But you can't sit here and tell me that, in the day and age when we're blowing up near photorealistic procedurally programmed monsters, we can't sit down a GD table and agree on a way to embed a stupid typeface or figure out how to get halfway decent tracking.
You can embed typefaces all day long and I'll still set my browser to override with the one that has best readability on my display.
You can't know the typeface, you can't know the dpi, you can't know the view area size. Design accordingly.
The web ain't a book, but that doesn't mean it's exempt from the rules of visual communication.
The web has always been about semantic markup, the rules of written communication apply, visual is a distant second.
Dear MPAA,
You played Russian roulette, yes you played with many, many empty holes, but you also did it many times. You have a thick skull, so it'll take some time, keep it up!
Best death wishes,
the World
The stability of a driver is a function of how many useful bug reports get into the hands of the developer who wrote the driver.
Sorry, we don't support the binary blob for your kernel/device anymore, please install Linux Vista/buy new expensive device with no useful features added.
I see no trace of information loss in that statement, nor do I detect any hint of a resolution loss.
Pathetic. The most interesting property of the hologram--multiangle viewing--is lost and you don't see a trace of information loss? The resolution loss is just common sense, starting from the simple: why waste all that plate/film if all the information fits in a tiny bit (how tiny is exactly is enough to hold it all in your opinion?) of it?
A change in the resolution of your computer screen doesn't change the amount of information contained in your harddrive, merely the way it presents the information.
You'd be cutting away part of the hard drive as the hologram is the storage device.
Straw man. You were complaining that "average users" that also happen to be gamers are better of with Windows. While gamers may indeed be better served by the platform that runs their libraries it has nothing to do with beeing "average users". Because whoever those "average users" they may be, they are certainly not gamers.
I've seen many atempts to bend the "average user" into one or another direction in order to support ones position (no wonder with such a non-term), but this one borders on the absurd.
Look at it this way: the information not only exists in that little piece, but all the information exists at the same time in all of those pieces, so when you cut them, information-wise, you haven't done anything.
No it doesn't, each of those pieces holds part of the information, it just so happens that each part contains some information about the whole, but you only get full resolution when all the parts are together.
anything. A smaller piece will - because it is SMALLER - offer a smaller target against which the third laser will bounce and into your eyes. There are fewer photons that will be bounced back using a smaller piece - fewer photons, smaller image.
It goes like this: smaller piece -> less information -> fewer photons -> smaller image.
The "fact" that you, me and millions of others are totally convinced that double-blind experiments exist does not mean that our perceptions are conveying a true picture of "reality".
If that's the angle you are comming from... Been through that years ago, decided that the while interesting the notion that nothing exists as expierenced didn't have any actual effect on my understanding of the world. The most porbable explanation is still that the world exists largly as perceived, yes you can't prove it's real, so?
Heh, I actually can't feel inside my bones (yet). The main
reason I included it in the list is that I know it is possible
[..]
So you consider it possible without either objective nor
subjective evidence. I see...
Stare at the tip of your nose. You might be able adjust your
vision (ok, maybe focus was a bad word) so that without (seeming) to
move your eyes, you can see your nose from one side, and then the
other.
So defocusing after all. No shifting my eyes from one halftransparent
version of my nose to another doesn't seem like it moves at all. I can
see both of them in the middle for one. The other thing is of course
that I realize that my nose isn't half transparent. Desfocusing really
baffled me as a kid, I thought something was wrong with my eyes,
beacause I was seeing double.:-D
I actually completely agree with this, and hence the
category of the deluded. But concluding that something is impossible
just because a lot of people manage to incorrectly convince themself
that they can do it is the sort of logical fallacy that sceptics are so
quick to pick others up on.
Actually that's not how the thinking process goes. The large masses of
believers are the only evidence (or commonly available evidence if you
like that better) that such things actually exists, if you can find an
explanation for all the paranormal you have been informed about you
conclude that "that's it".
You are assuming that I can't substantiate them. Believe me, I took a LOT of convincing before I was even about to begin contemplating the idea that was I have been experiencing might be more than delusion. Maintaining a strict distinction between the real and imagined is something that I have striven to do throughout my entire life: I know full well how fallable the human mind can be, and its potential to be convinced that absolutely any belief is true. But there comes a point when one looks at all of the available evidence and delusion is no longer the most likely explanation.
That sounds compleatly hollow to me after the bit about knowing that you have the potential capability to feel inside of your bones. Sorry, but you aren't strict enough with yourself in this. On the other hand I understand that this is easy for me to say as the most "unreal" thing I have expierenced is melting of objects--with fever and a sleeping pill and dreamlike states--murmurs of voices when tired and dreams while falling asleep for only a few seconds.
*Sigh* -- they aren't that hard to find.
I may not be willing to dig through heaps of bullshit.
But if you insist, Nina Kulagina has been put under the most intense scientific scrutiny of those that I know about.
So the best you have smells of soviet propoganda three miles against the wind? The secrecy over potentialy military usefull tech in the soviet union is well known, yet they show it to whole world without even understanding it. Right.
The scientific establishment has enough trouble accepting that even something like acupuncture has merit, when there is a plethora of evidence showing that it really does work (anyone who accepts the theory that led to its development is immediately thrown out of the scientific community), let alone the more subtle and harder to test phenomena.
The merit the scientific community ascribes to acupuncture is mostly the merit of a placebo. Would a scientist who tried to explain gravity with yin and yang have a better expierence ("thrown out" is hyperbole IMHO)?
Because tables are ubreakable with font and screen size changes... I can always turn off CSS if I need a huge font or a narrow screen, with tables I'm stuck.
Something can't be "the same" and "less clear" at the same time. A progressive JPEG does not contain the whole image in the first bytes, yet your computer displays a smaller version. Welcome to/., you'll fit right in with Crazyjim1 and co (if any).
There's less chance for error or falsification in most parapsych tests than in pretty much any other scientific discipline. A number of skeptics (notably James Randi and other members of CSICOP) have tried to demonstrate how some of these tests could have been falsified, but they usually involve gymnastic skill, intimate advanced knowledge of building layouts, and are often so convoluted that Occam's Razor would suggest the veracity of psychic phenomena.
Only if the explanation of how the psychic phenomena works is less convulted would Occam's Razor be on it's side.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear MPAA, You played Russian roulette, yes you played with many, many empty holes, but you also did it many times. You have a thick skull, so it'll take some time, keep it up! Best death wishes, the World
The patent trolls of course.
They also patent things they have no idea how to make and if someone figures out.
What about additional instructions for graphics rendering?
Is anime pop now?
More books then in the library and also recent newspapers.
And what exactly does your rant says about "average users" beeing or not beeing gamers?
I know what a hologram is, thank you very much. Wilds speculation based on fictional properties of holograms is another matter.
Straw man. You were complaining that "average users" that also happen to be gamers are better of with Windows. While gamers may indeed be better served by the platform that runs their libraries it has nothing to do with beeing "average users". Because whoever those "average users" they may be, they are certainly not gamers.
I've seen many atempts to bend the "average user" into one or another direction in order to support ones position (no wonder with such a non-term), but this one borders on the absurd.
Q: Who am I? A: Hell
Wow, a keyboard and a screen cleaner in one!
Because tables are ubreakable with font and screen size changes... I can always turn off CSS if I need a huge font or a narrow screen, with tables I'm stuck.
The web is not a book.
Something can't be "the same" and "less clear" at the same time. A progressive JPEG does not contain the whole image in the first bytes, yet your computer displays a smaller version. Welcome to /., you'll fit right in with Crazyjim1 and co (if any).