I would never have guessed that B5 was one of the best sci-fi shows on TV because the completely-over-the-top-costumes kept me from watching. looking at those costumes after watching star trek is like listening to a slow song as its intended, then speeding it up 5x and turning the volume up full. too much! too much!! too much!!!
for me, the costumes got in the way of B5, and because of it i have yet to ever watch a full episode. i just can't stand to watch.
I also love the later part of the article when this "Andrew" person expounds on how wonderful OS X is... compared to Windows98! wtf.
If you really think Windows 98 is better than OS X you have some eye-opening to do. OS X is coming very close to what I would consider a Perfect Operating System(tm) and Windows 98 doesn't even come CLOSE. Others
I don't know how Shrek is rendered, but I do know that it isn't rendered with Pixar's PRMan. That is significant because if you're not doing raytracing with PRMan, PRMan is a REYES renderer. REYES renderers DO NOT need to have the entire frame to render just a part of it.
THAT is significant because you can (if you were inclined to do so) send small "chunks" of the frame to distributed renderers and not worry a bit about what frame data the clients recieved. The chunks would not be able to be reassembled into a frame because you could simply restrict each client to one chunk per frame or per scene.
Anyway, it is technically possible to distribute chunks of a frame to a distributed rendering system without worrying about losing too much important frame data to a single person, IF (and only if) you're rendering a scene that does not require any given surface to know what any other surface looks like (reflections, for instance).
Yes its possible, but modern renderers compute surfaces by raytracing and/or global illumination and both of those rendering techniques require that the renderer have the entire frame so that reflections can be calculated.
if you don't know what i'm talking about by now there's nothing i can say to make you understand.
why doesn't anyone do anything about these kinds of things? everyone bitches about it but do any of you actually DO ANYTHING to stop it?
It is very easy to bitch and moan here - in fact it seems to be the fuel that keeps this site going - but those of you that aren't actually making an effort to stop things like this DESERVE the broadcast flag.
mod me up, down, sideways, whatever. just don't bitch about it unless you do something to stop it.
if you can super-cool the cell to counteract the super-heating that the lens causes, it will work.
solar cells work well under heat, but they do not work well while melting.
if you can find a way to keep the cell cool, you can put the cell right at the focal point (or as much of a focal point as it will take to cover the entire cell) and it will generate as much electricity as an array of cells the size of the focusing lens, if you build it out of the same cells. keep in mind that once you increase the voltage you have to beef up the leads on the cell, or you'll melt them just from the amount of current.
anyway, if you had a cell that was designed with this in mind, yes you could focus the entire lens right on the cell and get a good amount of electricity out of it.
but it is easier just to use an array of cells in direct unfocused sunlight.
sending out 'marketing messages.' (in lay terms, spam)
marketing messages do not always equal spam. For example, Apple sends me marketing messages all the time, and they're not spam.
also, in 'lay terms' (think you mean "layman's terms") 'spam' would be "sending you mail you don't ask for", and 'marketing messages' are not always 'spam'.
i don't mean to get on a rant here, but also:
if you have to explain 'marketing messages' also explain 'spamcop' and 'blacklist' and 'OptInRealBig'. explaining what marketing messages (a plain english term) are, and not explaining other terms the readers might not know about portrays you as a zealot, which you may or may not be. if portraying yourself as a zealot is what you were after, i should say that zealots have ZERO credibility because they are (by definition) fanatical and unreasoning.
anyway, thanks for the links, and please put a little bit more thought into your blurbs.
isn't pixar one of the more popular 3d companies? at least in movies they are, and their RenderMan 3d format is pretty damn popular among photorealistic renderers. There's nothing that I know of that a RenderMan file cannot represent. I'm wondering why they're not making some effort to collaborate in this.
another question: why is apple a part of this when Pixar is not? Steve Jobs is CEO of both companies, as we all know.
I used to work for Yahoo! (but I am not attempting to represent them here).
Yahoo! will fix the problem, if it is indeed a problem that is as represented here on slashdot (hah). They'll fix it and won't make much of a stink about it because its a bug in IE that they will have to write around.
Besides, as far as I'm concerned its not really an issue with Yahoo! mail or Hotmail anyway, its an issue with IE5, since the problem is only exploitable through IE5.
my summary: yawn. this is just reason #632 to not use IE - ever.
to a decoder that isn't aware of dolby's magic, it appears to be regular stereo sound. that's the beauty of dolby pro logic, its backwards compatible.
to a decoder that is aware of dolby's magic, it can mathematically create the rear and center channels from the way the two standard channels are encoded. its actually very simple.
FM radio is the same way, it wasn't always stereo. before the hi-fi days FM was mono and the stereo encoders were created in a way that made it possible to transmit one single audio stream, instead of two. that's why monoaural FM radios still play both channels, but through one speaker. the channels are transmitted as mono then seperated by FM stereo decoders. If there's no decoder, the song might as well be mono.
usually the really important scripts are running/bin/sh - a STATICALLY compiled binary of a shell that is pretty much everywhere.
why not dynamically compiled? Well if your glibc barfs all dynamically compiled binaries barf with it - including perl, and including any shells that you use to start up your system. With a statically compiled shell to handle all of those startup scripts you can boot linux without glibc working, and you probably have enough of a system still running to get things fixed. with a dynamically linked startup file interpreter, when glibc or something glibc depends on goes, your whole system goes, single-user mode and all.
Besides, while perl can execute system commands and make decisions based on input, i think the shell is a better tool for things like this. sh and bash were designed to do startup scripts (among other things) and they do them well. why fix what isn't broken? shell scripts work, and they can do anything you'd need them to do during startup.
hah you can buy an arcade with a MUCH bigger screen for half the price at www.arcade-infinity.com. Looks like the site is down at the moment - if it doesn't return you can google for "Japanese JAMMA cabinet" and that should find you something useful.
I'm not an owner of that company or investor or anything other than a very happy customer.
shipping is kind of expensive but the arcade cabs are very cheap in my experience. slap a windows PC in there and a couple bits from www.ultimarc.com (arcadeVGA adapter and the J-PAC) and you have every thing you need but the roms to play thousands of arcade games on this arcade.
and there are a lot more than one type of cabinet - there are stand-up cabs, sit down cabs, two seater sega cabs, cabinets with dual monitors, cabinets with giant projection screen monitors, all kinds of stuff.
well flogging is cruel and unusual punishment. against the constitution. so what you're saying is that you're against the constitution at least partially. Hanging is illegal in all but i think one state, so you're outnumbered there, and lets just not get into the right of one person or group of people to take someone else's life be it behind the protection of the law or not. killing humans is wrong wrong wrong no matter what your justification.
you don't bill for support? well that's your fault. I bill every single hour i spend doing anything for anyone else. spammers don't steal from me, and they don't steal from my customers, because I offer the customers plenty of information that they can use to de-spam themselves. those that choose to pay me to do it make the choice of their own free will.
My sensibilities are not delicate, (how lovely of you to attack me personally) in fact they're not even in question.
Clearly, if you're this upset about spam, there are other things in your life that are bothering you. Yes, spam is annoying. but is anything really so annoying that you'd want to kill someone because of what they are doing? Nothing justifies killing another human being. There isn't a single thing that any person can do that will justify killing another human being in my eyes. Some deserve castration, some deserve solitary confinement, but none deserve to die, not even if they took millions of lives all by themselves.
this has gotten off topic, but spam is nothing to get angry about. never has, never will.
Perl, if written right, can be a VERY good looking, and VERY easy to understand. All of you that say that it is hard to read are:
a) reading code that wasn't meant to be cute, but was meant to work where nothing else was as practical, b) reading code that was written by someone that didn't know perl, or are c) reading code written by someone that knows perl a LOT better than you.
In my personal experience, people that gripe about Perl are the ones that use it least. The people I know that use Perl quickly learned to love it.
come on, spam isn't THAT bad. Yes, its annoying, yes it takes time away from real things, but is it really so bad that you'd actually want to flog someone publicly?
I get thousands of spam messages per day and I don't consider it anything more than a very slight annoyance.
there are a lot of things that should recieve legislative attention long before spam recieves it. think about that next time you complain that your favorite cause isn't getting enough attention.
Slashdot Mirror
I would never have guessed that B5 was one of the best sci-fi shows on TV because the completely-over-the-top-costumes kept me from watching. looking at those costumes after watching star trek is like listening to a slow song as its intended, then speeding it up 5x and turning the volume up full. too much! too much!! too much!!!
for me, the costumes got in the way of B5, and because of it i have yet to ever watch a full episode. i just can't stand to watch.
all gone. sorry, but i'm sure someone else will invite you if you ask nice.
contact me if you want one. first 6 get invites.
I also love the later part of the article when this "Andrew" person expounds on how wonderful OS X is... compared to Windows98! wtf.
If you really think Windows 98 is better than OS X you have some eye-opening to do. OS X is coming very close to what I would consider a Perfect Operating System(tm) and Windows 98 doesn't even come CLOSE. Others
I don't know how Shrek is rendered, but I do know that it isn't rendered with Pixar's PRMan. That is significant because if you're not doing raytracing with PRMan, PRMan is a REYES renderer. REYES renderers DO NOT need to have the entire frame to render just a part of it.
THAT is significant because you can (if you were inclined to do so) send small "chunks" of the frame to distributed renderers and not worry a bit about what frame data the clients recieved. The chunks would not be able to be reassembled into a frame because you could simply restrict each client to one chunk per frame or per scene.
Anyway, it is technically possible to distribute chunks of a frame to a distributed rendering system without worrying about losing too much important frame data to a single person, IF (and only if) you're rendering a scene that does not require any given surface to know what any other surface looks like (reflections, for instance).
Yes its possible, but modern renderers compute surfaces by raytracing and/or global illumination and both of those rendering techniques require that the renderer have the entire frame so that reflections can be calculated.
if you don't know what i'm talking about by now there's nothing i can say to make you understand.
blah.
why doesn't anyone do anything about these kinds of things? everyone bitches about it but do any of you actually DO ANYTHING to stop it?
It is very easy to bitch and moan here - in fact it seems to be the fuel that keeps this site going - but those of you that aren't actually making an effort to stop things like this DESERVE the broadcast flag.
mod me up, down, sideways, whatever. just don't bitch about it unless you do something to stop it.
if you can super-cool the cell to counteract the super-heating that the lens causes, it will work.
solar cells work well under heat, but they do not work well while melting.
if you can find a way to keep the cell cool, you can put the cell right at the focal point (or as much of a focal point as it will take to cover the entire cell) and it will generate as much electricity as an array of cells the size of the focusing lens, if you build it out of the same cells. keep in mind that once you increase the voltage you have to beef up the leads on the cell, or you'll melt them just from the amount of current.
anyway, if you had a cell that was designed with this in mind, yes you could focus the entire lens right on the cell and get a good amount of electricity out of it.
but it is easier just to use an array of cells in direct unfocused sunlight.
he had an allergic reaction and was taken to the hospital. he did not get hives, but he almost died.
sending out 'marketing messages.' (in lay terms, spam)
marketing messages do not always equal spam. For example, Apple sends me marketing messages all the time, and they're not spam.
also, in 'lay terms' (think you mean "layman's terms") 'spam' would be "sending you mail you don't ask for", and 'marketing messages' are not always 'spam'.
i don't mean to get on a rant here, but also:
if you have to explain 'marketing messages' also explain 'spamcop' and 'blacklist' and 'OptInRealBig'. explaining what marketing messages (a plain english term) are, and not explaining other terms the readers might not know about portrays you as a zealot, which you may or may not be. if portraying yourself as a zealot is what you were after, i should say that zealots have ZERO credibility because they are (by definition) fanatical and unreasoning.
anyway, thanks for the links, and please put a little bit more thought into your blurbs.
http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/members. htm
isn't pixar one of the more popular 3d companies? at least in movies they are, and their RenderMan 3d format is pretty damn popular among photorealistic renderers. There's nothing that I know of that a RenderMan file cannot represent. I'm wondering why they're not making some effort to collaborate in this.
another question: why is apple a part of this when Pixar is not? Steve Jobs is CEO of both companies, as we all know.
Isn't it about time we ditched FTP for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched floppy disks for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched IDE drives for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched x86 for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched Microsoft Windows for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched CDs for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched telnet for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched CRTs for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched 20-year-old TV sets for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched COBOL for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched BASIC for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched SCO Unix for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched DOS for something better?
Isn't it about time we ditched Dubya for something better?
my point is that there is a lot of very old crap out there that should be replaces, but is going to get used and keep getting used for years to come.
I used to work for Yahoo! (but I am not attempting to represent them here).
Yahoo! will fix the problem, if it is indeed a problem that is as represented here on slashdot (hah). They'll fix it and won't make much of a stink about it because its a bug in IE that they will have to write around.
Besides, as far as I'm concerned its not really an issue with Yahoo! mail or Hotmail anyway, its an issue with IE5, since the problem is only exploitable through IE5.
my summary: yawn. this is just reason #632 to not use IE - ever.
to a decoder that isn't aware of dolby's magic, it appears to be regular stereo sound. that's the beauty of dolby pro logic, its backwards compatible.
to a decoder that is aware of dolby's magic, it can mathematically create the rear and center channels from the way the two standard channels are encoded. its actually very simple.
FM radio is the same way, it wasn't always stereo. before the hi-fi days FM was mono and the stereo encoders were created in a way that made it possible to transmit one single audio stream, instead of two. that's why monoaural FM radios still play both channels, but through one speaker. the channels are transmitted as mono then seperated by FM stereo decoders. If there's no decoder, the song might as well be mono.
usually the really important scripts are running /bin/sh - a STATICALLY compiled binary of a shell that is pretty much everywhere.
why not dynamically compiled? Well if your glibc barfs all dynamically compiled binaries barf with it - including perl, and including any shells that you use to start up your system. With a statically compiled shell to handle all of those startup scripts you can boot linux without glibc working, and you probably have enough of a system still running to get things fixed. with a dynamically linked startup file interpreter, when glibc or something glibc depends on goes, your whole system goes, single-user mode and all.
Besides, while perl can execute system commands and make decisions based on input, i think the shell is a better tool for things like this. sh and bash were designed to do startup scripts (among other things) and they do them well. why fix what isn't broken? shell scripts work, and they can do anything you'd need them to do during startup.
hah you can buy an arcade with a MUCH bigger screen for half the price at www.arcade-infinity.com. Looks like the site is down at the moment - if it doesn't return you can google for "Japanese JAMMA cabinet" and that should find you something useful.
the guy that runs http://arcade.madsmurf.com/ can probably point you towards a cabinet vendor.
I'm not an owner of that company or investor or anything other than a very happy customer.
shipping is kind of expensive but the arcade cabs are very cheap in my experience. slap a windows PC in there and a couple bits from www.ultimarc.com (arcadeVGA adapter and the J-PAC) and you have every thing you need but the roms to play thousands of arcade games on this arcade.
and there are a lot more than one type of cabinet - there are stand-up cabs, sit down cabs, two seater sega cabs, cabinets with dual monitors, cabinets with giant projection screen monitors, all kinds of stuff.
have a look. they're good stuff.
Apple laptops are:
1.) extremely high quality
2.) aesthetically pleasing
3.) lightweight
4.) really really expensive
you forgot this: 5.) as comfortable as a beesting in the eyeball.
i don't care how great ibooks are or aren't i won't EVER buy one until they offer a mouse BUTTON instead of that all-too-annoying touchPAD.
Touchpads are the most asinine pointing devices ever devised by mankind and I'll never own one.
I don't care if the iBook prints $100 bills legally every minute for the rest of my life, I will NEVER own a laptop that has only a touchpad.
I will throw myself between a mother bear and her cubs before I'll own a touchpad pointing device.
no ibooks for me i guess. no big loss from what i can see anyway.
well flogging is cruel and unusual punishment. against the constitution. so what you're saying is that you're against the constitution at least partially. Hanging is illegal in all but i think one state, so you're outnumbered there, and lets just not get into the right of one person or group of people to take someone else's life be it behind the protection of the law or not. killing humans is wrong wrong wrong no matter what your justification.
you don't bill for support? well that's your fault. I bill every single hour i spend doing anything for anyone else. spammers don't steal from me, and they don't steal from my customers, because I offer the customers plenty of information that they can use to de-spam themselves. those that choose to pay me to do it make the choice of their own free will.
My sensibilities are not delicate, (how lovely of you to attack me personally) in fact they're not even in question.
Clearly, if you're this upset about spam, there are other things in your life that are bothering you. Yes, spam is annoying. but is anything really so annoying that you'd want to kill someone because of what they are doing? Nothing justifies killing another human being. There isn't a single thing that any person can do that will justify killing another human being in my eyes. Some deserve castration, some deserve solitary confinement, but none deserve to die, not even if they took millions of lives all by themselves.
this has gotten off topic, but spam is nothing to get angry about. never has, never will.
You guys...
Perl, if written right, can be a VERY good looking, and VERY easy to understand. All of you that say that it is hard to read are:
a) reading code that wasn't meant to be cute, but was meant to work where nothing else was as practical,
b) reading code that was written by someone that didn't know perl, or are
c) reading code written by someone that knows perl a LOT better than you.
In my personal experience, people that gripe about Perl are the ones that use it least. The people I know that use Perl quickly learned to love it.
stealing from who though? they're certainly not stealing from me.
come on, spam isn't THAT bad. Yes, its annoying, yes it takes time away from real things, but is it really so bad that you'd actually want to flog someone publicly?
I get thousands of spam messages per day and I don't consider it anything more than a very slight annoyance.
there are a lot of things that should recieve legislative attention long before spam recieves it. think about that next time you complain that your favorite cause isn't getting enough attention.
"...part Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, part Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, and part Curb Your Enthusiasm."
Why can't anyone come up with something NEW?
He/She will figure it out for you.
Are users that ignorant and lazy?
Yes. In fact not only are they ignorant and lazy, they really, truly do not care about standards compliance.
"If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect." -- Mark Twain
Compile a CBQ module for your kernel
find a way to parse the log and find out (in as close to real time as possible) who is slurping the whole site.
restrict that IP's bandwidth to the machine entirely, not just apache.
The linux kernel can handle these things very easily. Why bother with apache, use the linux machine itself to do it.
this, of course, assumes you are using linux.