I called American Airlines recently, and they did something like this. Their system was still annoying as heck (saying "Please state your tracking number now" or something, when I had no idea what a tracking number was), but it understood my answer of "I don't know". The problem was its timing was really stupid; I answered one question and then cleared my throat, and it took that as the answer to the next question and I never got to hear what it was. But even though it didn't seem to help all that much, I was fairly impressed by their voice recognition.
Given your skill at using the apostrophe, I suggest you go straight to the venerable institution of Bob the Angry Flower. I'm sure you'll learn a lot there.
You don't get CARP. It doesn't matter if they play all non-RIAA content - unless they've got logs from the past three years to prove it.
Plus, the law is set up to assume that absolutely all music in the world comes from the RIAA, and then they have some weird agency that would supposedly give the money back to whoever it was supposed to go to in those cases where it doesn't.
Welcome to Slashdot, where Copyright == Trademark.
It even says on the page you linked: "'Have Fun!' is a registered trademark of Pat O'Brien's".
Which is still somewhat absurd, but they probably do have some legal ground - if some competing establishment tried to use "Have Fun!" as a slogan, it would justifiably be considered trademark infringement.
If the words "Have Fun!" really were considered a copyrightable work of literature, it would indeed be the most ludicrous copyright ever, so it's rather nice that that's entirely untrue.
Truman Show? You must be kidding. Did you get the permission of us slashdot crowd over here beofore you uttered such hersey?
Wow.
I've seen several posters stupid enough to believe in the existence of a Slashborg, a collective mass of all Slashdotters which shares one opinion.
This is the first time, though, that I've seen someone claim that he is the Slashborg, even speaking in the first person plural.
Poster: what did you expect? A rally of support? "Yeah! Right on! The Truman Show can be dismissed as a bad movie without watching it because Jim Carrey is in it, and therefore it causes homosexuality too! We bow down to you, Mr. Coward!"
The address thing doesn't sound like a serious problem, but MIT should learn when not to outsource.
They give incoming freshmen an online writing test. During the June test, the site went down. Instead of the page where you could submit your essays, you would get - a.NET error message.
When the site went back up I noticed a credit on the page noting that the software was written by Microsoft.
Meanwhile, other online tools that prefrosh have needed to use - the ones that were designed at MIT and run on Athena - have been rock solid.
I'm making the distinction between anti-aliased text that takes hinting into account (apparently - I have no idea what the font renderers are doing behind the scenes), versus the kind that tries to be "picture-perfect" to what the letter would look like at a higher resolution.
In the comparisons of "before Quartz" and "after Quartz", the text is anti-aliased in both cases; the "before" case is somewhat distorted from the true form but very crisp, yet the curves are still smooth and AAed, and the "after" case is the ugly fuzzy one.
I'd like to see a comparison between reasonable anti-aliasing and un-anti-aliased fonts. Every page I've seen that wants to say "anti-aliasing is bad" shows some excessively anti-aliased text as an example. The example on that page can only cause me to conclude that Corel Photo-Paint's anti-aliasing is really bad. Heck, it looks like he ran it through a blur filter afterward just to make his point. AA on my GNOME desktop does not look like that.
(I'm not saying that GTK's AA is perfect. Diagonal lines tend to disappear.)
I'm reminded of when Mac users show examples of anti-aliased paragraphs of text rendered "before Quartz" and "after Quartz", raving over how perfect the "after Quartz" picture looks. The "before Quartz" one always looks MUCH better to read, as Quartz makes each character absolutely true to the letter form but, as a trade-off, really fuzzy.
I assume that the good antialiasing also takes hinting into consideration. So, are there any comparisons between properly-hinted AA and non-AA text?
"A bit of badgering?" They will automatically remove any site whose robots.txt denies them, so it's not like they're trying to make it hard to get out of their archive.
Perhaps they were more uncooperative because you were being nasty in your e-mail to them.
(wasn't midi fully capable of emulating the piano? what's this for!?)
Disklavier music is saved in a (I think slightly extended) MIDI format.
MIDI is capable of emulating the piano, provided that you have the appropriate instrument to play it back on.
You seem to understand what MIDI is, but let me digress for the benefit of other people. Most people's experience with MIDI is General MIDI, where the music is played back through a computer's sound card, which simply takes pre-recorded sound samples and mixes them together. This is why General MIDI sucks.
You could play MIDI back on a higher-quality electric piano, and get a somewhat higher-quality sound. (Assuming it's a good MIDI with the appropriate velocity information in the first place.)
Or you could play it on a Disklavier, an acoustic piano which plays back MIDI as accurately as possible.
Does Quartz even take advantage of hinting? In the original screenshot, the lines of the letters seem to be much better separated. It distorts the letter forms somewhat, sure, but it's a whole lot easier to read. The second screenshot is a blurry mess.
If it is, what would your point be? Can you point to any reputable source saying that split infinitives are always wrong?
It seems to me that "don't split infinitives" is one of those fake grammar rules made up by self-important people, just like "don't end sentences with prepositions". Each one can be awkward, but it is not inherently wrong.
Right! If you're concerned about security, all you need to do is run a command you got off of Slashdot as root!
(Seriously, why does this need to be root? Is there that big a chance that there would be suid root files under directories that a normal user can't look in?)
If people are pirating a movie that the studio hasn't released a subtitled version of yet, then either:
They are content to watch it in English, so an English version should have been released.
One or a few fans, working independently, subtitled the movie before the studio could, in which case it's tough shit for the studio. Perhaps they should hire the subtitlers so they're not so slow next time.
We aren't doing it here because you can't freaking get energy from water unless you put more energy into it first and defeat the purpose.
You mention "fuel cells with solar power regeneration" as a source for energy. Why do so many people think you can make energy into more energy by converting it? Why not use the solar power and skip the fuel cells?
Your ecological utopia where free energy flows from nature sounds nice, but can we talk about the real universe?
Slashdot Mirror
I called American Airlines recently, and they did something like this. Their system was still annoying as heck (saying "Please state your tracking number now" or something, when I had no idea what a tracking number was), but it understood my answer of "I don't know". The problem was its timing was really stupid; I answered one question and then cleared my throat, and it took that as the answer to the next question and I never got to hear what it was. But even though it didn't seem to help all that much, I was fairly impressed by their voice recognition.
If you're being that picky, then the least you could do is use punctuation that doesn't suck.
Given your skill at using the apostrophe, I suggest you go straight to the venerable institution of Bob the Angry Flower. I'm sure you'll learn a lot there.
The problem here is several parent posters using "CSS" and "DeCSS" interchangeably.
You don't get CARP. It doesn't matter if they play all non-RIAA content - unless they've got logs from the past three years to prove it.
Plus, the law is set up to assume that absolutely all music in the world comes from the RIAA, and then they have some weird agency that would supposedly give the money back to whoever it was supposed to go to in those cases where it doesn't.
Oh right. IANAL.
Welcome to Slashdot, where Copyright == Trademark.
It even says on the page you linked: "'Have Fun!' is a registered trademark of Pat O'Brien's".
Which is still somewhat absurd, but they probably do have some legal ground - if some competing establishment tried to use "Have Fun!" as a slogan, it would justifiably be considered trademark infringement.
If the words "Have Fun!" really were considered a copyrightable work of literature, it would indeed be the most ludicrous copyright ever, so it's rather nice that that's entirely untrue.
Thanks for discrediting your own post.
It's quite amusing when people think it helps their argument to invoke the fallacy of the slippery slope by name.
...and the movie projector, if you're watching a movie.
...and the car's electronics, if you're in a car.
...and probably someone's pacemaker.
Not a good idea.
ing a sentence in the subject and finishing it in the body is rather annoying?
Maintain users
That's easy... there's one user, called "root".
Setup quotes
Quotas? You must be talking about some other OS.
Setup apache
And immediately get hacked because everything runs as root.
These are worthy features for a Linux distribution... but Lindows is not really a Linux distribution.
Rootkit? You don't need to rootkit a Lindows machine. It already runs everything as root.
Wow.
I've seen several posters stupid enough to believe in the existence of a Slashborg, a collective mass of all Slashdotters which shares one opinion.
This is the first time, though, that I've seen someone claim that he is the Slashborg, even speaking in the first person plural.
Poster: what did you expect? A rally of support? "Yeah! Right on! The Truman Show can be dismissed as a bad movie without watching it because Jim Carrey is in it, and therefore it causes homosexuality too! We bow down to you, Mr. Coward!"
The address thing doesn't sound like a serious problem, but MIT should learn when not to outsource.
.NET error message.
They give incoming freshmen an online writing test. During the June test, the site went down. Instead of the page where you could submit your essays, you would get - a
When the site went back up I noticed a credit on the page noting that the software was written by Microsoft.
Meanwhile, other online tools that prefrosh have needed to use - the ones that were designed at MIT and run on Athena - have been rock solid.
Perhaps you didn't read all of my comment...
I'm making the distinction between anti-aliased text that takes hinting into account (apparently - I have no idea what the font renderers are doing behind the scenes), versus the kind that tries to be "picture-perfect" to what the letter would look like at a higher resolution.
In the comparisons of "before Quartz" and "after Quartz", the text is anti-aliased in both cases; the "before" case is somewhat distorted from the true form but very crisp, yet the curves are still smooth and AAed, and the "after" case is the ugly fuzzy one.
I'd like to see a comparison between reasonable anti-aliasing and un-anti-aliased fonts. Every page I've seen that wants to say "anti-aliasing is bad" shows some excessively anti-aliased text as an example. The example on that page can only cause me to conclude that Corel Photo-Paint's anti-aliasing is really bad. Heck, it looks like he ran it through a blur filter afterward just to make his point. AA on my GNOME desktop does not look like that.
(I'm not saying that GTK's AA is perfect. Diagonal lines tend to disappear.)
I'm reminded of when Mac users show examples of anti-aliased paragraphs of text rendered "before Quartz" and "after Quartz", raving over how perfect the "after Quartz" picture looks. The "before Quartz" one always looks MUCH better to read, as Quartz makes each character absolutely true to the letter form but, as a trade-off, really fuzzy.
I assume that the good antialiasing also takes hinting into consideration. So, are there any comparisons between properly-hinted AA and non-AA text?
"A bit of badgering?" They will automatically remove any site whose robots.txt denies them, so it's not like they're trying to make it hard to get out of their archive.
Perhaps they were more uncooperative because you were being nasty in your e-mail to them.
Hey, at least it helpfully asks if you want to refine your search to "knitting books".
(wasn't midi fully capable of emulating the piano? what's this for!?)
Disklavier music is saved in a (I think slightly extended) MIDI format.
MIDI is capable of emulating the piano, provided that you have the appropriate instrument to play it back on.
You seem to understand what MIDI is, but let me digress for the benefit of other people. Most people's experience with MIDI is General MIDI, where the music is played back through a computer's sound card, which simply takes pre-recorded sound samples and mixes them together. This is why General MIDI sucks.
You could play MIDI back on a higher-quality electric piano, and get a somewhat higher-quality sound. (Assuming it's a good MIDI with the appropriate velocity information in the first place.)
Or you could play it on a Disklavier, an acoustic piano which plays back MIDI as accurately as possible.
What a difference indeed.
Does Quartz even take advantage of hinting? In the original screenshot, the lines of the letters seem to be much better separated. It distorts the letter forms somewhat, sure, but it's a whole lot easier to read. The second screenshot is a blurry mess.
If it is, what would your point be? Can you point to any reputable source saying that split infinitives are always wrong?
It seems to me that "don't split infinitives" is one of those fake grammar rules made up by self-important people, just like "don't end sentences with prepositions". Each one can be awkward, but it is not inherently wrong.
Right! If you're concerned about security, all you need to do is run a command you got off of Slashdot as root!
(Seriously, why does this need to be root? Is there that big a chance that there would be suid root files under directories that a normal user can't look in?)
Domain names starting with bq-- are Unicode domain names mangled back into ASCII, so you were probably in the right place.
They are content to watch it in English, so an English version should have been released.
One or a few fans, working independently, subtitled the movie before the studio could, in which case it's tough shit for the studio. Perhaps they should hire the subtitlers so they're not so slow next time.
We aren't doing it here because you can't freaking get energy from water unless you put more energy into it first and defeat the purpose.
You mention "fuel cells with solar power regeneration" as a source for energy. Why do so many people think you can make energy into more energy by converting it? Why not use the solar power and skip the fuel cells?
Your ecological utopia where free energy flows from nature sounds nice, but can we talk about the real universe?