stopped doing firmware upgrades to it over a year ago. Maybe I'd be more upset if it were a newer model.
About recording at ~3AM, I don't know. That's about when it would call to update its guide. I've never tried to record something then, and I'd be pretty upset if it weren't smart enough to postpone the call (which can be done manually if you happen to be watching at that time).
All in all, I don't know if I'd say the Tivo is "infinitely" more polished, but it has always struck me as more polished and somewhat experimental in its UI, which I think is good. However, you might say that the 2003 Corvette is more polished than the 1953 Corvette, but as far as utility and style, both are way beyond a Model T (which might represent a VCR).
Anyway, what I'm getting down to is that I can't see much of a reason for you to switch camps now, just as I don't feel there's much reason to switch camps either. Cnet's reviews of the two lines are almost neck and neck.
I think Tivo has benefitted from better marketing, and a much better name. It has also benefitted from its quirky recommendation system which has been featured in sitcoms. In everything I've read, the ReplayTV has better image quality and has innovated in some important areas such as networking and commercial skipping.
What I still don't understand is why, among the most technically savvy, there is such a huge imbalance in support, when a site like Cnet rates them almost equal.
I predict that by 2012, most Computer-Human Interface research will be dedicated to answering one lingering question:
Abort, Retry, Ignore?
The one that I remember most clearly is this:
If you have set a show to record repeatedly, and have some number of episodes stored (1-99), the comparison doc says there is no way to stop recording the show while also preserving the episodes already recorded.
It says the only way to do this is to use the "Preserve" function on each episode (which makes a copy of that episode), then delete the original show (which will delete the original set of episodes). It further says that this will not work if your drive is close to full, which is true.
Now, I will admit that the best solution to this problem does require a small insight which, from a usability point of view should be considered unacceptable. (i.e. the first time I was faced with this dilemma, it took me a few minutes to hit upon the solution) However, it isn't that bad once you figure it out:
For every repeating record, the machine will automatically record that show on any day of the week where it shows up in that time slot. However, you can uncheck any day, and that day will be skipped. If you uncheck all the days, it won't record at all. So, that show will basically be frozen with all the episodes that it already contains.
So, the solution is to uncheck seven checkboxes. That is not particularly discoverable, but once discovered, it is quick and effective.
That's my musty tome on the grave injustice done by that comparison doc. Honestly, having not used a Tivo, I feel awkward even comparing to it, but my experience has been so good, I can't imagine how it could be much better!
I can't tell whether the strange tone of this piece is characteristic of British writing, or just this author.
Anyway, the story really should have been about getting the piano to the tribe. If I was writing a short story, the piano would have been the main character--
An aged instrument is torn against its will from a diginfied, but meaningless twilight in luxury, portaged by sweaty, cursing soldiers through the steaming jungle mud, and deposited amongst a people at whose foreign touch it cringed.
But, over the course of two years, even as its cladding peeled away in the humidity, and insects came to violate its works, the instrument found a new purpose, straining against its own years to learn a new repertoire, and inspire its new people, as it had long ago inspired its own.
Ok, bidding for movie rights starts at $20,000. All proceeds to benefit the Indigenous Peoples' Keyboardists' Club.
Thanks for pointing me to that site. I've read a bit of it, and it didn't mention much about unexpected non-records on the ReplayTV, except if a program changes its time schedule significantly (which Survivor never has done).
Anyway, I am a ReplayTV partisan. Why? Because since November of 1999, I have never been disappointed in any way by my machine!
Now, I have never tried a Tivo, so maybe there is something I'm missing. But my ReplayTV has never skipped a show, I can search for shows easily, timeshifting and zipping back and forth is a no-brainer, the picture is great, it has a large enough hacking community that there are solutions for expansion and tweaking, and on and on.
Even some of the limitations mentioned in the comparison site I know to be false, even for my machine which is over three years old.
So, again, thank you for the resource, but I'm a demanding user, and I'm impressed that an early-model machine has satisfied me for over three years.
Engineering IS NOT independant of science
Yes, of course you are correct. You know it, I know it. But to the voters who must choose between $5 billion to build a supercollider or $5 billion in freeways and bridges, will they choose the scientist or the engineer?
I wrote my post poorly, so let me clarify. I was attempting to portray the dilemma of obtaining public funds for scientific research.
The perfect example is NASA. What do most people ask? "How is that going to help us?" Most people aren't satisfied by knowledge for its own sake, especially when their tax money is involved.
This is why, in my opinion, the public understands engineers better than scientists.
From what I have heard, this movie is a triumph of style over substance.
I loved TNG. I have a signed picture of the crew including the annoying kid, darnit!
But what made it so great were the characters and the dialog. All the actors grew so dramatically in those first three seasons, it more than redeemed those of us who endured jeers in the beginning. Captain Picard is a broad, cultural icon because of Patrick Stewart's famously modulated portrayal.
Unfortunately, and to my great chagrin, it sounds as though this delicate treasure has been defiled by the ruthless forces of Hollywood into a product that looks good on a poster, but lacks its essential soul.
I don't need more movies. I can just look at my autographed photo and smile.
And yet you quote Turing, a mathematician. hmm.
Well, he was nominally a mathematician, but he was also a philosopher, computer scientist, cryptographer, and biologist.
I guess I was trying to be a bit controversial by pitting engineers against scientists. Clearly, it is a chicken and egg relationship.
My main thought was that I think the general public has a much better grasp of the role of the engineer than the scientist, which likely affects public funding for "pure" science.
As for myself, my actual degree is in "computer systems engineering", though my degree was similar to my friends' "computer science" degrees. Both were granted by the Department of Engineering.
Just the way you describe your job, I personally think most science and engineering involves a combination of both disciplines.
Does engineering eat science's crumbs, or does science serve engineering's beck and call?
Of course the two are inderdependent. To a huge majority of people, most of whom have some kind of say in how resources are allocated, the goals of the scientist, however, often seem esoteric and even blasphemous.
However, the goals of the engineer are very clear: envision, design, implement, sell. Cars, computers, bridges, perfume bottles, guns.
Which is more important, Ms. Voter, the Scientist or the Engineer? Now, don't go thinking too much!
(disclaimer: I'm an engineer)
I want to second these points, and just ask: why does everybody, especially slashdotters focus so much on the Tivo, when ReplayTV is, technically, a superior product?
Its menus and program guide are perhaps a bit more traditional, and it doesn't try to out you unnecessarily (which may titillate some potential users), but ReplayTV has had some of these "new" Tivo features for months if not years.
Is it something aesthetic about the system? Is it the admittedly ingenious name? The remote? Constant references by comics and sitcoms?
Tell me!
I love my ReplayTV 2020 which I bought 3 years ago for $700 (before Tivo was a verb), then swapped in an 80GB drive for $300 20 months ago. My dog ate my first remote, so I got a new one ($40), but this expense has all been richly repaid in great functionality, and I am now a devoted fan.
The Viewer I'd rate "good", because it shows a path to potential interface improvements in the future, but not something I'd use today.
The WebQuotes is "better" because it leverages the architecture that Google is based on, and lets you see some of the reasons why that link is near the top.
But the Froogle service is clearly the "best". It has the potential to centralize the Internet's consumer marketplaces, enhancing competition and value. My only concern is that the big retailers will put up walls to Froogle's spiders. However, if Froogle becomes popular, they may be forced to join the party, or lose access to a growing meta-internet market.
Ladies and gentlemen, Google is reminding us that we live in exciting times.
US drivers (for some reason) have the right to refuse to wear seatbelts
I'm not sure where you got this impression. The US makes traffic laws on a state-by-state basis, so it does vary, but almost every state requires seat belt use.
Following is a "talking point" from buckleupamerica.org, which addresses seat belt laws in the US.
As of the year 2002, 18 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have safety belt laws with primary enforcement. A primary seat belt law allows officers to stop and ticket drivers for violating the safety belt law without observing any other infraction. The remaining states (except New Hampshire) have secondary laws. Secondary laws allow officers to give tickets for safety belt violations only after a car is stopped for some other violation.
And by the way, every private driver in the world has the ability to refuse to wear a seat belt, just as they have a ability to speed or make an illegal U turn. The issues of laws and enforcement of those laws just make those choices more or less likely.
In the US they are designed to try and save people who refuse to wear seat belts. Over here most people wear them
I'm always a little curious about broad statements, especially when comparing the habits of different societies.
I live in California, which is the most populous state, and has by far the most cars of any state, as well as the most stringent emissions laws. It turns out that, at least as of 1999, it also had the highest rate of seat belt use, nearly 90%. (Buckle up America Report, 2001)
At a national level, that 90% is considered a target number for 2005. As of 2002, national usage is at 75%, which was a sad surprise to me. Of course, each state has its own laws.
It isn't surprising to me that less than half of North Dakotans wear a seat belt, considering the rural environment and culture, but I would have thought the national average would be higher by now.
Interestingly, all the states that border California are also very high.
I like the ability to pause if I need to releave myself.
Awww, c'mon! Just hook up your trucker's tube and relax!
i have had a PVR for the last 15 years
I got excited there for a minute! (What kind of machine could he have built in 1987?)
I'll respond assuming you'd honestly like to know what the big deal is vis-a-vis PVRs vs. VCRs.
I've owned a Replay 2020 for several years (since before Tivo was a verb), and upgraded the drive, wore out one remote going on two, so I think I would be considered a somewhat knowledgeable user of PVRs.
In theory, you are right. What PVRs do is to take the 1970's architecture of the home VCR and incorporate 25 years of usage experience. The result is a machine which does (almost) everything a VCR can do, but much more quickly and conveniently, plus many other peripheral features which are only possible with modern technology.
For instance, to record a show while you're on vacation, you have to insert a tape, make sure it doesn't have anything useful on it, consult your TV Guide, then either program start and stop times manually for each show to record or enter VCR+ codes. Now, you can go away on vacation and your machine will record all these disparate programs onto a single tape, ready for your enjoyment.
This was fantastic for the 70's, but not for the 90's. These days, it's almost universally considered a pain in the neck.
The PVR incorporates an up-to-date onscreen program guide with a week or two of programming, which lets you simply flip around and mark shows of interest. You can search all the programs for certain actors, topics, or titles, and set up special "channels" that the machine will fill with shows you like.
Once captured, programs are stored in such a way that they are automatically organized, can easily be preserved or deleted, and can be watched endlessly with no loss of quality.
Both devices can speed through commercials, though the Replay 4000, 4500 and 5000 machines are the only ones that can automatically skip all commercials, if you choose. Or, you can skip 30 seconds at a time. Or, you can fast forward through them at various speeds up to 20x.
The only thing VCRs have over PVRs, and this is changing, is the ability to archive shows for longer periods of time.
I currently have 40 hours (80GB) of storage. I rarely approach this limit, even with my large collection of Primetime Glick episodes, assorted other series, movies, etc... However, when I do want to "save" something or give it to somebody else, I must record it from my ReplayTV to my VCR.
New PVRs such as the ReplayTVs I mentioned do have a peer-to-peer exchange capability. Unfortunately, very few people have upload bandwidth to the net that would make this very useful. It takes like 8 hours to send one episode of Giligan's Island to your friend Bob Denver. Within a household, where network speeds can soar, this is not a problem. However, even then, your PC will not be recognized as a client, so playback there or archival to DVD is impossible right now.
These things will change, however.
What I would say in closing, is that it is very easy to get used to having a PVR. The reason they haven't caught on is because they are expensive, and people figure they have all the functionality they need with a VCR. But the people who take the plunge and start using them get hooked. They'd sooner give up their microwaves.
Hey, why do I need a microwave oven, anyway? I love Mac and Cheese!
You KNOW you're hanging out at the wrong forum when someone has to preface their comment with THAT.
I resent the implication! I'm a jackass and proud of it!
Well how does it work with UT2003 and all the settings up in an intense CTF?
I don't play shooters, so I don't have a good idea of how it would do.
What I was more getting at, though, that, aside from sheer polygons per second, cards are gaining exponentially in the ability to approach true realism by other means (pixel shaders, bump mapping, texture mapping, etc...) which require special code.
I agree with what you're saying about the complexity of software. New generations of GPUs come out every 6 or 8 months, while a major game can take two years.
Oh well--I can wait!
Please. Just. Don't. Go. There.
Bill? Bill Shatner??
OK, all kidding aside, compared to $50 + $10/mo like most mmorpgs, the numbers aren't that different.
Just charging $50+$20/mo for a dazzling mmorpg could be one solution: Build a pretty but smallish world at first, then expand it quarterly on the revenue stream. Something like that could limit risk.
What you're suggesting is interesting, but just basically a toy, I think? Maybe just include some unbelievable screensavers or something, since gamers might blow back at you hard for an "extended demo," unless you were really clear about it.
That's actually one of the idea behing nVidia's whole CG thing.
Yeah, that is a very cool technology. As I understand it, it maps to an equivalent pixel shader language in DirectX 9 (but I think it goes further than DirectX).
Well, what I've heard is that it will make it much easier for developers to take advantage of the GPU's features, and I guess those elements just wouldn't run on an older card.
It's good in the long run, but after spending $200 on my new card, I guess I won't get the benefits until sometime down the road.
Heh--- funny you should mention that. That nature scene is the most stunning realtime rendering I've seen. I thought of mentioning it in my original post, but I didn't want to go on and on.
Honestly, it's the first time I've seen into a virtual world that I really wanted to visit.
I recently replaced my GeForce2 MX with a GeForce4 Ti 4200. I have a P3-1000.
Of course, the first thing I did was to download some of the NVidia demos, so I could witness the awesome power of my new card. I was especially interested in the wolfman demo.
Well, it was spectacular. You could drive him around, make his hair longer or shorter, change the lighting, etc... And the characterization was lightyears beyond anything in Dungeon Siege, Warcraft III, or any other current game.
Then, I hit escape, and I was back to reality.
That was three or four months ago. Realistically, I imagine I'll have to wait until Doom III, maybe 5 or 6 months more, before I can actually play a game which will take advantage of a non-trivial part of my new GPU's power.
How long will it be before an FX board will be taxed by a new game?
If people will pay $399 for a state of the art card, I suggest that some game publisher consider developing a game at the $199 or $249 price point which will really take advantage of these cards.
Otherwise, the best we can hope for is a few more frames of the same ugly polygons.