Flash has it's own native video format now(flv), which is useful for developers seeking a cross-platform audience (since the Flash plug-in has a wider installed base than any of various video players out there...except perhaps Windows Media...and makes it possible for developers to integrate the video into the page however they like)
The Flash video format is not too bad if you pony up for Sorenson Squeeze...otherwise, it sucks.
I didn't test the url, but my guess is that it what they are using, if the site is Flash based.
I recently purchased a very nice film SLR for 150 bucks new, because I wanted an SLR but was unwilling to pony up the equivelant of my monthly mortgage for one.
I own a decent digital, as well, so I have come to know both breeds.
I hate the digital. I hate its crappy, battery-sucking LCD viewfinder that is useless in bright sunlight. I hate its shutter lag that assures I always miss the shot. I hate its habit of saving power by shutting off every two minutes , assuring that I am still rebooting my camera whenever the next photo op occurs. I hate the fact that I need to carry twice my weight in batteries to every major event. I hate burrowing through menus using only two tiny buttons whose functions change at the whim of the camera's software developer in order to change simple camera settings.
I LIKE my film camera. I like that it only cost me 150 bucks, so if I lose or break it, I won't be suicidal. I like that it has a clearly marked button or dial for everything I want to do, so that I can change settings with ease. I like that I can change film stocks when I want different results. I like that when I depress the shutter, it takes a picture RIGHT NOW, instead of later. I like that I can forget and leave it on, and my battery will still be good for weeks.
I even kind've like waiting for my film to be developed (even if it's as long as a whole hour). Until that moment, EVERY picture I take is a potential pulizter prize winner:-)
To bring them into the digital realm, I just have them dropped on Kodak CD's, which are high-res, cheaper than prints and look much better than scans of prints. I figure it is a small price to pay for actually getting the shots I want, and it's handy to have the stuff already archived on CD.
Above all, I like being secure in the knowledge that ten years from now, my camera will still be working. I don't feel that secure with my digital, which will probably be a doorstop in a few years.
The only benefits I see to digitals are increased picture capacity, the ability to review your photos on the spot and the means to make your own porn (the internet gets all the credit for the porn explosion in this country, but I think that people forget that a lot of porn sites owe their existence to a bunch of horny people who didn't have to sneak into a photo lab at night to build their websites).
My take, anyway. Your mileage may vary. But I see a lot of money being spent these days on stuff that is more promises of a better world than a truly better one. Ten years ago, a 17 inch CRT monitor cost me 500 bucks. However, thanks to the magic of modern technology, I can now purchase a far less durable 17 inch monitor that can only be viewed from one angle for....drumroll...500 bucks! But, hey, they're lighter, right?
Somewhere along the way, people stopped selling BETTER ideas, and just starting selling NEW ones. There is a difference...
Clearly, you have not tried a 35mm SLR. I have both film and digital cameras. My film SLR cost a third the price as the digital, and routinely takes better pictures...more image area, better color and zero shutter lag. And a battery lasts me for months.
Digital SLR's are another technology that is being rammed down out throats without any consideration as to it's true utility. Everyone seems to forget that a digital camera is convenient only so long as you have access to a personal computer and printer, and in many ways is inferior in usability.
I gave up taking my digital to air shows...it was a worthless paper weight, perpetually stuck in some power saving mode when the critical photo op occurred, or letting subjects escape due to shutter lag, or completely impossible to see through owing to the power-sucking LCD viewfinder that is invisible in bright sunlight. And low-light photography with digitals is laughable.
I have yet to lose an SD card, but I bet that is a moment destined to increase my love of all things digital.
Digital has its uses, but it is nowhere near ready to replace film.
Exporting religion has been a time honored Christian custom for centuries.
Bush is just the latest in a long line of crusaders.
I don't understand it any more than I understand why women insist that you try a spoonful of whatever the hell they happen to be eating, especially if it tastes funny...
The real danger of genetically engineered ANYTHING is that you risk creating a monoculture, which could make an entire food crop or species vulnerable to rapid extinction under adverse conditions.
The more specialized a species becomes, the more it needs a tightly defined environment in which to exist. If anything happens to change its environment...and it will...it can have catastrophic consequences.
Engineered plants and animals can also overwhelm other wildlife in the same niches of the ecosystem, despite precautions, and throw the entire ecosystem out of balance. (In much the same way that non-native animals introduced to closed ecosystems can have very disruptive results...witness the Cane toad plague in Australia)
Mother nature has spent millenia sorting out which species are best adapted to survive on our planet, and she does so without prejudice. Can you say the same for a profit-minded food corporation?
I can see how skipping some content would be nice. My wife is a teacher, and sometimes shows relevant films to her classes...but must pre-screen and re-record many of them to omit content that may be inappropriate. (That is, content that will have some parent screaming bloody murder...there is always at least one, even after signing the waivers.)
It's tough to find a movie that doesn't go over the top at some point nowadays...studios seem to prefer PG-13 and R ratings today, instead of the G ratings of yesteryear.
All good fun, but good luck trying to screen this stuff from your six year old. It is no longer even possible to watch TV during prime-time without jumping in front of the screen every five minutes. The only safe channel is PBS (or, ironically, C-SPAN...nothing going on there).
I agree. Unfortunately, Star Wars has not really reached the level of mythology yet, or even public domain. And, thanks to persistent lobbying by Hollywood suits, who keep pushing the for longer lived copyright laws (which already exceed the life of the artist PLUS 75 years), it will not do so for a long time.
In general, however, copyright law is less of a deterrent to derivative works than trademark law, which is very restrictive. However, trademark protection only lasts as long as company's can afford to enforce it, and expires rapidly (ten years) if not renewed. Unfortunately, mega corporations like the film studios have become can afford to keep protecting their franchises forever.
Funny how often laws designed to "protect us" always seem to end up imprisoning us.
Amen. I'm glad someone said it. I'm really tired of hearing from victims of the latest medical buzz word. This country is wall to wall victims. Whatever happened to personality traits? Being different doesn't mean you have a developmental disorder. BUT having a developmental disorder means you WILL be very different, indeed...
My youngest son is autistic. He is what they refer to as "high-functioning". He is eight years old, has difficulty completing a meaningful sentence (most of what he says are snippets of speech from favorite movies), experiences difficulty understanding what is said to him without some sort of visual cue, and lives largely in a world all his own...one that is full of irrational fear and frustration over a planet far too unpredictable and alien for him to understand. He has a violent temper...he has already broken the noses of two school teachers (people who say teachers don't work for a living clearly never got to know one)...and it requires medication to simply make him manageable. Before treatment, it was not unusual for me to have to hold or sit on him for over an hour while he threw a truly epic tantrum, and he would sleep no more than two or three hours at a time. He would, instead, rush about the house like a large two-year-old, leaving a swath of destruction in his wake. We have long since abandoned any effort to own anything nice. Until recently, we rarely even left the house as a family. Vacations were invariably disasterous, and even trips to the grocery were a challenge. Babysitters or daycare were never an option.
By contrast, my other son is quite normal, except for being forced to deal with a brother who is not.
This is what the doctors mean when they say "has trouble socializing"...not someone who is too clueless to wear deodorant or to know better than to keep piles of Star Wars toys on his office desk.
Why does everyone insist on giving Reagan credit for toppling the Soviet Union? Communism bankrupted itself. Ol' Ronny nearly bankrupted our own country trying to keep up.
Anyone taken a look at Vietnam lately? After years of unsuccessful and bloody efforts by "Democratic" countries to force it to adopt a new economic system (because that is really what all this "political" rhetoric is about...who gets to be rich, and how?), Vietnam has voluntarily and quite peacefully adopted a capitalistic economic model which has rescued its economy from the financially disasterous Communist model.
And no one had to get shot.
Likewise, if Reagan had invested all those billions in the economic well being of our nation, instead of non-productive military spending, Russia would still be bankrupt...their spending would have continued, owing to paranoia, China, Nato, and the neccessity to police a dozen unwilling vassal states lining the world's longest border...and we would have ended the cold war with a lot more money than we have now.
Reagan was not a hero of the cold war. He just spent a lot of money on the military-industrial complex, and some fat cats and hawks really love him for it. But he was not a war hero. He was a grade B actor...in politics, as well as in the movies.
What many people seem to forget in these endless debates about the "Theory" of Evolution is that science defines "Theory" as a working model of the universe...that is, it embraces the model as fact for all practical purposes until evidence to the contrary requires a rethinking of the model...at which time, scientists will cheerfully rework their findings and put forth a new theory. And all without placing a single sticker on anything.
It is simply understood that science takes everything with a grain of salt. No sticker necessary.
That is the difference between how religion and science consider the universe. Scientists are willing to explore new possibilities, and those who discover new ideas are lauded...not branded as heretics.
It's the difference between discovering the universe, or just taking someone's "word" for it.
I wonder how people would feel if someone insisted that they put warning stickers on the Bible?
Y'know, I've been seeing people whine a bit about Apple's DRM, but it is far more liberal than most online music providers DRM, and, frankly, after using iTunes for a couple years now, I have yet to bump up against it. I have had no problem burning as many CD's as I like.
What's the big deal?
And, Doug, I am sorry to say, you DO sound like you're getting a bit grumpy in your old age LOL. Look around a bit. There is more good music out there than you might think...most of it below the pop radar. iTunes is, in fact, a great way to find it.
And now that they take monoply money, you don't even have to feel bad about it:-)
Actually, the German law DOES stifle free speech. I recently did some work for a game company that produces historical wargames. All of the cut scenes featuring archival war footage had to be edited to remove any sign of swastikas. (Keep in mind that the Nazis painted swastikas on EVERYTHING).
I was forced to remove a promotional trailer for a cartoon about an inept Luftwaffe pilot (fritzthefox.com) from one of their kiosks at a convention because the aircraft in it had swastikas painted on their tails (which they did in real life).
I found the whole thing ludicrous. I know these laws are meant to prevent the resurgence of one of the worst hate groups that ever existed, but the law is more about fear than it is prevention.
The fact is, the Nazi party could never rise again. The next evil empire will not be led by a bunch of tatooed skinheads. The next time they start herding people into camps, if will be under a different flag, for different reasons, and everyone will fall in line in the name of patriotism and self-defense.
Banning a symbol will accomplish nothing, except to wipe away any recorded memory of the last witch hunt.
I have a friend who was precisely the sort of person you describe. At least, he WAS my friend until I did some work for him myself. He complained about my work, too, and all efforts to appease him were futile, so I eventually told him to keep his money and don't let the door hit him on the way out.
I think some people simply learn that squeeky wheels get more grease, and decide to make squeeking a lifestyle. Unfortunately, there is nothing more annoying than a squeeking wheel.
I agree. I've hated Amazon's "improved" search ever since they implemented the ability to search within books BY DEFAULT.
Now, any search using almost any given keyword returns thousands of results. It's rendered their basic search engine useless.
It wouldn't be quite so bad if the link to the advanced search engine was easier to find. But despite frequent visits to amazon, I never seem to find it without some digging.
I really think programmers and lawmakers should get more days off. They obviously don't know when to quit working...
Actually, we had a small but significant ground presence in the form of special forces, who helped organize and lead the rebels, and call in the air strikes.
Slashdot Mirror
Flash has it's own native video format now(flv), which is useful for developers seeking a cross-platform audience (since the Flash plug-in has a wider installed base than any of various video players out there...except perhaps Windows Media...and makes it possible for developers to integrate the video into the page however they like)
The Flash video format is not too bad if you pony up for Sorenson Squeeze...otherwise, it sucks.
I didn't test the url, but my guess is that it what they are using, if the site is Flash based.
I recently purchased a very nice film SLR for 150 bucks new, because I wanted an SLR but was unwilling to pony up the equivelant of my monthly mortgage for one.
:-)
I own a decent digital, as well, so I have come to know both breeds.
I hate the digital. I hate its crappy, battery-sucking LCD viewfinder that is useless in bright sunlight. I hate its shutter lag that assures I always miss the shot. I hate its habit of saving power by shutting off every two minutes , assuring that I am still rebooting my camera whenever the next photo op occurs. I hate the fact that I need to carry twice my weight in batteries to every major event. I hate burrowing through menus using only two tiny buttons whose functions change at the whim of the camera's software developer in order to change simple camera settings.
I LIKE my film camera. I like that it only cost me 150 bucks, so if I lose or break it, I won't be suicidal. I like that it has a clearly marked button or dial for everything I want to do, so that I can change settings with ease. I like that I can change film stocks when I want different results. I like that when I depress the shutter, it takes a picture RIGHT NOW, instead of later. I like that I can forget and leave it on, and my battery will still be good for weeks.
I even kind've like waiting for my film to be developed (even if it's as long as a whole hour). Until that moment, EVERY picture I take is a potential pulizter prize winner
To bring them into the digital realm, I just have them dropped on Kodak CD's, which are high-res, cheaper than prints and look much better
than scans of prints. I figure it is a small price to pay for actually getting the shots I want, and it's handy to have the stuff already archived on CD.
Above all, I like being secure in the knowledge that ten years from now, my camera will still be working. I don't feel that secure with my digital, which will probably be a doorstop in a few years.
The only benefits I see to digitals are increased picture capacity, the ability to review your photos on the spot and the means to make your own porn (the internet gets all the credit for the porn explosion in this country, but I think that people forget that a lot of porn sites owe their existence to a bunch of horny people who didn't have to sneak into a photo lab at night to build their websites).
My take, anyway. Your mileage may vary. But I see a lot of money being spent these days on stuff that is more promises of a better world than a truly better one. Ten years ago, a 17 inch CRT monitor cost me 500 bucks. However, thanks to the magic of modern technology, I can now purchase a far less durable 17 inch monitor that can only be viewed from one angle for....drumroll...500 bucks! But, hey, they're lighter, right?
Somewhere along the way, people stopped selling BETTER ideas, and just starting selling NEW ones. There is a difference...
Clearly, you have not tried a 35mm SLR. I have both film and digital cameras. My film SLR cost a third the price as the digital, and routinely takes better pictures...more image area, better color and zero shutter lag. And a battery lasts me for months.
Digital SLR's are another technology that is being rammed down out throats without any consideration as to it's true utility. Everyone seems to forget that a digital camera is convenient only so long as you have access to a personal computer and printer, and in many ways is inferior in usability.
I gave up taking my digital to air shows...it was a worthless paper weight, perpetually stuck in some power saving mode when the critical photo op occurred, or letting subjects escape due to shutter lag, or completely impossible to see through owing to the power-sucking LCD viewfinder that is invisible in bright sunlight. And low-light photography with digitals is laughable.
I have yet to lose an SD card, but I bet that is a moment destined to increase my love of all things digital.
Digital has its uses, but it is nowhere near ready to replace film.
Have you SEEN the average American lately? We INVENTED plus sizes.
Poverty, sure. Hunger? Not yet. Your average street bum here is begging for his next bottle of Ripple, not a Big Mac.
Note that this principle operates in inverse proportion to the amount of money invested in the dream.
For example, you will meet much more resistence if you criticize someone's choice of autommobiles or computers than you will if you razz their tie.
Not that this truism applies to emotional investment as well. (Try deconstructing someone's religion to see this in action)
Exporting religion has been a time honored Christian custom for centuries.
Bush is just the latest in a long line of crusaders.
I don't understand it any more than I understand why women insist that you try a spoonful of whatever the hell they happen to be eating, especially if it tastes funny...
The real danger of genetically engineered ANYTHING is that you risk creating a monoculture, which could make an entire food crop or species vulnerable to rapid extinction under adverse conditions.
The more specialized a species becomes, the more it needs a tightly defined environment in which to exist. If anything happens to change its environment...and it will...it can have catastrophic consequences.
Engineered plants and animals can also overwhelm other wildlife in the same niches of the ecosystem, despite precautions, and throw the entire ecosystem out of balance. (In much the same way that non-native animals introduced to closed ecosystems can have very disruptive results...witness the Cane toad plague in Australia)
Mother nature has spent millenia sorting out which species are best adapted to survive on our planet, and she does so without prejudice. Can you say the same for a profit-minded food corporation?
I can see how skipping some content would be nice. My wife is a teacher, and sometimes shows relevant films to her classes...but must pre-screen and re-record many of them to omit content that may be inappropriate. (That is, content that will have some parent screaming bloody murder...there is always at least one, even after signing the waivers.)
It's tough to find a movie that doesn't go over the top at some point nowadays...studios seem to prefer PG-13 and R ratings today, instead of the G ratings of yesteryear.
All good fun, but good luck trying to screen this stuff from your six year old. It is no longer even possible to watch TV during prime-time without jumping in front of the screen every five minutes.
The only safe channel is PBS (or, ironically, C-SPAN...nothing going on there).
They're gonna screw with the interface again, aren't they?
Just shoot me.
I agree. Unfortunately, Star Wars has not really reached the level of mythology yet, or even public domain. And, thanks to persistent lobbying by Hollywood suits, who keep pushing the for longer lived copyright laws (which already exceed the life of the artist PLUS 75 years), it will not do so for a long time.
In general, however, copyright law is less of a deterrent to derivative works than trademark law, which is very restrictive. However, trademark protection only lasts as long as company's can afford to enforce it, and expires rapidly (ten years) if not renewed. Unfortunately, mega corporations like the film studios have become can afford to keep protecting their franchises forever.
Funny how often laws designed to "protect us" always seem to end up imprisoning us.
Amen. I'm glad someone said it. I'm really tired of hearing from victims of the latest medical buzz word. This country is wall to wall victims. Whatever happened to personality traits? Being different doesn't mean you have a developmental disorder. BUT having a developmental disorder means you WILL be very different, indeed...
My youngest son is autistic. He is what they refer to as "high-functioning". He is eight years old, has difficulty completing a meaningful sentence (most of what he says are snippets of speech from favorite movies), experiences difficulty understanding what is said to him without some sort of visual cue, and lives largely in a world all his own...one that is full of irrational fear and frustration over a planet far too unpredictable and alien for him to understand. He has a violent temper...he has already broken the noses of two school teachers (people who say teachers don't work for a living clearly never got to know one)...and it requires medication to simply make him manageable. Before treatment, it was not unusual for me to have to hold or sit on him for over an hour while he threw a truly epic tantrum, and he would sleep no more than two or three hours at a time. He would, instead, rush about the house like a large two-year-old, leaving a swath of destruction in his wake. We have long since abandoned any effort to own anything nice. Until recently, we rarely even left the house as a family. Vacations were invariably disasterous, and even trips to the grocery were a challenge. Babysitters or daycare were never an option.
By contrast, my other son is quite normal, except for being forced to deal with a brother who is not.
This is what the doctors mean when they say "has trouble socializing"...not someone who is too clueless to wear deodorant or to know better than to keep piles of Star Wars toys on his office desk.
Why does everyone insist on giving Reagan credit for toppling the Soviet Union? Communism bankrupted itself. Ol' Ronny nearly bankrupted our own country trying to keep up.
Anyone taken a look at Vietnam lately? After years of unsuccessful and bloody efforts by "Democratic" countries to force it to adopt a new economic system (because that is really what all this "political" rhetoric is about...who gets to be rich, and how?), Vietnam has voluntarily and quite peacefully adopted a capitalistic economic model which has rescued its economy from the financially disasterous Communist model.
And no one had to get shot.
Likewise, if Reagan had invested all those billions in the economic well being of our nation, instead of non-productive military spending, Russia would still be bankrupt...their spending would have continued, owing to paranoia, China, Nato, and the neccessity to police a dozen unwilling vassal states lining the world's longest border...and we would have ended the cold war with a lot more money than we have now.
Reagan was not a hero of the cold war. He just spent a lot of money on the military-industrial complex, and some fat cats and hawks really love him for it. But he was not a war hero. He was a grade B actor...in politics, as well as in the movies.
Of course, since a good deal of copyrightable content comes from America, you may be screwed, anyway.
And, if you try to circumvent it, we can always label you a terrosist and invade.
Dang uppity foreigner.
Five hundred years from now, do you think someone will hang it on their wall, or wipe their ass with it?
What many people seem to forget in these endless debates about the "Theory" of Evolution is that science defines "Theory" as a working model of the universe...that is, it embraces the model as fact for all practical purposes until evidence to the contrary requires a rethinking of the model...at which time, scientists will cheerfully rework their findings and put forth a new theory. And all without placing a single sticker on anything.
It is simply understood that science takes everything with a grain of salt. No sticker necessary.
That is the difference between how religion and science consider the universe. Scientists are willing to explore new possibilities, and those who discover new ideas are lauded...not branded as heretics.
It's the difference between discovering the universe, or just taking someone's "word" for it.
I wonder how people would feel if someone insisted that they put warning stickers on the Bible?
Y'know, I've been seeing people whine a bit about Apple's DRM, but it is far more liberal than most online music providers DRM, and, frankly, after using iTunes for a couple years now, I have yet to bump up against it. I have had no problem burning as many CD's as I like.
:-)
What's the big deal?
And, Doug, I am sorry to say, you DO sound like you're getting a bit grumpy in your old age LOL. Look around a bit. There is more good music out there than you might think...most of it below the pop radar. iTunes is, in fact, a great way to find it.
And now that they take monoply money, you don't even have to feel bad about it
Actually, the German law DOES stifle free speech. I recently did some work for a game company that produces historical wargames. All of the cut scenes featuring archival war footage had to be edited to remove any sign of swastikas. (Keep in mind that the Nazis painted swastikas on EVERYTHING).
I was forced to remove a promotional trailer for a cartoon about an inept Luftwaffe pilot (fritzthefox.com) from one of their kiosks at a convention because the aircraft in it had swastikas painted on their tails (which they did in real life).
I found the whole thing ludicrous. I know these laws are meant to prevent the resurgence of one of the worst hate groups that ever existed, but the law is more about fear than it is prevention.
The fact is, the Nazi party could never rise again. The next evil empire will not be led by a bunch of tatooed skinheads. The next time they start herding people into camps, if will be under a different flag, for different reasons, and everyone will fall in line in the name of patriotism and self-defense.
Banning a symbol will accomplish nothing, except to wipe away any recorded memory of the last witch hunt.
I have a friend who was precisely the sort of person you describe. At least, he WAS my friend until I did some work for him myself. He complained about my work, too, and all efforts to appease him were futile, so I eventually told him to keep his money and don't let the door hit him on the way out.
I think some people simply learn that squeeky wheels get more grease, and decide to make squeeking a lifestyle. Unfortunately, there is nothing more annoying than a squeeking wheel.
...who here was dumb enough to register with Ad Age?
I did, too, but I started going to the movies late....
Actually, between ads and cell phones, I get closer to that home theater all the time.
Cheaper??? Have you priced Maya lately?
You can buy a lot of brushes for that...
I agree. I've hated Amazon's "improved" search ever since they implemented the ability to search within books BY DEFAULT.
Now, any search using almost any given keyword returns thousands of results. It's rendered their basic search engine useless.
It wouldn't be quite so bad if the link to the advanced search engine was easier to find. But despite frequent visits to amazon, I never seem to find it without some digging.
I really think programmers and lawmakers should get more days off. They obviously don't know when to quit working...
Actually, we had a small but significant ground presence in the form of special forces, who helped organize and lead the rebels, and call in the air strikes.
I think if we could just learn to live without insurance companies, we could be flying tomorrow :-P
I would move elsewhere, but all the other countries are being bombed or sanctioned by the Arsenal for Democracy at the moment...