Yeah. Why didn't kirk end up being trapped by som evil guy with his only way of escape being through seducing the evil guy's gay lover. I would have watched it. Or maybe just have some characters sexual orientation change due to a transporter malfunction (You can do anything with a transporter malfunction).
"The vodka is strong but the meat is rotten." it's an Uban legend
F. Russian/Chinese mechanical translator translates "out of sight, out of mind" into "blind and insane". Also "Spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" as "the drink is good but the meat is rotten."
How many of you out there have a bit (maybe only just a little twinge) of doubt about that.
It seems that in todays society, if a case has media attention then a conviction is mandatory, guilt is irrelevant.
When the Oklahoma bombing occured I was convinced that whoever was charged would be convicted, regardless of their guilt or innocence.
A trial should be a process where the truth is determined. When the pressures are so great that the prosecution will do _anything_ for a conviction the outcome becomes predetermined.
As people realise that the trial shows nothing, people begin to think that those in jail are, in fact, innocent. When why else would the prosecuters have been so heavy handed, surely if he/she had have been guilty then they could have taken things easy and still gotten them.
This gerates sympathy for the victims, guilty or innocent.
And most of all. Is this justice?
How far have they gone in this case? I don't know, Guessing from the information we receive is just a gauge showing which side has manipulated the media the best. It seems as though they have done enough in the past to make thir actions suspect in this case.
Re:GUI toolkit is the important question!
on
Delphi for Linux
·
· Score: 1
Delphi is not only a fine IDE, it is also a fine language. If it wern't for portability issues it would be my language of choice even for non gui apps. Free Pascal is getting close to being as good but not quite there yet.
re: the toolkit They might do something similar to the way they did their database abstraction. That would let them use GTK+, Qt or whatever. This would let people pick which toolkit they want and possibly even change during devopment.
I guess it's one way to do things, but I don't really like it. I like to know exactly how my app is going to look. Changing gui toolkits is a good way to make your app suffer from java ugly app syndrome. I'm not much of a themes person.
I'd like to see something like GLUI, a gui toolkit written on top of GLUT. Then you can have apps that run identically on Linux win9x Os/2 BeOs etc.
Everyone (who's anyone) that I know seems to know about Turings sexuality and death. But the local university philosophy dept has a bit of a Turing bent.
Time had their most influentual people of the century thing which mentioned him, I think. Definatley read some floppy glossy thing about it.
hmmm. Given the context maybe bent isn't quite the right word.
I think a lot of the free software products don't actualy have design criteria that are stringent and as such don't require documents.
To a certain degree I believe this is a good thing. Commercial software is written for a specific purpose and the product must conform to that purpose.
In the free software world as long as it performs _a_ function it should be enough. If that function conforms to what you want then you use it, otherwise you find somthing else.
The free software need not live under the fear of inadequate programs. If somebody wants it, there is quite often a programmer who wants it too. If the program that that person writes doesn't fit the bill there will still be other programmers out there who are inclined to do it themselves.
Consider someone writing a ICQ clone, some of my friends want something that does just the who-is-online and messaging. Others want chat, file transfers and any number of weird features. I'm sure sooner or later, of the many clones in development, there will be programs to suit both types, and a bunch of crappy things that hardly anyone uses.
One of the most important features of programs with no fixed design is that they can become something different to their intended purpose. I'm not talking a complete genre shift but a change to fit a slightly different field.
As an example, if someone was writing a paint package intending to do something gimpy and they provided some powerful cut and paste featurs that were really easy to use. They could mid-development change tack and use the powerful features as the central basis for the application
I feel the heart of good design comes out of one or a few people doing something that they wanted to have Mark Kilgard(glut), Linus(some os thing), K+R(stuff) and John Carmak(commander keen). Once they had what they wanted others went hey, that's what I want too.
For all those people there are plenty of others who have made things that no-one wants (my turing machine emulator for one).
Unfortuantely what this means is that when you have a harddrive from someone elses computer and connect it to your own the system is bound to reject the foreign data.
Of course, what this means is there will be a lucritive market in anti-rejection software.
In fact I might start selling something along these lines myself. A program you run that stops the computer from automatically blanking new hard drives. Of course there are no guarantees. If the bits have been away from the computer for too long there is little chance of survival.
Although demo coding and chip design require completely different knowledge, many of the skills involved are common to both. The most important skill is the willingness to do the extra work on the details. Future Crew demos always stuck out from the herd. I think they could quite easily have the ability to design the silicon.
To get the manufacturing done and then drivers written is a great deal of work though.
I think they have a chance. If..
They are phenominally talented. They get venture capital and expand Their technology is licenced by an existing 3d manufacturer who has fallen behind the pack.
Failing that I think they have a good chance at making the silicon and selling the chips for use in arcade machines. They don't need standardised drivers etc.
Of course they will sink into nothingness if their fill rate and tri-setup isn't top notch. Geometry acceleration would have been an advantage too.
And then there's the golden rule of 3D cards. ---Rendering speed only counts in a shipping product.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. Why didn't kirk end up being trapped by som evil guy with his only way of escape being through seducing the evil guy's gay lover. I would have watched it. Or maybe just have some characters sexual orientation change due to a transporter malfunction (You can do anything with a transporter malfunction).
F. Russian/Chinese mechanical translator translates "out of sight, out of mind" into "blind and insane". Also "Spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" as "the drink is good but the meat is rotten."
So he confessed...
How many of you out there have a bit (maybe only just a little twinge) of doubt about that.
It seems that in todays society, if a case has media attention then a conviction is mandatory, guilt is irrelevant.
When the Oklahoma bombing occured I was convinced that whoever was charged would be convicted, regardless of their guilt or innocence.
A trial should be a process where the truth is determined. When the pressures are so great that the prosecution will do _anything_ for a conviction the outcome becomes predetermined.
As people realise that the trial shows nothing, people begin to think that those in jail are, in fact, innocent. When why else would the prosecuters have been so heavy handed, surely if he/she had have been guilty then they could have taken things easy and still gotten them.
This gerates sympathy for the victims, guilty or innocent.
And most of all. Is this justice?
How far have they gone in this case? I don't know, Guessing from the information we receive is just a gauge showing which side has manipulated the media the best. It seems as though they have done enough in the past to make thir actions suspect in this case.
How far can they go? Ask Kevin.
Where do you plug the keyboard?
Delphi is not only a fine IDE, it is also a fine language. If it wern't for portability issues it would be my language of choice even for non gui apps. Free Pascal is getting close to being as good but not quite there yet.
re: the toolkit
They might do something similar to the way they did their database abstraction. That would let them use GTK+, Qt or whatever. This would let people pick which toolkit they want and possibly even change during devopment.
I guess it's one way to do things, but I don't really like it. I like to know exactly how my app is going to look. Changing gui toolkits is a good way to make your app suffer from java ugly app syndrome. I'm not much of a themes person.
I'd like to see something like GLUI, a gui toolkit written on top of GLUT. Then you can have apps that run identically on Linux win9x Os/2 BeOs etc.
Don't think it'll happen though.
Everyone (who's anyone) that I know seems to know about Turings sexuality and death. But the local university philosophy dept has a bit of a Turing bent.
Time had their most influentual people of the century thing which mentioned him, I think. Definatley read some floppy glossy thing about it.
hmmm. Given the context maybe bent isn't quite the right word.
I think a lot of the free software products don't actualy have design criteria that are stringent and as such don't require documents.
To a certain degree I believe this is a good thing. Commercial software is written for a specific purpose and the product must conform to that purpose.
In the free software world as long as it performs _a_ function it should be enough. If that function conforms to what you want then you use it, otherwise you find somthing else.
The free software need not live under the fear of inadequate programs. If somebody wants it, there is quite often a programmer who wants it too. If the program that that person writes doesn't fit the bill there will still be other programmers out there who are inclined to do it themselves.
Consider someone writing a ICQ clone, some of my friends want something that does just the who-is-online and messaging. Others want chat, file transfers and any number of weird features. I'm sure sooner or later, of the many clones in development, there will be programs to suit both types, and a bunch of crappy things that hardly anyone uses.
One of the most important features of programs with no fixed design is that they can become something different to their intended purpose. I'm not talking a complete genre shift but a change to fit a slightly different field.
As an example, if someone was writing a paint package intending to do something gimpy and they provided some powerful cut and paste featurs that were really easy to use. They could mid-development change tack and use the powerful features as the central basis for the application
I feel the heart of good design comes out of one or a few people doing something that they wanted to have Mark Kilgard(glut), Linus(some os thing), K+R(stuff) and John Carmak(commander keen). Once they had what they wanted others went hey, that's what I want too.
For all those people there are plenty of others who have made things that no-one wants (my turing machine emulator for one).
Unfortuantely what this means is that when you have a harddrive from someone elses computer and connect it to your own the system is bound to reject the foreign data.
Of course, what this means is there will be a lucritive market in anti-rejection software.
In fact I might start selling something along these lines myself. A program you run that stops the computer from automatically blanking new hard drives. Of course there are no guarantees. If the bits have been away from the computer for too long there is little chance of survival.
I think I'll go IPO in February.
Although demo coding and chip design require completely different knowledge, many of the skills involved are common to both. The most important skill is the willingness to do the extra work on the details. Future Crew demos always stuck out from the herd. I think they could quite easily have the ability to design the silicon.
To get the manufacturing done and then drivers written is a great deal of work though.
I think they have a chance.
If..
They are phenominally talented.
They get venture capital and expand
Their technology is licenced by an existing 3d manufacturer who has fallen behind the pack.
Failing that I think they have a good chance at making the silicon and selling the chips for use in arcade machines. They don't need standardised drivers etc.
Of course they will sink into nothingness if their fill rate and tri-setup isn't top notch.
Geometry acceleration would have been an advantage too.
And then there's the golden rule of 3D cards.
---Rendering speed only counts in a shipping product.