What? You think there won't be any ipv6 nat devices? First off, there already are. Secondly, the reason comcast charges for extra IPs is because they, like everyone else, needs to be fairly frugal about handing out IPs. ipv6 negates that.
And by the way, comcast for SURE knows that people are using NAT ("none the wiser?" please). That's why they tell you to connect your computer directly to the cable modem when you have a problem. Some ISPs even GIVE you modems with built in NAT.
Oh so you never like to transfer large files to your laptop? Or make backups to the network? Or do any kind of bulk transfer that rsync can't cover effectively? Any time I have to do a large transfer, I have to hook my laptop up to the ethernet, because it's a lot faster, and does approach wire speed (unlike wireless).
I'm sure they said the same thing before 100baseTX was ubiquitous.
You might've wanted to put a SPOILER WARNING SINCE YOU DID IT IN THE THIRD SENTENCE! You want people to see the movie, then you kill it right away? Nice.
Did you just miss the point of everything I just said? When you edit stuff in photoshop, where do you think the pixel pushing algos comes from? Do you think Adobe just decided, this is what's going to happen when I use the burn in tool? When I adjust exposure levels? When I compensate for f-stops? No, they took what would happen if you did it in the darkroom, and transposed it into a digital process. Not understanding WHY it does what it does can severely limit you're understanding of what will happen in the digital realm.
I've either been trolled (very poorly) or you really DON'T get it... which is kind of scary.
Crap, forget breaks... readable version:
What? In one fell swoop, you completely underlined WHY it's important to know how traditional film processing and enlarging work.
When I say 'print photos', I'm referring to the developing process. That's how you traditionally PRINT A PHOTO; when you tell a photographer, "I need a print of that photo," that means 'make a new copy of the negative onto photo paper from your darkroom', not out of your printer. You enlarge the negative onto photo paper after futzing around with exposure times and apertures (this is on the enlarger, NOT the camera lens), as well as chemical temps and adjusting for what the film was originally designed for (also called 'pushing' film - when you 'push' film to go at ISO speeds it was never originally intended to do). I mean do you even know what those photoshop tools for dodging and burning CAME from?!?
Photography is just like any medium that requires practice to become good at. Do you think musicians just skip the basics and jump to all the cool and interesting stuff right away? Well, maybe once in awhile, but for the majority of the time, it's a very good idea to learn the basics, to learn *why* what certain chord progressions and techniques lead to certain end results, and then build upon them. It's similar with all things like that, including photography. I mean you do realize that Photoshop takes basic photo print techniques and piles all sorts of stuff on top that would be very difficult or next to impossible to realize in the darkroom, right? It's the same thing.
Again, some people should either take a quick (and usually very entertaining) class in film development, or at least read a book on how it works. After that, suddenly all sorts of stuff make sense, like why a histogram is better with certain settings, how grain works in various types of film to achieve a certain look, and how ISO, apertures, depth of field, and f-stops all work together at various parts of the developing process really change the output.
What? In one fell swoop, you completely underlined WHY it's important to know how traditional film processing and enlarging work.
When I say 'print photos', I'm referring to the developing process. That's how you traditionally PRINT A PHOTO; when you tell a photographer, "I need a print of that photo," that means 'make a new copy of the negative onto photo paper from your darkroom', not out of your printer. You enlarge the negative onto photo paper after futzing around with exposure times and apertures (this is on the enlarger, NOT the camera lens), as well as chemical temps and adjusting for what the film was originally designed for (also called 'pushing' film - when you 'push' film to go at ISO speeds it was never originally intended to do). I mean do you even know what those photoshop tools for dodging and burning CAME from?!?
Photography is just like any medium that requires practice to become good at. Do you think musicians just skip the basics and jump to all the cool and interesting stuff right away? Well, maybe once in awhile, but for the majority of the time, it's a very good idea to learn the basics, to learn *why* what certain chord progressions and techniques lead to certain end results, and then build upon them. It's similar with all things like that, including photography. I mean you do realize that Photoshop takes basic photo print techniques and piles all sorts of stuff on top that would be very difficult or next to impossible to realize in the darkroom, right? It's the same thing.
Again, some people should either take a quick (and usually very entertaining) class in film development, or at least read a book on how it works. After that, suddenly all sorts of stuff make sense, like why a histogram is better with certain settings, how grain works in various types of film to achieve a certain look, and how ISO, apertures, depth of field, and f-stops all work together at various parts of the developing process really change the output.
Spoken like some completely without any clue. Here's a hint: awesome photography comes from a combination of knowing what makes a good photo (see the past) and taking advantage of future tech. No one said chemistry will not be in mainstream use in 20 years. What I'm saying is, know what makes digital an advantage (likeon-the-fly editing capabilities not inherent in printing) and how prints actually show up on paper (how certain colors bleed into each other on various papers and how pushing the film can affect grain). IOW, take the basics, and do something completely new.
Wow, that's a really convincing argument there. I suggest taking a photo film class for taking and developing your own film, and you'll see why people that have done it are both extremely appreciative of digital, and also love the film.
I do B&W only. As soon as digital can come up with something that can come close to an LF b&w back, I'm all about it. And please don't say "reduce to grayscale"... sometimes that filter comes up with the WEIRDEST approximations...
...I'm finding that most companies will stall your order for days for reasons from random extra checks through to migration of lesser known species of Vole, business needs be damned!
Can someone please translate that into a sentence? Seriously... I can wade through some of the typical grammatical errors, but come on...
Well, your analogy is way off then. Maybe you should've pointed out something that is universally lauded for being a bottom feeder show, ie anything with Paris Hilton in it, or whatever is the equivalent of "Temptation Island" these day.
Wait a second, you take a hokey but entertaining show (24) and a very well written character drama (Lost) and try and say they are BAD? Excuse me, but those are probably the BEST examples of TV done RIGHT.
Are you really that clueless? The person who gives you the most loyalty more often than not IS the person with the most skills. Why? Because if you did it right, you helped to increase their skill level through training, and through their increased skill level, rewarded them with adequate incentives, such as a good salary, job perks, and plenty of benefits, not to mention at that point, they should have developed a good work related comraderie with the people they most often work with. THIS is why in the past, many people wanted to work for a company for a LONG time. Jumping ship to another company would have them starting out the whole cycle all over again; while they may start out a decent pay, the whole other aspect of re-developing work rapports and all that has to start from the beginning.
Unfortunately, companies these days want the shortcut of just getting someone with experience and skills into the job. People are treated as a commodity, and while there *is* validity in that, it completely negates the human aspect of the position. In other words, you can get the greatest and most skilled employee in a position, but if they are condescending and other people who've been there longer can't get along with them, employee satisfaction drops, and productivity drops.
What a horrible vision for future interfaces. It's like you took the worst from every scifi book and show (the stuff that looks flashy), tossed out the usefullness, and threw it all into a messy pot to make the wet dreams of someone who thought the movie "Hackers" was what the internet would become.
With text games, you can sit there at the prompt, go make a sandwich, then come back and play more.
There is such a thing as pausing most games, right?
You're comparing an action RPG with a traditional, role playing RPG? What? Then you completely struck me as misinformed with that Resident Evil comment. I have always thought that Res Evil was boring UNTIL the GameCube iteration. Not to mention it DOESN'T have fixed camera angles... try informing yourself a little better next time.
And you actually sold your DS and bought a PSP? Are you kidding me? My PSP has sat in the drawer for months, unused, mostly because the games are mediocre at best. Meanwhile, the DS, which I thought was be nothing but gimmicks, goes with me EVERYWHERE.
I'm not sure if you're a troll or someone who has completely bought into marketing hype and loves whatever the "next big thing" is. I am very picky about what console games I play, and I haven't been impressed with Nintendo since the SNES days, so it's a big deal when I actually do like them - and I really consider them now to have some of the best games for their platforms. The fact that you don't know what SSB:M is makes me wonder how much experience you have with games at all.
So get off your little high horse there, buddy, the POINT I was trying to make is, we (tech types) don't work 9-5 and we're expected to "just fix it" whether it's 9-5 or 4am on a Saturday.
Wow thanks for pointing out the obvious. Note that you didn't include any context in any of your original statement. If you had read that with no context either, wouldn't you think you came off as an ass? Pretty much anyone would. I'm glad you had a good rapport with your supervisor, but guess what? Anyone worth their salt does, so don't make it sound like it's so cool and rare that you guys were so relaxed that you could act so unprofessional around him or her. And if you worked for me, you would probably be in heaven - I let my very small team (I keep it small so we don't waste any time, costs are kept down, and the salaries are excellent and steadily increase at a far better than average clip) do anything they want... as long as everything they said they'd finish is done and at the quality we agreed upon by their deadline. We banter and we swear, we act stupid and dumb, but I rarely run up to one of them, even as a joke and just unload on them. I don't expect that of them to me either.
You're kidding right? I work in a HUGE IT department for a national laboratory. I get rolled out of bed at 4 in the AM on Sundays just like everyone else when one of our server farms takes a dive. If someone above me (including the CEO) doesn't understand why I'm taking issue with a stupid comment made by another employee ("He telecommutes too much!") I will DEFINITELY say something... but I won't throw obscenities and get all agressive with him right off the bat! Maybe later on... but man, the guy bit off his head right away. Sure he had a right to be annoyed, but you don't start off answering a question by zinging someone, no matter who it is. Just because you received a lack of respect doesn't mean you have to respond in kind.
Keep in mind that I write as well. Neither IT folks nor writers are known for normal hours.
Wow, I would've totally fired your ass and got someone in there with less attitude, who could explain the situation without being such a condescending asshole; it even comes across in the complete lack of readability in your little rant there. If someone questions your work habits or activities, you convince them otherwise with professionalism. No wonder you're an 'ex-wiz'.
Slashdot Mirror
What? You think there won't be any ipv6 nat devices? First off, there already are. Secondly, the reason comcast charges for extra IPs is because they, like everyone else, needs to be fairly frugal about handing out IPs. ipv6 negates that.
And by the way, comcast for SURE knows that people are using NAT ("none the wiser?" please). That's why they tell you to connect your computer directly to the cable modem when you have a problem. Some ISPs even GIVE you modems with built in NAT.
Oh so you never like to transfer large files to your laptop? Or make backups to the network? Or do any kind of bulk transfer that rsync can't cover effectively? Any time I have to do a large transfer, I have to hook my laptop up to the ethernet, because it's a lot faster, and does approach wire speed (unlike wireless).
I'm sure they said the same thing before 100baseTX was ubiquitous.
You might've wanted to put a SPOILER WARNING SINCE YOU DID IT IN THE THIRD SENTENCE! You want people to see the movie, then you kill it right away? Nice.
*woosh*
If you're going to troll, learn how to do it well.
Clueless.
I've either been trolled (very poorly) or you really DON'T get it... which is kind of scary.
Did you just miss the point of everything I just said? When you edit stuff in photoshop, where do you think the pixel pushing algos comes from? Do you think Adobe just decided, this is what's going to happen when I use the burn in tool? When I adjust exposure levels? When I compensate for f-stops? No, they took what would happen if you did it in the darkroom, and transposed it into a digital process. Not understanding WHY it does what it does can severely limit you're understanding of what will happen in the digital realm. I've either been trolled (very poorly) or you really DON'T get it... which is kind of scary.
Crap, forget breaks... readable version:
What? In one fell swoop, you completely underlined WHY it's important to know how traditional film processing and enlarging work.
When I say 'print photos', I'm referring to the developing process. That's how you traditionally PRINT A PHOTO; when you tell a photographer, "I need a print of that photo," that means 'make a new copy of the negative onto photo paper from your darkroom', not out of your printer. You enlarge the negative onto photo paper after futzing around with exposure times and apertures (this is on the enlarger, NOT the camera lens), as well as chemical temps and adjusting for what the film was originally designed for (also called 'pushing' film - when you 'push' film to go at ISO speeds it was never originally intended to do). I mean do you even know what those photoshop tools for dodging and burning CAME from?!?
Photography is just like any medium that requires practice to become good at. Do you think musicians just skip the basics and jump to all the cool and interesting stuff right away? Well, maybe once in awhile, but for the majority of the time, it's a very good idea to learn the basics, to learn *why* what certain chord progressions and techniques lead to certain end results, and then build upon them. It's similar with all things like that, including photography. I mean you do realize that Photoshop takes basic photo print techniques and piles all sorts of stuff on top that would be very difficult or next to impossible to realize in the darkroom, right? It's the same thing.
Again, some people should either take a quick (and usually very entertaining) class in film development, or at least read a book on how it works. After that, suddenly all sorts of stuff make sense, like why a histogram is better with certain settings, how grain works in various types of film to achieve a certain look, and how ISO, apertures, depth of field, and f-stops all work together at various parts of the developing process really change the output.
What? In one fell swoop, you completely underlined WHY it's important to know how traditional film processing and enlarging work. When I say 'print photos', I'm referring to the developing process. That's how you traditionally PRINT A PHOTO; when you tell a photographer, "I need a print of that photo," that means 'make a new copy of the negative onto photo paper from your darkroom', not out of your printer. You enlarge the negative onto photo paper after futzing around with exposure times and apertures (this is on the enlarger, NOT the camera lens), as well as chemical temps and adjusting for what the film was originally designed for (also called 'pushing' film - when you 'push' film to go at ISO speeds it was never originally intended to do). I mean do you even know what those photoshop tools for dodging and burning CAME from?!? Photography is just like any medium that requires practice to become good at. Do you think musicians just skip the basics and jump to all the cool and interesting stuff right away? Well, maybe once in awhile, but for the majority of the time, it's a very good idea to learn the basics, to learn *why* what certain chord progressions and techniques lead to certain end results, and then build upon them. It's similar with all things like that, including photography. I mean you do realize that Photoshop takes basic photo print techniques and piles all sorts of stuff on top that would be very difficult or next to impossible to realize in the darkroom, right? It's the same thing. Again, some people should either take a quick (and usually very entertaining) class in film development, or at least read a book on how it works. After that, suddenly all sorts of stuff make sense, like why a histogram is better with certain settings, how grain works in various types of film to achieve a certain look, and how ISO, apertures, depth of field, and f-stops all work together at various parts of the developing process really change the output.
Spoken like some completely without any clue. Here's a hint: awesome photography comes from a combination of knowing what makes a good photo (see the past) and taking advantage of future tech. No one said chemistry will not be in mainstream use in 20 years. What I'm saying is, know what makes digital an advantage (likeon-the-fly editing capabilities not inherent in printing) and how prints actually show up on paper (how certain colors bleed into each other on various papers and how pushing the film can affect grain). IOW, take the basics, and do something completely new.
Wow, that's a really convincing argument there. I suggest taking a photo film class for taking and developing your own film, and you'll see why people that have done it are both extremely appreciative of digital, and also love the film.
I do B&W only. As soon as digital can come up with something that can come close to an LF b&w back, I'm all about it. And please don't say "reduce to grayscale"... sometimes that filter comes up with the WEIRDEST approximations...
...I'm finding that most companies will stall your order for days for reasons from random extra checks through to migration of lesser known species of Vole, business needs be damned!
Can someone please translate that into a sentence? Seriously... I can wade through some of the typical grammatical errors, but come on...
Well, your analogy is way off then. Maybe you should've pointed out something that is universally lauded for being a bottom feeder show, ie anything with Paris Hilton in it, or whatever is the equivalent of "Temptation Island" these day.
Shit, I haven't bought a movie or a cd in five fucking years.
Translation: I can justify my pirating by saying that there's nothing good out there anymore.
There may be a TON of crap out there, but there's still plenty of good stuff. Too bad you can't find any of it.
Wait a second, you take a hokey but entertaining show (24) and a very well written character drama (Lost) and try and say they are BAD? Excuse me, but those are probably the BEST examples of TV done RIGHT.
Are you really that clueless? The person who gives you the most loyalty more often than not IS the person with the most skills. Why? Because if you did it right, you helped to increase their skill level through training, and through their increased skill level, rewarded them with adequate incentives, such as a good salary, job perks, and plenty of benefits, not to mention at that point, they should have developed a good work related comraderie with the people they most often work with. THIS is why in the past, many people wanted to work for a company for a LONG time. Jumping ship to another company would have them starting out the whole cycle all over again; while they may start out a decent pay, the whole other aspect of re-developing work rapports and all that has to start from the beginning.
Unfortunately, companies these days want the shortcut of just getting someone with experience and skills into the job. People are treated as a commodity, and while there *is* validity in that, it completely negates the human aspect of the position. In other words, you can get the greatest and most skilled employee in a position, but if they are condescending and other people who've been there longer can't get along with them, employee satisfaction drops, and productivity drops.
What a horrible vision for future interfaces. It's like you took the worst from every scifi book and show (the stuff that looks flashy), tossed out the usefullness, and threw it all into a messy pot to make the wet dreams of someone who thought the movie "Hackers" was what the internet would become.
With text games, you can sit there at the prompt, go make a sandwich, then come back and play more. There is such a thing as pausing most games, right?
You're comparing an action RPG with a traditional, role playing RPG? What? Then you completely struck me as misinformed with that Resident Evil comment. I have always thought that Res Evil was boring UNTIL the GameCube iteration. Not to mention it DOESN'T have fixed camera angles... try informing yourself a little better next time.
And you actually sold your DS and bought a PSP? Are you kidding me? My PSP has sat in the drawer for months, unused, mostly because the games are mediocre at best. Meanwhile, the DS, which I thought was be nothing but gimmicks, goes with me EVERYWHERE.
I'm not sure if you're a troll or someone who has completely bought into marketing hype and loves whatever the "next big thing" is. I am very picky about what console games I play, and I haven't been impressed with Nintendo since the SNES days, so it's a big deal when I actually do like them - and I really consider them now to have some of the best games for their platforms. The fact that you don't know what SSB:M is makes me wonder how much experience you have with games at all.
So get off your little high horse there, buddy, the POINT I was trying to make is, we (tech types) don't work 9-5 and we're expected to "just fix it" whether it's 9-5 or 4am on a Saturday.
Wow thanks for pointing out the obvious. Note that you didn't include any context in any of your original statement. If you had read that with no context either, wouldn't you think you came off as an ass? Pretty much anyone would. I'm glad you had a good rapport with your supervisor, but guess what? Anyone worth their salt does, so don't make it sound like it's so cool and rare that you guys were so relaxed that you could act so unprofessional around him or her. And if you worked for me, you would probably be in heaven - I let my very small team (I keep it small so we don't waste any time, costs are kept down, and the salaries are excellent and steadily increase at a far better than average clip) do anything they want... as long as everything they said they'd finish is done and at the quality we agreed upon by their deadline. We banter and we swear, we act stupid and dumb, but I rarely run up to one of them, even as a joke and just unload on them. I don't expect that of them to me either.
You're kidding right? I work in a HUGE IT department for a national laboratory. I get rolled out of bed at 4 in the AM on Sundays just like everyone else when one of our server farms takes a dive. If someone above me (including the CEO) doesn't understand why I'm taking issue with a stupid comment made by another employee ("He telecommutes too much!") I will DEFINITELY say something... but I won't throw obscenities and get all agressive with him right off the bat! Maybe later on... but man, the guy bit off his head right away. Sure he had a right to be annoyed, but you don't start off answering a question by zinging someone, no matter who it is. Just because you received a lack of respect doesn't mean you have to respond in kind.
Keep in mind that I write as well. Neither IT folks nor writers are known for normal hours.
Wow, I would've totally fired your ass and got someone in there with less attitude, who could explain the situation without being such a condescending asshole; it even comes across in the complete lack of readability in your little rant there. If someone questions your work habits or activities, you convince them otherwise with professionalism. No wonder you're an 'ex-wiz'.
It also closer matches your natural field of view.