I don't believe introverts regard IM the same way as face-to-face communications. I know a lot of people that are socially very shy in public, that practically live in IM or WOW etc.
I think part of that is because there's a high density of introverts in such media, and they tend to be more comfortable without all those meddling extroverts.;)
Unless you keep the aspect ratio. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, and have no place arguing if something looks similar or not in a graphic design situation.
Nobody cares, because for trademark matters the only thing that counts is consumer confusion. And as I said, no consumer would be confused by this. Again, if you're making a copyright case, the standard is a hell of lot higher than thinking they sort of look similar if you squint.
Additionally, you're now saying that Apple owns all arcs with a given radius? For Chrissakes, people need to stop swallowing everything Jobs says. He's not the messiah, people.
Which will result in lower prices which is good for consumers. How is this the deeper downside? Why are Americans, which have one of the highest standards of living in the world, more deserving of these jobs than people in other countries?
I think he was talking about the downside as it applies to the build quality, not the economy. But I agree with you in general - when people talk about slashing gov. sponsored R&D funding, I ask a very complex simple question: why are janitors in America paid many, many times those in India for doing the same work?
Look at the posts above yours - you can find a picture of the two logos superimpose
If you play enough with the scale, you can superimpose any arc on any other. The two don't even look remotely similar.
What this comes down to is, is Apple going after trademark or copyright? If copyright, they'll have to prove the thing was actually copied. If trademark, they'll have to prove consumer confusion. That will be very difficult because 1) NYC is not a computer manufacturer, and 2) those things do NOT look alike to any sane person who has not recently taken a great deal of drugs.
Football is as random as basketball (or any other sport). You can win by 6 points as easily as lose by 6 points *if* the two teams are equally matched (on that given day).
Statistically that statement is invalid. You can't determine randomness from a single trial, and the fact is that in football, the better team wins far more likely than sports such as baseball. Good teams in football can have a winning percentage of over 0.800, which is far better than the best baseball teams. So the outcomes of American football are much less random than baseball. Yes the outcome in football *can* swing wildly, but the fact is it tends not to as often as in baseball, when a last place team can often beat a first place team 5-1 or something. Looking at it historically, that doesn't happen *as often* in football.
NBA Basketball is also fairly un-random. College is far more difficult to evaluate because of the extreme discrepancy between the major programs and the also-rans in Division 1. I have a fair amount of college basketball data on hand, perhaps I'll compare it to NFL games sometime.
Is always a question of statistics with a random noise involved. The amount of noise involved strongly depends on which sport that is involved. Basket is a sport where a lot of points is scored, which in turn means that the noise is relatively low while football (what americans call soccer for some strange reason and what americans call football is more like rugby) has a lot of noise since the ability to score a goal there is depending a lot on luck.
American football, over the course of a full game, has coarse scoring jumps (7pts for a touchdown) but luck plays a surprisingly small role. This is why good teams have very high winning percentages and poor ones have such low winning percentages. Not sure how that dynamic works in futbol, but the luck factor isn't as large as you'd think.
The reason the LRMC method is well-suited to NCAA basketball is that A) there are a lot of games, and B) the good conferences don't play the bad ones much. That means that a high-order Markov model is a good way to determine who would beat whom through a game of "I beat a team that beat a team that beat a team that beat you" sort of thing.
I came up with a version of this independently before I stumbled over these guys last year. It's pretty fun and works quite well. It's certainly much better than the polls, and in most cases last year my system was within a point or two of the Vegas spread. It's also pretty good at recognizing underdogs early - mine had Davidson and Drake before they were in the polls.
I don't think there's anything "ulterior" about it. It's pretty obvious: if people are going to run open source software, MS would like them to be running it on Windows. It's therefore in their interests to help open source developers to get their stuff running on Windows - especially where it doesn't compete with any of their own products.
Wait for the "embrace, extend, extinguish" routine. Didn't they just come out with something that would only work on Novell and no other flavor of Linux? Just sayin', they've done this before.
As far as I'm concerned, IT is a glorified janitorial service... at least where PC systems service is concerned
Well, it should be better than *that*. A good IT guy, to me, is a critical team member who helps us keep running smoothly and gets us out of jams. To go with your analogy, the good IT guy isn't like the janitor who routinely sweeps the floor, he's like the good plumber who fixes your overflowing toilet before you're swimming in crap. Can't put a price on that. Unfortunately, most of our IT guys are like the plumber who gets to your house and tells you he doesn't do toilets.
But IT can only do so much.
True. Which is why I'll go out of my way to point out to the higher ups how chronically overworked our good IT people are. I'll also get a read on how busy our good IT guy is and understand if he can't get to my stuff immediately. He's got enough jackasses who claim everything they need is "critical". Funny thing is though, he usually gets to my stuff before theirs. Treating people well usually gets you farther, funny how that works.
And my people seem to appreciate my loose grip on their machines. Most of them are mature enough not to screw things up too badly.
I certainly would appreciate it! We need more guys like that. 95% of our IT guys are assholes who quote policy as if it were written by Moses, and can't be bothered to go out of their way to help you do anything unless you get a VP on their ass. Oh, and they're generally incompetent to boot.
If you're ever looking for work, we gots offices all over the place!
So yes, give users control over their machines... but make sure they know that even though you're there to clean up the mess, the mess's fall-out is still on them. They will then take better care of their tool... their source of productivity and income.
I like that approach. I'm a fairly tech-savvy scientist who needs to be able to find, test, and evaluate various approaches to solve problems. This frequently has me trying out Open source tools and the like, for which I kind of need access to my machine. I'm fine taking the blame for hosing my machine*, with the flip side that IT doesn't act like a bunch of obnoxious, obstructionist asshats when I need to get things done. Unfortunately, with one exception, our IT department seems to forget that our ability to do the things we do is what brings in money. They're here to help us make do what we do. They often forget that.
*Of course, when I hose my machine, I also fix it myself, but that's another matter.
Whether an individual subpixel can display 256 levels is quite irrelevant since dithering is capable of producing a higher colour depth at the expense of colour resolution.
Then it seems you still can't simultaneously claim the listed resolution and the listed color depth. You don't get colors for nothing and your bits for free...
This is why I laugh at people who buy HDTVs and expect some kind of massive improvement. In most of the country, the infrastructure just isn't there to give people very many full-res HD channels over cable. Digital satellite has many of the same issues. There just isn't enough bandwidth.
No, but as per the subject of this thread, they can put the best quality on the most watched channels, and those that benefit most from HD. You can bet your ass that ESPN is as close to uncompressed as exists on their network. Sports sells HDTVs.
Similar but with more asshat. As a practicing troll, the goal of a well-crafted troll post is humor and entertainment with possibly just a bit of agitation of those who are either a) overly self righteous, or b) clueless. Generally, both groups think they are crushing the troll poster with their insightful or reactionary posts, so it's hard to claim they're harmed - they're quite pleased with themselves. And their responses provide good entertainment for those who get the joke.
With griefers, the balance is 99% pain to 1% sadist fun. For trolls, it's the reverse.
So for Apple to give Zdziarski the podium at an Apple retail location is a little like Steve Ballmer inviting Linus Torvalds to speak at a Windows product launch."
I'd say it's more like Citibank inviting Mitnick to talk about security, or the MPAA inviting DVD Jon.
I thin that's the security model our government uses. Wrap everything in massive layers of bureaucracy and nothing bad happens. Of course, nothing good happens either, but that's OK.
called Assassin that some frats and/or dorms play at UIUC. A guy locked himself in his room to avoid an assassin, who then camped right outside his door, ready to strike the instant he opened the door. Supposedly, the guy really had to do #2, but rather than open the door and lose, he crapped out his 2nd floor window.
I'd have just told the guy that I'm crapping on the first thing I see when I come out of the room. This guy failed to realize that he had the better weapon at the time.
Problem with these medical studies is that your average med school student avoids "hard" classes like the plague because they'll reduce his/her sterling GPA. Those include, notably, any math class beyond calculus (like upper level stats) and your real Physical Chemistry classes, for instance. As a result you get these clowns putting out research like this, the "cell phones cause cancer" thing, etc.
You can do the same experiment as many times as you want, but as long as you are using the same theoretical foundations, you won't get any closer to the actual result. The only way to judge that the results are accurate are to devise experiments capable of giving results similarly precise but which are founded on different, but accepted, principles. Sort of like how the various methods for dating fossils give similar results.
Still won't work. Those methods have also been validated by testing against multiple known samples - otherwise, you find yourself in a catch-22 in which you can't trust the alternate methods either. What you need to do is build a fusion reactor, create a bunch of new universes, warp into them at some future time, and measure their age. Then come back and tell me about it. Oh, and make sure you don't kill your dad or something in the process, or then you're really screwed.
Otherwise, we're all just pissing in the wind here.
Seriously though, does anyone expect Nvidia to say, "Yes, we really do think that our products will all be obsolete and outdated in a few years. Thank you for asking." I personally have no idea as to whether or not ray tracing is the future of games, but I really don't think that Nvidia is the right person to ask either, (just as Intel isn't).
One could argue that the Nvidia folks have been well aware of ray-tracing for a long time, and if they thought it was reaching the point where it was going to be useful that they would have begun incorporating it in a future generation of chip. So it's not like they're permenantly committed against it - they may honestly believe it's time is not here.
As for Intel, I do think it's fairly obvious that the inherent parallelization of ray tracing is a big part of what makes it attractive to them right now. That and they have enough cash to just screw around with it without having to market it. But there's no reason Nvidia wouldn't go to multi-core chips if they thought the demand was there.
Feeling superior towards other classmates does not make up for the education you missed by not cooperating with your peers. Humans are social beings, and the best learning happens in a social context. You learn a lot from seeing others make and correct mistakes.
That doesn't mean that every single assignment needs to be collaborative. At some point, you need to be tested alone to see what you can do as opposed to riding the coattails of your smarter friends.
Seeing someone else open that box will give you a clue how to open yours, and that will make the task easier that having to figure it out all by yourself.
Right, and you thus won't actually learn how to solve problems for yourself, but to simply mimic what you see. Hell, if that's learning I can get a chimp through college.
As for the punishing prof: he needs to be sued for academic misconduct in denying his students an efficient study method, and for relying on security by obscurity.
Horseshit. That's like saying that a victim of home theft should be sued for hiding their belongings instead of using a bank vault. Many colleges rely upon the honor of their student body to do the right thing, something that appears to be lost on you.
Slashdot Mirror
It's Comcraptic.
I don't believe introverts regard IM the same way as face-to-face communications. I know a lot of people that are socially very shy in public, that practically live in IM or WOW etc.
I think part of that is because there's a high density of introverts in such media, and they tend to be more comfortable without all those meddling extroverts. ;)
Unless you keep the aspect ratio. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, and have no place arguing if something looks similar or not in a graphic design situation.
Nobody cares, because for trademark matters the only thing that counts is consumer confusion. And as I said, no consumer would be confused by this. Again, if you're making a copyright case, the standard is a hell of lot higher than thinking they sort of look similar if you squint.
Additionally, you're now saying that Apple owns all arcs with a given radius? For Chrissakes, people need to stop swallowing everything Jobs says. He's not the messiah, people.
Which will result in lower prices which is good for consumers. How is this the deeper downside? Why are Americans, which have one of the highest standards of living in the world, more deserving of these jobs than people in other countries?
I think he was talking about the downside as it applies to the build quality, not the economy. But I agree with you in general - when people talk about slashing gov. sponsored R&D funding, I ask a very complex simple question: why are janitors in America paid many, many times those in India for doing the same work?
Look at the posts above yours - you can find a picture of the two logos superimpose
If you play enough with the scale, you can superimpose any arc on any other. The two don't even look remotely similar.
What this comes down to is, is Apple going after trademark or copyright? If copyright, they'll have to prove the thing was actually copied. If trademark, they'll have to prove consumer confusion. That will be very difficult because 1) NYC is not a computer manufacturer, and 2) those things do NOT look alike to any sane person who has not recently taken a great deal of drugs.
But a few graphics artists compared the shapes of the logos - and they are identical.
You mean except for the part that they look nothing alike?
Football is as random as basketball (or any other sport). You can win by 6 points as easily as lose by 6 points *if* the two teams are equally matched (on that given day).
Statistically that statement is invalid. You can't determine randomness from a single trial, and the fact is that in football, the better team wins far more likely than sports such as baseball. Good teams in football can have a winning percentage of over 0.800, which is far better than the best baseball teams. So the outcomes of American football are much less random than baseball. Yes the outcome in football *can* swing wildly, but the fact is it tends not to as often as in baseball, when a last place team can often beat a first place team 5-1 or something. Looking at it historically, that doesn't happen *as often* in football.
NBA Basketball is also fairly un-random. College is far more difficult to evaluate because of the extreme discrepancy between the major programs and the also-rans in Division 1. I have a fair amount of college basketball data on hand, perhaps I'll compare it to NFL games sometime.
Is always a question of statistics with a random noise involved.
The amount of noise involved strongly depends on which sport that is involved. Basket is a sport where a lot of points is scored, which in turn means that the noise is relatively low while football (what americans call soccer for some strange reason and what americans call football is more like rugby) has a lot of noise since the ability to score a goal there is depending a lot on luck.
American football, over the course of a full game, has coarse scoring jumps (7pts for a touchdown) but luck plays a surprisingly small role. This is why good teams have very high winning percentages and poor ones have such low winning percentages. Not sure how that dynamic works in futbol, but the luck factor isn't as large as you'd think.
The reason the LRMC method is well-suited to NCAA basketball is that A) there are a lot of games, and B) the good conferences don't play the bad ones much. That means that a high-order Markov model is a good way to determine who would beat whom through a game of "I beat a team that beat a team that beat a team that beat you" sort of thing.
I came up with a version of this independently before I stumbled over these guys last year. It's pretty fun and works quite well. It's certainly much better than the polls, and in most cases last year my system was within a point or two of the Vegas spread. It's also pretty good at recognizing underdogs early - mine had Davidson and Drake before they were in the polls.
I don't think there's anything "ulterior" about it. It's pretty obvious: if people are going to run open source software, MS would like them to be running it on Windows. It's therefore in their interests to help open source developers to get their stuff running on Windows - especially where it doesn't compete with any of their own products.
Wait for the "embrace, extend, extinguish" routine. Didn't they just come out with something that would only work on Novell and no other flavor of Linux? Just sayin', they've done this before.
Good troll, sir.
As far as I'm concerned, IT is a glorified janitorial service... at least where PC systems service is concerned
Well, it should be better than *that*. A good IT guy, to me, is a critical team member who helps us keep running smoothly and gets us out of jams. To go with your analogy, the good IT guy isn't like the janitor who routinely sweeps the floor, he's like the good plumber who fixes your overflowing toilet before you're swimming in crap. Can't put a price on that. Unfortunately, most of our IT guys are like the plumber who gets to your house and tells you he doesn't do toilets.
But IT can only do so much.
True. Which is why I'll go out of my way to point out to the higher ups how chronically overworked our good IT people are. I'll also get a read on how busy our good IT guy is and understand if he can't get to my stuff immediately. He's got enough jackasses who claim everything they need is "critical". Funny thing is though, he usually gets to my stuff before theirs. Treating people well usually gets you farther, funny how that works.
And my people seem to appreciate my loose grip on their machines. Most of them are mature enough not to screw things up too badly.
I certainly would appreciate it! We need more guys like that. 95% of our IT guys are assholes who quote policy as if it were written by Moses, and can't be bothered to go out of their way to help you do anything unless you get a VP on their ass. Oh, and they're generally incompetent to boot.
If you're ever looking for work, we gots offices all over the place!
So yes, give users control over their machines... but make sure they know that even though you're there to clean up the mess, the mess's fall-out is still on them. They will then take better care of their tool... their source of productivity and income.
I like that approach. I'm a fairly tech-savvy scientist who needs to be able to find, test, and evaluate various approaches to solve problems. This frequently has me trying out Open source tools and the like, for which I kind of need access to my machine. I'm fine taking the blame for hosing my machine*, with the flip side that IT doesn't act like a bunch of obnoxious, obstructionist asshats when I need to get things done. Unfortunately, with one exception, our IT department seems to forget that our ability to do the things we do is what brings in money. They're here to help us make do what we do. They often forget that.
*Of course, when I hose my machine, I also fix it myself, but that's another matter.
Whether an individual subpixel can display 256 levels is quite irrelevant since dithering is capable of producing a higher colour depth at the expense of colour resolution.
Then it seems you still can't simultaneously claim the listed resolution and the listed color depth. You don't get colors for nothing and your bits for free...
This is why I laugh at people who buy HDTVs and expect some kind of massive improvement. In most of the country, the infrastructure just isn't there to give people very many full-res HD channels over cable. Digital satellite has many of the same issues. There just isn't enough bandwidth.
No, but as per the subject of this thread, they can put the best quality on the most watched channels, and those that benefit most from HD. You can bet your ass that ESPN is as close to uncompressed as exists on their network. Sports sells HDTVs.
It seems very similar in concept to a troll.
Similar but with more asshat. As a practicing troll, the goal of a well-crafted troll post is humor and entertainment with possibly just a bit of agitation of those who are either a) overly self righteous, or b) clueless. Generally, both groups think they are crushing the troll poster with their insightful or reactionary posts, so it's hard to claim they're harmed - they're quite pleased with themselves. And their responses provide good entertainment for those who get the joke.
With griefers, the balance is 99% pain to 1% sadist fun. For trolls, it's the reverse.
So for Apple to give Zdziarski the podium at an Apple retail location is a little like Steve Ballmer inviting Linus Torvalds to speak at a Windows product launch."
I'd say it's more like Citibank inviting Mitnick to talk about security, or the MPAA inviting DVD Jon.
Corollary: if licking on it doesn't help, blowing will. Always good for Nintendo cartridges and...um...other things.
I thin that's the security model our government uses. Wrap everything in massive layers of bureaucracy and nothing bad happens. Of course, nothing good happens either, but that's OK.
called Assassin that some frats and/or dorms play at UIUC. A guy locked himself in his room to avoid an assassin, who then camped right outside his door, ready to strike the instant he opened the door. Supposedly, the guy really had to do #2, but rather than open the door and lose, he crapped out his 2nd floor window.
I'd have just told the guy that I'm crapping on the first thing I see when I come out of the room. This guy failed to realize that he had the better weapon at the time.
Problem with these medical studies is that your average med school student avoids "hard" classes like the plague because they'll reduce his/her sterling GPA. Those include, notably, any math class beyond calculus (like upper level stats) and your real Physical Chemistry classes, for instance. As a result you get these clowns putting out research like this, the "cell phones cause cancer" thing, etc.
Tell Robert Johnson hello
But it was worth it to play a guitar like that.
You can do the same experiment as many times as you want, but as long as you are using the same theoretical foundations, you won't get any closer to the actual result. The only way to judge that the results are accurate are to devise experiments capable of giving results similarly precise but which are founded on different, but accepted, principles. Sort of like how the various methods for dating fossils give similar results.
Still won't work. Those methods have also been validated by testing against multiple known samples - otherwise, you find yourself in a catch-22 in which you can't trust the alternate methods either. What you need to do is build a fusion reactor, create a bunch of new universes, warp into them at some future time, and measure their age. Then come back and tell me about it. Oh, and make sure you don't kill your dad or something in the process, or then you're really screwed.
Otherwise, we're all just pissing in the wind here.
Seriously though, does anyone expect Nvidia to say, "Yes, we really do think that our products will all be obsolete and outdated in a few years. Thank you for asking." I personally have no idea as to whether or not ray tracing is the future of games, but I really don't think that Nvidia is the right person to ask either, (just as Intel isn't).
One could argue that the Nvidia folks have been well aware of ray-tracing for a long time, and if they thought it was reaching the point where it was going to be useful that they would have begun incorporating it in a future generation of chip. So it's not like they're permenantly committed against it - they may honestly believe it's time is not here.
As for Intel, I do think it's fairly obvious that the inherent parallelization of ray tracing is a big part of what makes it attractive to them right now. That and they have enough cash to just screw around with it without having to market it. But there's no reason Nvidia wouldn't go to multi-core chips if they thought the demand was there.
Feeling superior towards other classmates does not make up for the education you missed by not cooperating with your peers. Humans are social beings, and the best learning happens in a social context. You learn a lot from seeing others make and correct mistakes.
That doesn't mean that every single assignment needs to be collaborative. At some point, you need to be tested alone to see what you can do as opposed to riding the coattails of your smarter friends.
Seeing someone else open that box will give you a clue how to open yours, and that will make the task easier that having to figure it out all by yourself.
Right, and you thus won't actually learn how to solve problems for yourself, but to simply mimic what you see. Hell, if that's learning I can get a chimp through college.
As for the punishing prof: he needs to be sued for academic misconduct in denying his students an efficient study method, and for relying on security by obscurity.
Horseshit. That's like saying that a victim of home theft should be sued for hiding their belongings instead of using a bank vault. Many colleges rely upon the honor of their student body to do the right thing, something that appears to be lost on you.
You could fill up a million pages on slashdot just with all the stupid bills governments all over the world table every day.
Could?