not really just a nitpick... a really serious difference. If it were 61" wide, assuming it's a 16:9 ratio (no, I didn't RTFA... this is Slashdot!), it would be 34.3125" high. Pythagoras tells us:
61^2 + 34.3125^2 = X^2
3721 + 1177.34765625 = X^2 4898.34765625 = X^2
that this would make it a 69.98819654948968" diagonal screen...
Alzheimer's is a terrible, terrible disease that I would not wish on my worst enemies...
Not me, I'd love it if Osama bin Laden got it... Maybe he'd start bombing all the wrong countries... Or forget that he's hiding from us... Or pull the pin on a grenade and try to figure out what it is (tick, tick). All good stuff..
So, I would definitely wish it on my worst enemies...
I understand market pressures as well as the next non-ecomonist. What I'm trying to point out is that, market pressures on the front end (TV Stations purchasing frequencies) was NOT there as an incentive to move to HDTV, which every set will have to be soon (think costlier TV sets...). So, now that the consumer has ponied up extra money for this high-tech fancy HDTV set, the TV stations are going to do their best to prevent them from seeing HDTV signals, because they can hit 4 demographics with one channel now, instead of one. This, in turn, shits all over the consumer.
Yeah, but that basically sucks for HD fans. The FCC winds up giving free bandwidth again and all it does it put money in the pocket of the TV stations and not improve the user experience...
Thus far nobody has really tried the multiple channels on one station gambit, although it is allowed
Actually, not true. My local station (WBAL-TV in Baltimore, MD, USA) broadcasts 3 channels on channel "2". The first (2-01) is the widescreen high-def channel. 2-02 is the 4:3 ration high def channel and 2-03 is an extremely low-def doppler radar of the Baltimore area broadcasting 24/7.
Help: re-introducing myself to the intracacies..
on
Kernel 2.6.1 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
This is a bit off-topic, but:
I was an early user of Linux (1.2.8 and earlier w/ Slackware). ("Back in my day, we had to compile our own kernels!").
Anyway, I've been screwing around again lately. I've got two machines running Mandrake 8.2 and one w/ Mandrake 9.2 (VMWare actually). Also planning on messing w/ Redhat 9 and Suse. Knoppix rules, etc.
What I want to know is: What are the complications/problems with upgrading your kernel? I remember there being all sorts of problems with shared libraries versions since they don't have any internalized versioning system to run things side by side.
Is it still true that I might break half the apps running on my system if I try to update my kernel?
Please help to re-educate a guy who has lost his way.
Yup. A "free market" is actually about the worst thing that could happen to the American people. If a free market is allowed to go unchecked, our standard of living will be averaged out with the rest of the world. There will be no more use for luxury automobiles or fancy houses.
The funny thing is that, if it were a tangible thing, like a shirt or a car, the US will tax the shit out of it. Thus, manufacturing jobs are more protected than intellectual ones. Just because you can't pick it up and say "here it is", it's not taxed, even though it's the most valuable part of our economy in the "information age".
The $10 hasn't been redone like the $20. AFAIK, it's not supposed to be either. They're supposed to do the $50 and $100 next (in that order). Get your cheap ass a $20 bill and try again;-)
I also disagree. Shitty software is a commodity. Unfortunately, many companies now think that this is the norm because of all the money they were paying inexperienced people to write software in the late 90s.
This is NOT the norm to someone with a good Comp Sci background and any pride in his work. The late 90s software quality made me want to wretch.
I look forward to the days when that's a bad dream (I hope that day comes again).
We all generally take it as a given that software is expensive to develop, but that's really not true. Only the design/requirements phase is expensive. If you know exactly what it is that you need to write, in great detail, then the actual generation of documented, working code isn't that time consuming.
This statement assumes that the problem is defined up front.
In my 15 years of software development across _many_ industries, the requirements have _never_ been fully defined up front. That is the waterfall method of development, which everyone knows doesn't work all that well for large software products. There are too many variables.
As things change, the designs tend to change too. Thus, the developers and the designers need to be in the same place. This way, when "uh-oh" moments come up, the fixes and their impacts on other subsystems can be analyzed and evaluated.
If the coders are half-way across the world, this process could take forever. More likely, they'll just hack it up in order to avoid the schedule delay (PHBs don't understand that kind of schedule impact).
Slashdot Mirror
If it were 61" wide, assuming it's a 16:9 ratio (no, I didn't RTFA... this is Slashdot!), it would be 34.3125" high. Pythagoras tells us:
61^2 + 34.3125^2 = X^2
3721 + 1177.34765625 = X^2
4898.34765625 = X^2
that this would make it a 69.98819654948968" diagonal screen...
Now THAT's a Nitpick!
Not me, I'd love it if Osama bin Laden got it... Maybe he'd start bombing all the wrong countries... Or forget that he's hiding from us... Or pull the pin on a grenade and try to figure out what it is (tick, tick). All good stuff..
So, I would definitely wish it on my worst enemies...
I'm not sure it's a lack of insight... I mean, really, no matter how strong you make your mud hut, it's not going to stand up to an earthquake....
Touchpad: "What did you call me, punk?"
Actually, not true. My local station (WBAL-TV in Baltimore, MD, USA) broadcasts 3 channels on channel "2". The first (2-01) is the widescreen high-def channel. 2-02 is the 4:3 ration high def channel and 2-03 is an extremely low-def doppler radar of the Baltimore area broadcasting 24/7.
This is a bit off-topic, but:
I was an early user of Linux (1.2.8 and earlier w/ Slackware). ("Back in my day, we had to compile our own kernels!").
Anyway, I've been screwing around again lately. I've got two machines running Mandrake 8.2 and one w/ Mandrake 9.2 (VMWare actually). Also planning on messing w/ Redhat 9 and Suse. Knoppix rules, etc.
What I want to know is: What are the complications/problems with upgrading your kernel? I remember there being all sorts of problems with shared libraries versions since they don't have any internalized versioning system to run things side by side.
Is it still true that I might break half the apps running on my system if I try to update my kernel?
Please help to re-educate a guy who has lost his way.
Thanks.
Tom
The funny thing is that, if it were a tangible thing, like a shirt or a car, the US will tax the shit out of it. Thus, manufacturing jobs are more protected than intellectual ones. Just because you can't pick it up and say "here it is", it's not taxed, even though it's the most valuable part of our economy in the "information age".
Sounds like SCO needs some fiber!
Well, that would be wrong!
1.5 * 100,000 = 150,000...
Me too.
This is NOT the norm to someone with a good Comp Sci background and any pride in his work. The late 90s software quality made me want to wretch.
I look forward to the days when that's a bad dream (I hope that day comes again).
This statement assumes that the problem is defined up front.
In my 15 years of software development across _many_ industries, the requirements have _never_ been fully defined up front. That is the waterfall method of development, which everyone knows doesn't work all that well for large software products. There are too many variables.
As things change, the designs tend to change too. Thus, the developers and the designers need to be in the same place. This way, when "uh-oh" moments come up, the fixes and their impacts on other subsystems can be analyzed and evaluated.
If the coders are half-way across the world, this process could take forever. More likely, they'll just hack it up in order to avoid the schedule delay (PHBs don't understand that kind of schedule impact).