"Because of the 4-sided structures, synthetic diamonds are UV reactive under 'very intense short-wave ultraviolet' and will phosphoresce for a bit in the dark."
In otherwords, it shimmers almost imperceptibly better than natural ones, and is otherwise indistinguishable from a 'Magnificent' white diamond, yes?
I wonder if the synth diamond co's are busy making colored diamonds. Throwing enough copper salt into the mix would get you a quality-looking 'Emerald', same for cobalt salts for 'Sapphires'.
I wonder how small you could make an ethanol distiller. Couple it to a direct ethanol fuel cell (google for Acta), and you've got the makings of Bender.
For example, what's with the proliferation of Flash-only pages? They're slow, they're bloated, and, while pretty, they're not often terribly functional.
PDFs: Should never be used in place of webpages.
ECMAScript that doesn't work on all of the Big Three browsers: These webmasters should be shot.
Sorry. I have my busy periods and my insanely dull periods. I do this stuff and actually do end up watching everything eventually. Just not usually when I recieve it.
Still, cross-browser compatibility has been an issue since browsers were introduced. This dude's just catching on? I don't exactly know who he is, but honestly. CSS1 has had quirky issues since it was introduced
An example: borders. In Firefox, they're fitted outside the box. IE, they're fitted inside. Opera, they're fitted cenetered. When doing AJAX apps, you have to do a little bit of user-agent detection to use them properly.
Now, some people will disagree with me, but ECMAScript UA detection is EVIL. You should do object detection, as a general rule. Still, the issues with the different implementations of CSS make it problematic.
And don't even get me started on the differing implementations of DOM. It's just rediculous. What do any of these companies have to gain by disagreeing on standards?
Naw. No need for the big drive. Just flash all your transcoded stuff to Data DVDs as they accumulate; You can fit a goodly amount of time on a DVD, depending on how you transcode the video.
I usually do mine at 640x480 (generally 24000/1001 fps for film), 1700k mpeg4 video, 128k mp3 audio. That gets me about 5-6 hours per 4.7G DVD.
I do transcodes-for-pocketpc for stuff I don't really care about and TV serials (320x240, 368k video, 64k mono audio), giving me about nine hours per 2G SD card, or 22 hours for a backup DVD.
'course, that meant I had to grab the extra large battery for my PPC. But hey. Worth it to avoid boredom on them long train rides.
It's a conspiracy, dude. The Daves want to push Vongo and its ilk, with its DRM, but NetFlix is getting in the way. Its turnaround is about the same as a torrent on low-end DSL.
And, as we all know, the Daves control the media. They OWN the Wall Street Journal. And Rupert Murdoch. They keep him in a jar and bring him out on special occasions.
Actually, the only legislation that actually passed concerned rental companies' copying tapes in an effort to rent out more than they bought.
The only copy restrictions that went in had to do with macrovision - not an issue when copying DVDs digitally. Meanwhile, CSS is only a concern when you're transcoding; 1-1 copies can ignore it safely as well.
As for the legal implications of copying a rented DVD... I don't think the movie industry cares as much, so long as you're not sharing. Rental copying doesn't lose them quite as much money as sharing a rented copy.
Same here, except for one thing: I work kinda feast-or-famine. If I don't have time to watch a DVD, I've got a very nice script that rips it to an mpeg4/mp3 AVI using mplayer at low priority. This way, I can watch it at my leisure and get new films in with a nice high turnover rate.
I do this if I do have time to watch it too, but I then immediately watch the encoded avi.
No, I don't delete the AVIs once I've watched them.
"There is only a difference between the two scenarios if you buy into the idea that Hollywood is fighting to save their artistic vision... the same could not be said for Microsoft... surely....."
That's kinda the idea here; Cleanflicks lost on that point, but Microsoft couldn't really argue it; There's no artistic vision, just the idea that they (supposedly) are answering to the needs of the consumer. Something like this is double edged; it makes windows look better if it's popular, and Microsoft can become hip to things they should do with Windows.
Or not. A better concept here is, once word gets out, to propose the idea of a partnership doing this sort of thing.
Of course, Microsoft will argue that it amounts to a gateway to piracy. After all, pre-keying a Genuine windows disc is tantamount to forcing the end-user, at gunpoint, to make an image of the disc and upload it to the nearest torrent site, post haste. [/sarcasm]
The license dies (for me) with transfer of license ownership (ie: giving my disk / 4th generation pre-keyed backup to another person).
Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a market for pre-keyed windows installations? ie: purchase a windows disk, create a pre-keyed / slipstreamed / no question / extra utility (say, ClamAV and Spybot S&D, set to run silently at regular intervals at low prio)/ extra app (say, Openoffice, Firefox and Thunderbird preinstalled as well) DVD version, and sell both for slightly more than the purchase cost of the original. Since the license accompanies the disc, and since I'm not removing anything from the user, I think it would be a sweet thing to be able to buy. Microsoft's making their money, so they've no reason to bitch. Everything else is OSS...
Actually, lemme get started on the process for that; it should be relatively easy and potentially batchable (get a batch of WinXP discs of a set version, use one to create the base image, and change the key for each disc).
Huh. and here I was thinking that the main benefit of Linux was the POSIX subsystem that allows you to build most open source software natively (thus, costing only time), giving you solutions that would otherwise cost you time AND money.
Slashdot Mirror
"Because of the 4-sided structures, synthetic diamonds are UV reactive under 'very intense short-wave ultraviolet' and will phosphoresce for a bit in the dark."
In otherwords, it shimmers almost imperceptibly better than natural ones, and is otherwise indistinguishable from a 'Magnificent' white diamond, yes?
I wonder if the synth diamond co's are busy making colored diamonds. Throwing enough copper salt into the mix would get you a quality-looking 'Emerald', same for cobalt salts for 'Sapphires'.
Hmm.
Ok, so glass was priceless until we figured out how to make it.
Why isn't diamond cheap yet?
Ooohhh... Giant Mechs. That's right up there in coolness with orbital fire.
Yay, orbital fire!
Why does that sound vaguely like the battle strategy of a pierson's puppeteer?
As an italian, I am offended that you'd say french people smell of garlic. That's strictly our domain. And olive oil.
The french smell more of BO.
And Paris (literally) smells of dog poo in the summer.
I wonder how small you could make an ethanol distiller. Couple it to a direct ethanol fuel cell (google for Acta), and you've got the makings of Bender.
Me, I can't wait. I'll sign up for the service proper, but I'm SO reverse engineering the thing to allow me to pop purchased films right on my MythTV.
http://www.dvdrewinder.com/
Meh. The WWW has problems that go FAR beyond CSS.
For example, what's with the proliferation of Flash-only pages? They're slow, they're bloated, and, while pretty, they're not often terribly functional.
PDFs: Should never be used in place of webpages.
ECMAScript that doesn't work on all of the Big Three browsers: These webmasters should be shot.
Sorry. I have my busy periods and my insanely dull periods. I do this stuff and actually do end up watching everything eventually. Just not usually when I recieve it.
Um. I was making fun of Dvorak. I don't consider anything less than Perl to be proper programming.
Still, cross-browser compatibility has been an issue since browsers were introduced. This dude's just catching on? I don't exactly know who he is, but honestly. CSS1 has had quirky issues since it was introduced
An example: borders. In Firefox, they're fitted outside the box. IE, they're fitted inside. Opera, they're fitted cenetered. When doing AJAX apps, you have to do a little bit of user-agent detection to use them properly.
Now, some people will disagree with me, but ECMAScript UA detection is EVIL. You should do object detection, as a general rule. Still, the issues with the different implementations of CSS make it problematic.
And don't even get me started on the differing implementations of DOM. It's just rediculous. What do any of these companies have to gain by disagreeing on standards?
Meanwhile, this article is basically Dvorak saying, "Man. Programming is HARD. It has to be a problem with the language."
Yeah, but (obligatorily) imagine a beowulf cluster of these!
*slumps* Yeah, I know. I have no life.
Naw. No need for the big drive. Just flash all your transcoded stuff to Data DVDs as they accumulate; You can fit a goodly amount of time on a DVD, depending on how you transcode the video.
I usually do mine at 640x480 (generally 24000/1001 fps for film), 1700k mpeg4 video, 128k mp3 audio. That gets me about 5-6 hours per 4.7G DVD.
I do transcodes-for-pocketpc for stuff I don't really care about and TV serials (320x240, 368k video, 64k mono audio), giving me about nine hours per 2G SD card, or 22 hours for a backup DVD.
'course, that meant I had to grab the extra large battery for my PPC. But hey. Worth it to avoid boredom on them long train rides.
Meh. RPC-1 firmware is easily found, man. And so are DVD-R's for authoring.
It's a conspiracy, dude. The Daves want to push Vongo and its ilk, with its DRM, but NetFlix is getting in the way. Its turnaround is about the same as a torrent on low-end DSL.
And, as we all know, the Daves control the media. They OWN the Wall Street Journal. And Rupert Murdoch. They keep him in a jar and bring him out on special occasions.
Actually, the only legislation that actually passed concerned rental companies' copying tapes in an effort to rent out more than they bought.
The only copy restrictions that went in had to do with macrovision - not an issue when copying DVDs digitally. Meanwhile, CSS is only a concern when you're transcoding; 1-1 copies can ignore it safely as well.
As for the legal implications of copying a rented DVD... I don't think the movie industry cares as much, so long as you're not sharing. Rental copying doesn't lose them quite as much money as sharing a rented copy.
Same here, except for one thing:
I work kinda feast-or-famine. If I don't have time to watch a DVD, I've got a very nice script that rips it to an mpeg4/mp3 AVI using mplayer at low priority. This way, I can watch it at my leisure and get new films in with a nice high turnover rate.
I do this if I do have time to watch it too, but I then immediately watch the encoded avi.
No, I don't delete the AVIs once I've watched them.
No, I don't see anything wrong with that.
I've played with it. It's very difficult to build anything more complex than a cli program. That, and fork() never seems to work correctly.
That's what happens when implementing a standard is an afterthought, I suppose.
"There is only a difference between the two scenarios if you buy into the idea that Hollywood is fighting to save their artistic vision... the same could not be said for Microsoft... surely....."
That's kinda the idea here; Cleanflicks lost on that point, but Microsoft couldn't really argue it; There's no artistic vision, just the idea that they (supposedly) are answering to the needs of the consumer. Something like this is double edged; it makes windows look better if it's popular, and Microsoft can become hip to things they should do with Windows.
Or not. A better concept here is, once word gets out, to propose the idea of a partnership doing this sort of thing.
Of course, Microsoft will argue that it amounts to a gateway to piracy. After all, pre-keying a Genuine windows disc is tantamount to forcing the end-user, at gunpoint, to make an image of the disc and upload it to the nearest torrent site, post haste. [/sarcasm]
?
I think their full of it.
The license dies (for me) with transfer of license ownership (ie: giving my disk / 4th generation pre-keyed backup to another person).
Meanwhile, I wonder if there's a market for pre-keyed windows installations? ie: purchase a windows disk, create a pre-keyed / slipstreamed / no question / extra utility (say, ClamAV and Spybot S&D, set to run silently at regular intervals at low prio)/ extra app (say, Openoffice, Firefox and Thunderbird preinstalled as well) DVD version, and sell both for slightly more than the purchase cost of the original. Since the license accompanies the disc, and since I'm not removing anything from the user, I think it would be a sweet thing to be able to buy. Microsoft's making their money, so they've no reason to bitch. Everything else is OSS...
Actually, lemme get started on the process for that; it should be relatively easy and potentially batchable (get a batch of WinXP discs of a set version, use one to create the base image, and change the key for each disc).
Call it "Windows XP - Not Lame Edition"
Touché.
'Course, that only counts because even the HIRD doesn't yet quite run the HURD.
Huh. and here I was thinking that the main benefit of Linux was the POSIX subsystem that allows you to build most open source software natively (thus, costing only time), giving you solutions that would otherwise cost you time AND money.
Meh. I won't be impressed until I see a robot do 8-counts. Or, you know, at least jumping jacks.