You make it sound like it is general public that is doing the complaining. In fact, if you read the article, it is clearly the recording industry complaining, and as far as I can tell, they have been complaining and whining pretty much the whole time copyright existed. They complained about libraries, second hand bookstores, second hand music stores, tapes, cassettes, sheet music, they whine every time Micky Mouse copyright is about to expire, they fussed about fair use, etc. I personally am getting quite fed up with it, and I don't see any reason why should my tax money, my representatives precious time and bunch of other resources were used in order to prop up their outdated business model. Not to speak about the fact that if they get what they want, it will most likely mean higher Internet prices, higher technology prices, and stupid DRM annoyances everywhere you look.
It really has little to do with image stabilization, nor with hand vs. tripod. It has more to do with the behavior of light. Because of diffraction, you will never be able to under certain pixel size. You may be able to use deconvolution to get some additional detail, but with a small small sensor, you will probably never be able to crop that much. You would need to increase the sensor size. That said, having an affordable 100 megapixel large format camera would be sweet.
One thing I don't like about XML is that when you get to more "local" stuff, you still have to use the ... </tag> syntax. Where in LaTeX you would write \textbf{blablahblah}, in XML you have to do <textbf>blahblahblah</textbf>. At least for me the LaTeX way is more readable and easier to write. When you get down to details like math, MathML is just incredibly verbose compared to TeX. TeX syntax for math is messy and inconsistent but in general pretty fast to type, and not too hard to read. MathML is much easier to parse by a machine. For me, LaTeX has the right mixture of opening/closing tags on higher level, commands with parameters in the middle, and messy shortcuts on the low level. I completely agree about the \section, that's totally inconsistent. Of course, you actually can use
I have heard this explanation, and I don't understand it. This was a primary, there is no reason whatsoever to go vote if you don't know who to vote for, is there? Why would anybody vote in a primary if they don't have a preference for one of the candidates?
That's true, F-spot (or mono) has been much more stable lately, I still have an occasional crash every once a while, but I didn't have one in which I would loose any work or data in at least a year. A light table mode would be great, one where you can see several versions of a photo, zoom and pan them simultaneously, etc.
The feature I would most welcome a possibility to filter a photo through an external command, and read the result in as a new version. I often find myself exporting photo to a folder, opening a terminal, running a command on the photo, then opening the result in GIMP. The going back to f-spot, opening the photo in GIMP with new version created, switching to GIMP, dragging the background layer from the modified photo to the new version of photo opened from f-spot, deleting the original background layer in the new version of the photo and adjusting the size of the image if necessary, and saving thus overwritten new version to f-spot. This is a lot of work in order to do something that could be so easy. It should be possible to implement this as a plugin, but I just cannot figure out how to even start writing plugins for f-spot. I found some documentation on the web, but it only confused the hell out of me. I have written number of scripts in order to extend functionality of programs I use, such as emacs, jed, slrn, vim, ipe, and number of others, I don't mind having to edit configuration files to get a functionality I need, but this one simply did not make any sense to me.
The problem is, I believe, that majority of people using GIMP for image editing would not use these buttons (I use GIMP quite heavily, and I know I would never use them), so for them (us), such buttons would just end up cluttering already pretty complicated user interface.
People often complain about GIMP user interface, which in my opinion is pretty good. The main problem IMHO is that the user interface is not flexible or configurable enough. For example the toolbox. When I bought my actual toolbox, the kind that sits in your garage, it came with a bunch of tools. I tossed half of them out, and replaced them with other tools, more useful for the way I work. However, I cannot do that with the GIMP toolbox. The same with menus. There is no easy way to reorganize the menus. I would like to, in addition to the existing menus, create a menu that would contain all commands that I use on daily bases for photo editing. In another menu, I would put all the command for creating and editing certain types of mathematical graphs, and so on.
GIMP is very flexible and powerful program, but its user interface is rigid and does not allow you to easily use all the flexibility and power. Unfortunately, most people complaining about the GIMP user interface seem to want even more rigid interface, with a single window and some sort of MDI interface. That, IMNSHO, would be a huge step backward.
I have never tried it with a webcam (so far, I have not had a need to use one), but I have used xsane with a number of scanners, and I have never ran across one that would not work with it.
I have never heard about shotwell, so I went to its website (it would be nice if the article actually included a link to that). As far as I can tell, there are some important features missing from shotwell. Namely, there is no information about raw, integration with ufraw or another raw developing software, editing photos in external editors (GIMP), or running external filters on photos.
Also, it does not seem to have as many export options as f-spot.
I am definitely not happy with f-spot, and always keep looking for a replacement, but so far I was unable to find one, and, as far as I can tell, shotwell with its current set of features is not going work for me.
That was exactly my reaction when I read about it in an article that showed up in my google news page: "who in the world goes to the google homepage these days?" Then I went there just to see what's going on. I couln't care either way, but my second reaction was "that must suck if you are on a dialup".
I hate to rain on your parade, especially since I in principle agree with you, but India had several *extremely* violent uprisings against British, and they were suppressed with matching brutality. The number of lives lost were quite staggering. The question is, would any of the peaceful or diplomatic ways of gaining independence succeed without the previous military conflicts? I don't think we have any way of figuring that out.
First, we want to move the bottom panel to the left of the screen, and devote that to launching and switching between applications. That frees up vertical space for web content, at the cost of horizontal space, which is cheaper in a widescreen world.
Than sounds a lot like my fvwm config that I have been using for the last about 10 years. Just replace gdm with slim and gnome with fvwm and you get a blazingly fast environment that consumes almost no memory.
The problem is that in mathematics, the independent variable normally goes on the X axis (horizontal). In the case of learning, "effort" is the independent variable since "knowledge acquired" depends on "effort" and not the other way around.
Hm, I disagree with that. Assuming that knowledge acquired is a one-to-one function of effort, it does not matter which of the variables is dependent and which is independent. I think more common question is going to be "how much effort do I need to acquire certain knowledge?", rather than "how much knowledge do I acquire with given effort?".
Re:Vim most definitely can't "do everything"
on
Hacking Vim 7.2
·
· Score: 1
Well, you could create a syntax rule that would highlight the 80th character on each line, or the first 80 characters, or the 81 and higher characters...
Actually, they are working for me. Your taxes were used to build that bridge that goes nowhere. And to fix those potholes on the highway that nobody ever drives on.
I hired those dudes to not only collect the data, but also to analyze them, and use them to draw some conclusions. They should give me access to the data together with their final results, so I can independently verify that the data indeed imply their conclusion. It would also be good if they released the data to the public when they are done with it, in case someone would like to have a go at the data, perhaps to study some other property of it, but I understand that the data may be of such character that it would be useless for anybody else.
You do realize that Debian *always* backports security fixes in stable, right? The reasoning is that switching to a new version of a program in order to get a security fix in is likely to break something else.
OTOH, my reaction to this story was also that they should do it like Debian. Whatever happened to "we release when it is ready"?
I am not completely sure, as I don't use foxit, but if I remember correctly, the problem with the last exploit on foxit was that it executed the binary without a dialog box. Adobe reader asked user to confirm with a dialog box. In my opinion something like that is not a vulnerability, so adobe had nothing to patch.
Tried it with Adobe Reader 9 on OpenSUSE 11.1. I got a popup with a very clear warning that the reader is about to open a file that can damage my computer blah blah blah, it even said which file it is, and asked if I want to open it or cancel. After selecting "Open", it did not actually open the file, it offered to save it instead.
I don't have any problem with this, as long as it is not possible to bypass the warning somehow.
I have used the "Launch" functionality in Adobe Reader before, the TeXLive installer is actually a PDF file, that contains instructions for installation, and buttons that launch the actual installer programs.
I don't know how this game works, but the concept of 4D puzzles is nothing new. Years ago I wrote a simple 4 dimensional maze. I started with a simple 2D maze (my son at that time liked to play a simple maze game, but did not like several things about the way the game worked, so I wrote him another one one, learning Python along the way). Then I extended it to 3D by adding several floors. After that, it was a simple exercise to extend it to 4D. Let's say you start with a simple 3x3 maze, that is 9 rooms arranged in a square grid on a plane, with doors connecting some of the adjacent rooms. You use 'h' and 'l' to go left and right, and 'k' and 'j' to go forward and backward. You take 3 such "floor-plans", put them above each other, and connect some of the adjacent rooms through the floors and ceilings. You add keys, say 'u' and 'n', to move upstairs and downstairs. You can also add "rotate the world" feature, which will turn the cube on a side, so that the up/down direction will bacome, say, left and right, etc.
Now you take 3 such cubes, and add "doors" from some rooms in one cube to corresponding rooms in an "adjacent" cube, you add two more keys, say 'o' and ',', to move from cube to cube, and generalize the "rotations" to work in 4D, and you have a simple 4D maze. Then you can put a wumpus in the maze, couple of bottomless pits, and have fun. You can do other puzzles, for example, you can create a 4D minesweeper this way.
I guess you could interpret the fourth dimension as time, you would have a 3x3x3 maze where each night, some doors would disappear, and new doors would sprout between rooms, and you can move into the future or past, in the range of three given days.
If it wasn't maintained, it wouldn't say it runs on XP/Vista/7, now would it?;-)
Actually, it could. I had a situation when I wanted to install an application on windows, that was supposed to be compatible with XP/Vista, and it refused to install until I installed the latest service pack. Installing the service pack broke another application, which was not maintained anymore, it originally ran on XP and it said it should run on XP, but only until the said service pack.
How many times has someone said in these forums that Kubuntu is terrible but OpenSUSE is awesome? They're both Linux with KDE on top, right? Why are they different?
Of course distros are different. That's the whole point of having distros. Different guis, different administration tools, different way of organizing things on screen, etc. Most of the time, though, you could configure Kubuntu to look and behave exactly like OpenSUSE, and vice versa. But that's not what this discussion is about. What we are talking about is running third party binary applications on different versions of the same OS. As far as I can tell, if I purchase or download a binary only application (a number of games, Adobe reader, Maple are examples that I have on this particular computer), they install and run on pretty much every distro I have ever used. If there is any requirement at all, it says linux 2.2 or later or sometimes 2.4 or later, but that would be like saying Windows XP or later. I simply don't see that "million of incompatible versions" problem that people talk about.
Slashdot Mirror
You make it sound like it is general public that is doing the complaining. In fact, if you read the article, it is clearly the recording industry complaining, and as far as I can tell, they have been complaining and whining pretty much the whole time copyright existed. They complained about libraries, second hand bookstores, second hand music stores, tapes, cassettes, sheet music, they whine every time Micky Mouse copyright is about to expire, they fussed about fair use, etc. I personally am getting quite fed up with it, and I don't see any reason why should my tax money, my representatives precious time and bunch of other resources were used in order to prop up their outdated business model. Not to speak about the fact that if they get what they want, it will most likely mean higher Internet prices, higher technology prices, and stupid DRM annoyances everywhere you look.
It really has little to do with image stabilization, nor with hand vs. tripod. It has more to do with the behavior of light. Because of diffraction, you will never be able to under certain pixel size. You may be able to use deconvolution to get some additional detail, but with a small small sensor, you will probably never be able to crop that much. You would need to increase the sensor size. That said, having an affordable 100 megapixel large format camera would be sweet.
One thing I don't like about XML is that when you get to more "local" stuff, you still have to use the ... </tag> syntax. Where in LaTeX you would write \textbf{blablahblah}, in XML you have to do <textbf>blahblahblah</textbf>. At least for me the LaTeX way is more readable and easier to write. When you get down to details like math, MathML is just incredibly verbose compared to TeX. TeX syntax for math is messy and inconsistent but in general pretty fast to type, and not too hard to read. MathML is much easier to parse by a machine. For me, LaTeX has the right mixture of opening/closing tags on higher level, commands with parameters in the middle, and messy shortcuts on the low level. I completely agree about the \section, that's totally inconsistent. Of course, you actually can use
...
\begin{section}{Title}
\end{section}
but nobody does it.
You mean a schooner.
I believe that should be
\setupawesome[extra awesome]
\startawesome
Awesome!
\stopawesome
I have heard this explanation, and I don't understand it. This was a primary, there is no reason whatsoever to go vote if you don't know who to vote for, is there? Why would anybody vote in a primary if they don't have a preference for one of the candidates?
That's true, F-spot (or mono) has been much more stable lately, I still have an occasional crash every once a while, but I didn't have one in which I would loose any work or data in at least a year. A light table mode would be great, one where you can see several versions of a photo, zoom and pan them simultaneously, etc.
The feature I would most welcome a possibility to filter a photo through an external command, and read the result in as a new version. I often find myself exporting photo to a folder, opening a terminal, running a command on the photo, then opening the result in GIMP. The going back to f-spot, opening the photo in GIMP with new version created, switching to GIMP, dragging the background layer from the modified photo to the new version of photo opened from f-spot, deleting the original background layer in the new version of the photo and adjusting the size of the image if necessary, and saving thus overwritten new version to f-spot. This is a lot of work in order to do something that could be so easy. It should be possible to implement this as a plugin, but I just cannot figure out how to even start writing plugins for f-spot. I found some documentation on the web, but it only confused the hell out of me. I have written number of scripts in order to extend functionality of programs I use, such as emacs, jed, slrn, vim, ipe, and number of others, I don't mind having to edit configuration files to get a functionality I need, but this one simply did not make any sense to me.
The problem is, I believe, that majority of people using GIMP for image editing would not use these buttons (I use GIMP quite heavily, and I know I would never use them), so for them (us), such buttons would just end up cluttering already pretty complicated user interface.
People often complain about GIMP user interface, which in my opinion is pretty good. The main problem IMHO is that the user interface is not flexible or configurable enough. For example the toolbox. When I bought my actual toolbox, the kind that sits in your garage, it came with a bunch of tools. I tossed half of them out, and replaced them with other tools, more useful for the way I work. However, I cannot do that with the GIMP toolbox. The same with menus. There is no easy way to reorganize the menus. I would like to, in addition to the existing menus, create a menu that would contain all commands that I use on daily bases for photo editing. In another menu, I would put all the command for creating and editing certain types of mathematical graphs, and so on.
GIMP is very flexible and powerful program, but its user interface is rigid and does not allow you to easily use all the flexibility and power. Unfortunately, most people complaining about the GIMP user interface seem to want even more rigid interface, with a single window and some sort of MDI interface. That, IMNSHO, would be a huge step backward.
I have never tried it with a webcam (so far, I have not had a need to use one), but I have used xsane with a number of scanners, and I have never ran across one that would not work with it.
I have never heard about shotwell, so I went to its website (it would be nice if the article actually included a link to that). As far as I can tell, there are some important features missing from shotwell. Namely, there is no information about raw, integration with ufraw or another raw developing software, editing photos in external editors (GIMP), or running external filters on photos.
Also, it does not seem to have as many export options as f-spot.
I am definitely not happy with f-spot, and always keep looking for a replacement, but so far I was unable to find one, and, as far as I can tell, shotwell with its current set of features is not going work for me.
That was exactly my reaction when I read about it in an article that showed up in my google news page: "who in the world goes to the google homepage these days?" Then I went there just to see what's going on. I couln't care either way, but my second reaction was "that must suck if you are on a dialup".
How in the hell is that similar?
I hate to rain on your parade, especially since I in principle agree with you, but India had several *extremely* violent uprisings against British, and they were suppressed with matching brutality. The number of lives lost were quite staggering. The question is, would any of the peaceful or diplomatic ways of gaining independence succeed without the previous military conflicts? I don't think we have any way of figuring that out.
First, we want to move the bottom panel to the left of the screen, and devote that to launching and switching between applications. That frees up vertical space for web content, at the cost of horizontal space, which is cheaper in a widescreen world.
Than sounds a lot like my fvwm config that I have been using for the last about 10 years. Just replace gdm with slim and gnome with fvwm and you get a blazingly fast environment that consumes almost no memory.
The problem is that in mathematics, the independent variable normally goes on the X axis (horizontal). In the case of learning, "effort" is the independent variable since "knowledge acquired" depends on "effort" and not the other way around.
Hm, I disagree with that. Assuming that knowledge acquired is a one-to-one function of effort, it does not matter which of the variables is dependent and which is independent. I think more common question is going to be "how much effort do I need to acquire certain knowledge?", rather than "how much knowledge do I acquire with given effort?".
Well, you could create a syntax rule that would highlight the 80th character on each line, or the first 80 characters, or the 81 and higher characters...
The problem is, what is a character?
Wow! Fomapan. Now, that's a name I have not heard in a long time...
I used to live on that stuff. I didn't know they still make it. Export it, even.
...if you're taking my money, you work for me.
Actually, they are working for me. Your taxes were used to build that bridge that goes nowhere. And to fix those potholes on the highway that nobody ever drives on.
I hired those dudes to not only collect the data, but also to analyze them, and use them to draw some conclusions. They should give me access to the data together with their final results, so I can independently verify that the data indeed imply their conclusion. It would also be good if they released the data to the public when they are done with it, in case someone would like to have a go at the data, perhaps to study some other property of it, but I understand that the data may be of such character that it would be useless for anybody else.
You do realize that Debian *always* backports security fixes in stable, right? The reasoning is that switching to a new version of a program in order to get a security fix in is likely to break something else.
OTOH, my reaction to this story was also that they should do it like Debian. Whatever happened to "we release when it is ready"?
Dude, it didn't work! You seem to be out of magical energy...
Can somebody explain to me what does this have to do with news for nerds, stuff that matters?
I am not completely sure, as I don't use foxit, but if I remember correctly, the problem with the last exploit on foxit was that it executed the binary without a dialog box. Adobe reader asked user to confirm with a dialog box. In my opinion something like that is not a vulnerability, so adobe had nothing to patch.
Tried it with Adobe Reader 9 on OpenSUSE 11.1. I got a popup with a very clear warning that the reader is about to open a file that can damage my computer blah blah blah, it even said which file it is, and asked if I want to open it or cancel. After selecting "Open", it did not actually open the file, it offered to save it instead.
I don't have any problem with this, as long as it is not possible to bypass the warning somehow.
I have used the "Launch" functionality in Adobe Reader before, the TeXLive installer is actually a PDF file, that contains instructions for installation, and buttons that launch the actual installer programs.
I don't know how this game works, but the concept of 4D puzzles is nothing new. Years ago I wrote a simple 4 dimensional maze. I started with a simple 2D maze (my son at that time liked to play a simple maze game, but did not like several things about the way the game worked, so I wrote him another one one, learning Python along the way). Then I extended it to 3D by adding several floors. After that, it was a simple exercise to extend it to 4D. Let's say you start with a simple 3x3 maze, that is 9 rooms arranged in a square grid on a plane, with doors connecting some of the adjacent rooms. You use 'h' and 'l' to go left and right, and 'k' and 'j' to go forward and backward. You take 3 such "floor-plans", put them above each other, and connect some of the adjacent rooms through the floors and ceilings. You add keys, say 'u' and 'n', to move upstairs and downstairs. You can also add "rotate the world" feature, which will turn the cube on a side, so that the up/down direction will bacome, say, left and right, etc.
Now you take 3 such cubes, and add "doors" from some rooms in one cube to corresponding rooms in an "adjacent" cube, you add two more keys, say 'o' and ',', to move from cube to cube, and generalize the "rotations" to work in 4D, and you have a simple 4D maze. Then you can put a wumpus in the maze, couple of bottomless pits, and have fun. You can do other puzzles, for example, you can create a 4D minesweeper this way.
I guess you could interpret the fourth dimension as time, you would have a 3x3x3 maze where each night, some doors would disappear, and new doors would sprout between rooms, and you can move into the future or past, in the range of three given days.
If it wasn't maintained, it wouldn't say it runs on XP/Vista/7, now would it? ;-)
Actually, it could. I had a situation when I wanted to install an application on windows, that was supposed to be compatible with XP/Vista, and it refused to install until I installed the latest service pack. Installing the service pack broke another application, which was not maintained anymore, it originally ran on XP and it said it should run on XP, but only until the said service pack.
How many times has someone said in these forums that Kubuntu is terrible but OpenSUSE is awesome? They're both Linux with KDE on top, right? Why are they different?
Of course distros are different. That's the whole point of having distros. Different guis, different administration tools, different way of organizing things on screen, etc. Most of the time, though, you could configure Kubuntu to look and behave exactly like OpenSUSE, and vice versa. But that's not what this discussion is about. What we are talking about is running third party binary applications on different versions of the same OS. As far as I can tell, if I purchase or download a binary only application (a number of games, Adobe reader, Maple are examples that I have on this particular computer), they install and run on pretty much every distro I have ever used. If there is any requirement at all, it says linux 2.2 or later or sometimes 2.4 or later, but that would be like saying Windows XP or later. I simply don't see that "million of incompatible versions" problem that people talk about.