As Freeman, you're dropped into this bleak future, and nothing gets explained about how the world ended up that way or anything along those lines. Correct me if I'm wrong, of course, because I could have missed it, unless the explanation was simply "crap hit the fan after Black Mesa"
Bit of a late reply - been on hols, but if you finish the airboat bit and get to Black Mesa East then Dr Vance will explain a bit about the 7 hour war and the installation of Dr Breen as administrator. This though is only activated if you zoom-look at the noticeboard with news clippings on it. In fact several 'plot' elements are revealed this way.
I use 'plot' in quotes as I think that you are in some measure correct, that HL2 could have been much more enjoyable had they actually made it more interpersonally interactive and less 'shoot things, get to next waypoint, shoot more things, next waypoint'. Just because it sits in the FPS genre, doesn't mean it has to be only shooting and slogging.
Where they really save is not having to spend that time cleaning up viruses, and spyware and installing 3 or 4 different anti-malware products, and keep them up to date. They also save in having a generally stable system.
You are preaching to the choir here:). My original point was that focussing on the immediate benefits (cost and learning curve) will be easily defeated by people who value their time, but, being neophytes, will not know of the associated benefits.
As a rider, I'm typing this on a Win XP box that has been up and running behind a FreeBSD NAT box for ~1.5 years and not once has a virus or spyware breached the defences. A sensible user employing common sense will be fairly immune to all attacks irrespective of OS. Thereby we see why most attacks are successful:).
My FreeBSD box, BTW, has been running for 3 years without a hiccup - so as far as well chosen free software, chosen for the task at hand, goes - I'm very aware of the advantages.
True, but that is made up of a heck of a load of 'fries with that?' jobs due to no degree of any type (and I'm including Drama Studies and all sorts of noddy subjects in 'Degree'). After the degree and elementary computer skills the average wage rockets. In my area (of the country), a starting wage is 28K for a wet behind the ears graduate in anything resembling tech. and if you aren't earning more than 35k after the first year there is something deeply wrong.
My calculation comes in a bit below yours as
a (or should I say my?) working day is actually 6.5hrs.
My apologies, I should have written "Most people who have basic tertiary qualifications and can tell the difference between a mouse and a keyboard earn 30UKP in under an hour".
Yep, not that difficult, assuming you have common sense, basic tertiary education (which almost anyone can get in the UK now) and elementary computer skills. That's about 40% of the working population here (I mean education and computer skills, common sense - thats about 10% here:)).
Many Windows users have got used to the way Windows does things and are too lazy to change to something that requires a bit of brain usage.
1) It is probably that the time spent learning new idioms is viewed as time lost by most users and so shifting from one OS to another is not viewed as effective use of their time. After all, if someone says I can save 30UKP by switching to X and it will just take a day of my time to get up to speed then I doubt they will. Most people earn 30UKP in under an hour, so where is the benefit? They'll need to save 200UKP before they break even.
2) Tarring Win users as lazy and unwilling to use their brains with a Linux install merely makes people think 'supercilious wanker' and turns people off from your real message that alternative OSs are more than cost and it's an ammortised set of tangible and intangible benefits.
Though certain that that is true, I fear that not following the robots.txt may harm any defence that the IA may use with respect to unathorised distribution.
If you're not getting change from 500 quid you're being conned mate
When I worked in one it did part production on a Pink Floyd album and all of a Def Leppard album. The day figures were above the 5k I quoted. It had 8 engineers. I doubt you could get 3 engineers for 500 a day. It quoted by the half hour.
A significant quanity of studio time went into producing that album. I think in addition to the £1.50 you are sending to Lester you need to factor in that the Label has paid a studio for the production & mixing of the CD and was hoping for profits from CD sales to recoup that initial outlay. Your model has removed that profit element and so the Label has lost on this. Your model only works if the artist has paid up front for the studio time. This second model is actually bad for emergent artists who can't pay the upfront studio time fees (well over 5k a day for a cheap studio) and are reliant on the label footing the upfront cost.
So you are suggesting that Emacs is going to
be able to *fit* on the hard drive? That's one big motha.
--
This religious war was brought to you with the letters V and E and the numbers 6, 6 & 6.
It is ironic that the real communists want to use GNU/Linux because it is free as in beer.
I think you'll find they are wanting to use it as it is 'free' as in 'not produced by a company in the country that has maintained a remarkably schizophrenic attitude to Cuba, attempted numerous coups and asassination attempts against the leader and is currently forcing the general populace to live below the poverty line by punitive trade embargoes all based on misplaced ideology':).
Do they need to know their multiplication times tables, if they have a cellphone?
Yes. Most emphatically yes. It is the knowledge of what range or magnitude of an answer you expect from a calculation that is the most elementary error check on your result. Even knowing what the first digit should be from a multiplication adds another check.
Just plugging numbers into a calculator gives you the answer if you are perfect. If you mistype it merely gives you unsubstantiated garbage and no appreciation for the problem space.
The 'necklace burning' that is described has an additional effect that the duct tape doesn't. It fries the film inside the camera that is already exposed with images of ner-do-wells who triggered it already (Every 2-3 weeks the film is replaced in Gatsos).
In addition, some cameras are accused of being revenue generation devices and not safety devices (I can name one Truvelo in Nottighamshire hidden behind a bridge supoport post before Markham on the A1 on a 3 km stretch of straight road). The burning makes them uneconomic at 20,000UKP a pop.
Fewer restrictions to who? By imposing fewer restrictions like in BSD, you impose more restrictions on people who get the software from a third party. And now it's suddenly less free because those people have less freedom.
So you keep saying - less freedom for what? The original BSD'ed code is still available. The person who took in the BSD code for the non-free project hasn't un-freed the orginal code. It still exists as free usable code. The new, closed, project isn't free, but is hasn't somehow slurped the orginal free code out of existence. With or without the new closed project the original free code still exists. It maintains status quo.
In other words: whether the BSD license is more free completely depends on one's view
Agreed, but only 2 posts ago you were asserting that the BSD lic. is only free if you "define free as [...]to remove freedom". You didn't allow the possiblity of point of view at all. You said it was the "only way".
It's useless to slander GPL with "OMG BSD is free and GPL is t3h evil and viral LOlololololol!!!!111"
If you thought my post was attempting to assert that the GPL is viral (I have never asserted that and have been involved in 2 GPLed projects - happily) or comprising leetspeak then frankly I think you have comprehension issues
It's only "more" free if you define "free" as "having the freedom to remove freedom from those who you distribute the software to".
Disingenuous argument there. There are many ways one can posit that the BSD lic. os 'more free' than the GPL. Not the dubious 'only if free means removing freedoms' way you assert.
'More free in that it imposes fewer restrictions' is one simple example. The OP definately put quotes round 'free' in his original comment acknowledging that free is often a complex issue WRT licenses.
I would even suggest that your assertion that the BSD lic. removes freedom is false in that the original code that was imported into the hypothetical closed project isn't closed by the same project, it still roams free and available. Only the closed projects utilisation of that code is never released - there is nothing 'lost' in this.
It seesm in the US, whenever lawmakers wish to introduce some particularly bizarre or unpalatable legislation they name it the 'Family and... Act' or 'Little Billy Act' or some such other name to give it that warm cosy feeling that makes people think 'Hmm my fair use rights went out the window but at least the family is safe.'
God forbid the is ever written a Lil' Brudder Act. It probably would hide the fact they intend to poison anyone who isn't white and right wing Christian.
I think I mostly meant the data in a raw for a given camera needs different processing to create an image because as you point out the pixel positions are different and as someone else mentioned the pixel shapes are different so the interpolation of raw to TIFF or BMP requires different transforms.
What I mean is that the physical layout of the image capture device is implicit in the raw and to create a 'common raw' would restrict designers to a given physical layout, unless in creating the 'common raw' file some interpolation from the 'raw raw' of the camera to a 'common raw' took place. This would result in the pros demainding to see the 'raw raw' as it is truer than the 'common raw'.
I suppose, if the raw isn't really what is pulled off the CCD but is in fact preprocessed to give (maybe?) an RGBA grid then what you say is correct.
but I think the preferred goal is to have camera manufacturers standardize on ONE format.
How can camera manufacturers standardise on one raw format, unless they all agree to use exactly the same technology to capture the image in the first place? I thought the idea of raw was that it's what is pulled off the CCD (or whatever other technology is there) with no preprocessing?
Unless all manufacturers agree to have a set of given 'constants' in camera manufacture it ain't gonna work.
It just goes to show why there is the lack of understanding some people have of history when they can answer when the Gettysburg Address was but don't actually know why the American civil war started in the first place.
I'm not suggesting that you are one of these, but that the multiple choice exam system is used so frequently because of lazy exam writers who don't want to put the effort into writing a well structured essay type exam question when:
When was the battle of Wounded Knee?:
(a) 1890
(b) 2048
(c) 1623
(d) 1066
Fills a tickbox of 'was an exam set for this course'?
Yes, it seems to have morphed into a bland comic strip atop a bunch of postings by people who seem to think that virtual group hugs and virtual coffee houses that give out virtual coffes and 'mime's/emotes of drinking this virtual coffee is in any way remotely normal.
Oh, and group/public virtual self flagellation seems the norm.
Typical threads go:
Pootle: Ugh, I feel awful, shouted at mom.
Banangirl: Aaaaaaaawwwwwww {{{{{Pootle}}}}}
Zippy: Sorry to hear that {{{{Pootle}}}}
Grinch: Terrible {{{{{Mom}}}}}, {{Pootle}}
Flippy: Ow! {{{{{{{{{{Everyone}}}}}}}}}
Genuinely, the SNES and Dreamcast had audio RAM with the specific purpose of storing game sounds but I remember hearing the term in the late 80's and early 90's to also describe RAM of such low quality that random bit drops were common and so could only be used for loss tolerant applications.
I'd recommend asking on alt.folklore.computers - I've googled on there but come up blank even restricting the phrase to 1980-1992 (except for SNES & Gravis references).
I think it is a matter of semantics. A 'legal torrent site' is a site that 'hosts links to torrents of provably legal data'; and 'illegal torrent site' is a site that 'hosts links to torrents of provably illegal (in many jurisdictions) data'. It doesn't really say much regarding the legality or otherwise of the hub itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Bit of a late reply - been on hols, but if you finish the airboat bit and get to Black Mesa East then Dr Vance will explain a bit about the 7 hour war and the installation of Dr Breen as administrator. This though is only activated if you zoom-look at the noticeboard with news clippings on it. In fact several 'plot' elements are revealed this way.
I use 'plot' in quotes as I think that you are in some measure correct, that HL2 could have been much more enjoyable had they actually made it more interpersonally interactive and less 'shoot things, get to next waypoint, shoot more things, next waypoint'. Just because it sits in the FPS genre, doesn't mean it has to be only shooting and slogging.
You are preaching to the choir here :). My original point was that focussing on the immediate benefits (cost and learning curve) will be easily defeated by people who value their time, but, being neophytes, will not know of the associated benefits.
As a rider, I'm typing this on a Win XP box that has been up and running behind a FreeBSD NAT box for ~1.5 years and not once has a virus or spyware breached the defences. A sensible user employing common sense will be fairly immune to all attacks irrespective of OS. Thereby we see why most attacks are successful :).
My FreeBSD box, BTW, has been running for 3 years without a hiccup - so as far as well chosen free software, chosen for the task at hand, goes - I'm very aware of the advantages.
True, but that is made up of a heck of a load of 'fries with that?' jobs due to no degree of any type (and I'm including Drama Studies and all sorts of noddy subjects in 'Degree'). After the degree and elementary computer skills the average wage rockets. In my area (of the country), a starting wage is 28K for a wet behind the ears graduate in anything resembling tech. and if you aren't earning more than 35k after the first year there is something deeply wrong.
My calculation comes in a bit below yours as a (or should I say my?) working day is actually 6.5hrs.
Yep, not that difficult, assuming you have common sense, basic tertiary education (which almost anyone can get in the UK now) and elementary computer skills. That's about 40% of the working population here (I mean education and computer skills, common sense - thats about 10% here :)).
1) It is probably that the time spent learning new idioms is viewed as time lost by most users and so shifting from one OS to another is not viewed as effective use of their time. After all, if someone says I can save 30UKP by switching to X and it will just take a day of my time to get up to speed then I doubt they will. Most people earn 30UKP in under an hour, so where is the benefit? They'll need to save 200UKP before they break even.
2) Tarring Win users as lazy and unwilling to use their brains with a Linux install merely makes people think 'supercilious wanker' and turns people off from your real message that alternative OSs are more than cost and it's an ammortised set of tangible and intangible benefits.
Though certain that that is true, I fear that not following the robots.txt may harm any defence that the IA may use with respect to unathorised distribution.
I'm still in touch with some of the guys from Leppard - this is PMSL funny phrase. Many thanks for the laugh and can I use it?
When I worked in one it did part production on a Pink Floyd album and all of a Def Leppard album. The day figures were above the 5k I quoted. It had 8 engineers. I doubt you could get 3 engineers for 500 a day. It quoted by the half hour.
A significant quanity of studio time went into producing that album. I think in addition to the £1.50 you are sending to Lester you need to factor in that the Label has paid a studio for the production & mixing of the CD and was hoping for profits from CD sales to recoup that initial outlay. Your model has removed that profit element and so the Label has lost on this. Your model only works if the artist has paid up front for the studio time. This second model is actually bad for emergent artists who can't pay the upfront studio time fees (well over 5k a day for a cheap studio) and are reliant on the label footing the upfront cost.
He would have to be bloody well endowed. The statue of David is in the Uffizi in Florence and the Vatican is 280km away...
So you are suggesting that Emacs is going to be able to *fit* on the hard drive? That's one big motha. -- This religious war was brought to you with the letters V and E and the numbers 6, 6 & 6.
I think you'll find they are wanting to use it as it is 'free' as in 'not produced by a company in the country that has maintained a remarkably schizophrenic attitude to Cuba, attempted numerous coups and asassination attempts against the leader and is currently forcing the general populace to live below the poverty line by punitive trade embargoes all based on misplaced ideology' :).
Yes. Most emphatically yes. It is the knowledge of what range or magnitude of an answer you expect from a calculation that is the most elementary error check on your result. Even knowing what the first digit should be from a multiplication adds another check.
Just plugging numbers into a calculator gives you the answer if you are perfect. If you mistype it merely gives you unsubstantiated garbage and no appreciation for the problem space.
In addition, some cameras are accused of being revenue generation devices and not safety devices (I can name one Truvelo in Nottighamshire hidden behind a bridge supoport post before Markham on the A1 on a 3 km stretch of straight road). The burning makes them uneconomic at 20,000UKP a pop.
So you keep saying - less freedom for what? The original BSD'ed code is still available. The person who took in the BSD code for the non-free project hasn't un-freed the orginal code. It still exists as free usable code. The new, closed, project isn't free, but is hasn't somehow slurped the orginal free code out of existence. With or without the new closed project the original free code still exists. It maintains status quo.
In other words: whether the BSD license is more free completely depends on one's view
Agreed, but only 2 posts ago you were asserting that the BSD lic. is only free if you "define free as [...]to remove freedom". You didn't allow the possiblity of point of view at all. You said it was the "only way".
It's useless to slander GPL with "OMG BSD is free and GPL is t3h evil and viral LOlololololol!!!!111"
If you thought my post was attempting to assert that the GPL is viral (I have never asserted that and have been involved in 2 GPLed projects - happily) or comprising leetspeak then frankly I think you have comprehension issues
Disingenuous argument there. There are many ways one can posit that the BSD lic. os 'more free' than the GPL. Not the dubious 'only if free means removing freedoms' way you assert.
'More free in that it imposes fewer restrictions' is one simple example. The OP definately put quotes round 'free' in his original comment acknowledging that free is often a complex issue WRT licenses.
I would even suggest that your assertion that the BSD lic. removes freedom is false in that the original code that was imported into the hypothetical closed project isn't closed by the same project, it still roams free and available. Only the closed projects utilisation of that code is never released - there is nothing 'lost' in this.
God forbid the is ever written a Lil' Brudder Act. It probably would hide the fact they intend to poison anyone who isn't white and right wing Christian.
What I mean is that the physical layout of the image capture device is implicit in the raw and to create a 'common raw' would restrict designers to a given physical layout, unless in creating the 'common raw' file some interpolation from the 'raw raw' of the camera to a 'common raw' took place. This would result in the pros demainding to see the 'raw raw' as it is truer than the 'common raw'.
I suppose, if the raw isn't really what is pulled off the CCD but is in fact preprocessed to give (maybe?) an RGBA grid then what you say is correct.
I really hope I made myself clear :).
How can camera manufacturers standardise on one raw format, unless they all agree to use exactly the same technology to capture the image in the first place? I thought the idea of raw was that it's what is pulled off the CCD (or whatever other technology is there) with no preprocessing? Unless all manufacturers agree to have a set of given 'constants' in camera manufacture it ain't gonna work.
... is actually number 11 - he swapped with Gordon Brown as No. 11 is bigger and Brown didn't have a family at the time.
It's the sound of a dead horse being flogged - again and again and again.
It just goes to show why there is the lack of understanding some people have of history when they can answer when the Gettysburg Address was but don't actually know why the American civil war started in the first place.
I'm not suggesting that you are one of these, but that the multiple choice exam system is used so frequently because of lazy exam writers who don't want to put the effort into writing a well structured essay type exam question when:
When was the battle of Wounded Knee?:
(a) 1890
(b) 2048
(c) 1623
(d) 1066
Fills a tickbox of 'was an exam set for this course'?
Typical threads go:
Pootle: Ugh, I feel awful, shouted at mom.
Banangirl: Aaaaaaaawwwwwww {{{{{Pootle}}}}}
Zippy: Sorry to hear that {{{{Pootle}}}}
Grinch: Terrible {{{{{Mom}}}}}, {{Pootle}}
Flippy: Ow! {{{{{{{{{{Everyone}}}}}}}}}
I'd recommend asking on alt.folklore.computers - I've googled on there but come up blank even restricting the phrase to 1980-1992 (except for SNES & Gravis references).
I think it is a matter of semantics. A 'legal torrent site' is a site that 'hosts links to torrents of provably legal data'; and 'illegal torrent site' is a site that 'hosts links to torrents of provably illegal (in many jurisdictions) data'. It doesn't really say much regarding the legality or otherwise of the hub itself.