You don't need fancy statistics to predict that a foreign military invasion will ultimately fail. In the meantime you can also be sure of what a previous poster suggested. Invasions may work when they are combined with a civilian invasion if the population numbers allow for it (like China in Tibet and the like). And even in that example, China has a hard time completely assimilating Tibet and it's not quite done with it yet, after half a century and no armed resistance.
Yes, it's what they call smoothing. You cannot turn it off. The choices are "light", "medium", and "atrocious?" (can't remember the last option). Anyway, the choices are blurred fonts or even more blurred fonts.
In 1997, the actual cost shares for the United States were 23.35 percent for the civil budget, since all 16 nations participate fully in this budget; 28.08 percent for the military budget, exclusive of the AWACS program; 41.48 percent for the AWACS program; and 26.46 percent of the NSIP budget. The total U.S. cost share is 28.45 percent across all the budgets.
Not sure what you mean is not likely in the near future.
barring something like peak oil being imminent or something. Maybe then, but that's probably not likely in the near future.
But if you mean peak oil, that one definitely is scheduled for the pretty near future: between last year and about 10 years from now. If you mean a war betweem China and the US, then I agree that it's unlikely in the near future.
Copy URL +:: Firefox Add-ons "The Copy URL+ extension enables you to copy to the clipboard the current document's address along with additional information such as the document's title, the current selection or both." https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/129
It installs a context-menu, allowing you to copy any or all of page title, URL, and most importantly: the text currently selected.
At other times, I use bookmarks in a new folder specific to the subject. You can add keywords to bookmarks in FF.
Of course not. Regexes do NOT work in Google searches. Try searching for sla.*dot, and you will find, as expected, things with "sla" and "dot". The closest to slashdot you may come across could be a sla.dot Word template if/. had such a thing, and was using Word, and had decided that typing slashdot was too long and that sla would do since you cannot have a Word template called "/.dot"...
See this article: Debian HOW-TO : CPU power management. I used the info to configure a couple of Poweredge 860 server. Most of the time, it's at a CPU speed of 300Mhz instead of 3 Ghz. That saves quite some power, and you cannot notice the difference in speed.
Because anything that gets Americans killed, especially American soldiers, must be a good thing. Not exactly. Anything that gets ANY soldiers killed is a good thing. In a perfect world, war would be a good thing: the soldiers would kill each other and that would be it (until the next generation). But in practice, soldiers actually kill civilians. When they kill other soldiers it is often by accident.
Of course, now we also have terrorists trying to kill as many civilians as the military...
Who modded that funny? It's NOT funny. It's sad, that all the great volunteer work that went into Linux helps the military. I only hope that what these military in the article say is true: that it will actually hinder them more than help them.
Looks like Quark has significantly lowered it's prices. At the time (2-3 years ago?), it was around $2000. And Macs seem to have come down in price as well.
In a small network I managed (20 WinXP PCs and a Linux server), the question came up of buying one Mac. The reason was that one person received Mac CDs from graphics shops with Quark Xpress files, and only Macs could read the font files on these CDs. Since it was not possible to educate the various graphics designers from various places and countries to send the stuff correctly, the idea was to buy a Mac and a Quark license, and be done with the problem.
The Mac + the Quark license would have cost around $3-4000, + setting it all up, etc. And it wouldn't be able to run the old MS-Access application on which the whole business relies.
I had nothing against Mac, and am not particularly fond of Windows, but all that money and trouble seemed far too much for an additional machine which could not replace the existing PC and would only run Quark a few times per week. I must say that the insane price of the Quark license was probably the deciding factor in the decision to drop the idea and just cope with the fonts problem.
Incandescent light bulbs may be old technology and inefficient, but they do indeed produce a natural light, which fluorescent lights do not. Particularly, their spectrum is continuous: they emit light at all visible wavelenghts. The balance is of course not the same as daylight, having more reds and less blues, but it is basically the same sort of light as the sun. Fluorescent lights emit only a few very precise wavelenghts, and nothing of other wavelengths. Various tricks and wavelenght combnations make it seem sort of white, but I definitely don't want any of it in my house.
A wood fire is not very technologically advanced either, and a pretty old invention. But we still seem to enjoy it... (unless an idiot insists on playing his guitar in front of it)
The screenshot page happens to show very clearly why I don't want Linux as my standard desktop yet: the fuzzy fonts.
Look at the screenshots of the Windows dialogs: the small fonts are perfectly clear and sharp. Look at the last screenshot, of the Debian GUI installer: the fonts look all smeary or out of focus or something. That's not something I can watch all day long. For a desktop system, cosmetics do matter after all.
For servers, of course, it's completely different, so while waiting for insightful comments on how to improve the fonts, I will go back to my text based Debian installer on my (noisy) new Dell server...
I use ext3 on my external backup disks because: - it is much better and more reliable than FAT32 - it is both open source and (relatively) widely used, so I expect there will always be some way to read it - it can easily be read by attaching it to any machine and booting some Linux LiveCD or bootable USB. - the OS which traditionally can read ext2/3 is itself open source and also widely used, so there is no fear that it would become unavailable
For archival and backup, I feel all these advantages far outweigh the slight inconvenience that the disks are not readable directly by Windows and Mac, requiring either a driver or a reboot into Linux.
The important point is to label the disks very clearly. Otherwise, someone connecting them to a Windows or Mac machine may believe the disk is empty and re-partition/re-format it! I would not only put a big explanatory label on the disk's case, but also name the volume something like "Linux-..." or "Linux-ext3-...", and also explain to persons involved (manager(s) + people handling the disks) that they are not readable in Windows (some people don't read even big labels...).
In fact, all (about a dozen) editors I know use both (FCP and Avid). Some prefer FCP, and others prefer Avid. The choice for each particular project depends on many factors, in which the editor's personal preference usually doesn't count much. The production company or director may have their own editing room with an Avid or FCP in it, or they may get a good renting deal for one or the other. In the best case (not too often), the choice is made knowingly to ease the global workflow. Depending on source material and post-production choices, one or the other may make the workflow simpler.
Premiere is really in a different league. It seems to be used by home users, students, some local TV stations, and a few graphics designers. I never heard of a motion picture film or any feature-length project edited on Premiere. Even if it is a nice editing program (I don't know), it probably just doesn't fit well into a professional workflow with sound editing (usually ProTools around here) and color correction and finishing (FCP for very cheap projects, or Avid Symphony or Nitris, DaVinci, etc.).
How does After Effects and Final Cut Pro compare to Cinelerra?
They don't.
Final Cut Pro compares to Avid. After Effects is for effects, as you might guess from the name. People editing in FCP or Avid sometimes use After Effects to render some special effects before re-importing them into their editor.
As for Cinelerra, I would guess that no professional editor would have ever even heard the name, let alone have a clue about what it is. Well, even I couldn't quite figure out what it was supposed to be last time I looked at their site. Apparently also some sort of special effects rendering thing, except it cannot import from or export to your editing program, so I'm not sure what it might be used for.
A little experiment: search the Cinelerra site (which includes the documentation) for various very specific keywords which would be relevant for any professional film/video editing program:
What makes Softmaker think there is room in the market for their product ?
I don't know how much room there is, but I can tell you why I use TextMaker:
Because I never liked MS Word which is terribly complicated and unpractical, and it is also very expensive.
Because OpenOffice Writer is an abomination of an awkward and slow as molasses would-be clone of that MS Word which I don't like. (Yes, I guess this will modded flamebait, but I really hated OpenOffice every time I thought I would give it another chance)
TextMaker brought some fresh air into my (simple) word processing needs: it is extremely fast, it has all the features I need, and the ones I use (styles and occasional frames) are much more practical than in Word. Styles are accessible from the right-click menu, frames seemed much easier to work with than when I had to use them in Word, etc.
The only thing I don't like in TextMaker is it's proprietary default document format. I wish they would switch to ODF. (But maybe ODF is also an abomination like the OOo programs? I wouldn't know but I certainly hope not. We need an open document format)
(I bought the Windows version. Haven't tried the Linux version yet.)
I wish I could also sue them for all the crap that comes ON TOP OF Windows. Google Desktop (even if you say no to the license, it stays there), Google Toolbar, Diskeeper Lite which hijacks standard OS tools like defrag and wants you to buy a worse version, Symantec Internet Security (notoriously hard to uninstall), and all those useles IBM utilities and whatnot.
I always do. If I didn't, everything (not just fonts) would always be blurred, indepentently of the clearType settings. I suppose that most people just like blurred fonts, or don't really notice. After all, most people watch 4:3 videos strecthed to 16:9 without noticing the deformation. And all Macs seem to have these fuzzy fonts also.
I cannot understand this ClearType thing. It just makes all text look fuzzy and out of focus and harder to read. Just today, while setting up a new notebook, I had to endure these horribly blurred fonts until I took the time to go turn off ClearType completely. Suddenly, everything was clear and sharp again, with no weird artifacts. Fortunately, it's usually not on by default. This (HP) notebook was an exception. It should have been called FuzzyType. Turn it off to get clear type.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry for the stupid question, but I'm a foreigner. What is a "boob job"? Google's "define:boob job" didn't return any results.
You don't need fancy statistics to predict that a foreign military invasion will ultimately fail. In the meantime you can also be sure of what a previous poster suggested.
Invasions may work when they are combined with a civilian invasion if the population numbers allow for it (like China in Tibet and the like). And even in that example, China has a hard time completely assimilating Tibet and it's not quite done with it yet, after half a century and no armed resistance.
Yes, it's what they call smoothing. You cannot turn it off. The choices are "light", "medium", and "atrocious?" (can't remember the last option). Anyway, the choices are blurred fonts or even more blurred fonts.
Last I heard, he wasn't much into building jails. That seems to be more of a US thing, which has the highest prison population rate in the world.
And since you seem to imply Venezuela would build jails for political prisoners, would you have a few examples of such political prisoners?
You say that as if the US was paying to protect Europe. NATO isn't free for it's member states:
NATO: History of Common Budget Cost Shares:
But if you mean peak oil, that one definitely is scheduled for the pretty near future: between last year and about 10 years from now. If you mean a war betweem China and the US, then I agree that it's unlikely in the near future.
I use text file and the Firefox Copy URL + extension:
:: Firefox Add-ons9
Copy URL +
"The Copy URL+ extension enables you to copy to the clipboard the current
document's address along with additional information such as the document's
title, the current selection or both."
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/12
It installs a context-menu, allowing you to copy any or all of page title, URL, and most importantly: the text currently selected.
At other times, I use bookmarks in a new folder specific to the subject. You can add keywords to bookmarks in FF.
Of course not. Regexes do NOT work in Google searches. Try searching for sla.*dot, and you will find, as expected, things with "sla" and "dot". The closest to slashdot you may come across could be a sla.dot Word template if
See this article: Debian HOW-TO : CPU power management. I used the info to configure a couple of Poweredge 860 server. Most of the time, it's at a CPU speed of 300Mhz instead of 3 Ghz. That saves quite some power, and you cannot notice the difference in speed.
Because anything that gets Americans killed, especially American soldiers, must be a good thing.
Not exactly. Anything that gets ANY soldiers killed is a good thing. In a perfect world, war would be a good thing: the soldiers would kill each other and that would be it (until the next generation). But in practice, soldiers actually kill civilians. When they kill other soldiers it is often by accident.
Of course, now we also have terrorists trying to kill as many civilians as the military...
Who modded that funny? It's NOT funny. It's sad, that all the great volunteer work that went into Linux helps the military. I only hope that what these military in the article say is true: that it will actually hinder them more than help them.
Apparently, the user has to manually select the addresses that will be spammed ("invited"), and click a button.
This is by far not as bad as what wayn.com does (or at least used to do). They were just sending out their spam through your account without your knowledge. See "WAYN - Where Are You Now? Warning" or Wayn.com : phishing alert, ne vous faites pas couillonner ! (the last one in French). (found these at the end of a French blog post about other deceptive practices of Wayn.com)
Looks like Quark has significantly lowered it's prices. At the time (2-3 years ago?), it was around $2000. And Macs seem to have come down in price as well.
In a small network I managed (20 WinXP PCs and a Linux server), the question came up of buying one Mac. The reason was that one person received Mac CDs from graphics shops with Quark Xpress files, and only Macs could read the font files on these CDs. Since it was not possible to educate the various graphics designers from various places and countries to send the stuff correctly, the idea was to buy a Mac and a Quark license, and be done with the problem.
The Mac + the Quark license would have cost around $3-4000, + setting it all up, etc. And it wouldn't be able to run the old MS-Access application on which the whole business relies.
I had nothing against Mac, and am not particularly fond of Windows, but all that money and trouble seemed far too much for an additional machine which could not replace the existing PC and would only run Quark a few times per week. I must say that the insane price of the Quark license was probably the deciding factor in the decision to drop the idea and just cope with the fonts problem.
When we can do everything with a single Google account...
"Am I alone..." No, you are not.
Incandescent light bulbs may be old technology and inefficient, but they do indeed produce a natural light, which fluorescent lights do not. Particularly, their spectrum is continuous: they emit light at all visible wavelenghts. The balance is of course not the same as daylight, having more reds and less blues, but it is basically the same sort of light as the sun. Fluorescent lights emit only a few very precise wavelenghts, and nothing of other wavelengths. Various tricks and wavelenght combnations make it seem sort of white, but I definitely don't want any of it in my house.
A wood fire is not very technologically advanced either, and a pretty old invention. But we still seem to enjoy it... (unless an idiot insists on playing his guitar in front of it)
The screenshot page happens to show very clearly why I don't want Linux as my standard desktop yet: the fuzzy fonts.
Look at the screenshots of the Windows dialogs: the small fonts are perfectly clear and sharp. Look at the last screenshot, of the Debian GUI installer: the fonts look all smeary or out of focus or something. That's not something I can watch all day long. For a desktop system, cosmetics do matter after all.
For servers, of course, it's completely different, so while waiting for insightful comments on how to improve the fonts, I will go back to my text based Debian installer on my (noisy) new Dell server...
Well, sort of. It's a Windows batch file called c.bat, which contains one line:
@perl -e "print q(%* = ), %*"
I use ext3 on my external backup disks because:
- it is much better and more reliable than FAT32
- it is both open source and (relatively) widely used, so I expect there will always be some way to read it
- it can easily be read by attaching it to any machine and booting some Linux LiveCD or bootable USB.
- the OS which traditionally can read ext2/3 is itself open source and also widely used, so there is no fear that it would become unavailable
For archival and backup, I feel all these advantages far outweigh the slight inconvenience that the disks are not readable directly by Windows and Mac, requiring either a driver or a reboot into Linux.
The important point is to label the disks very clearly. Otherwise, someone connecting them to a Windows or Mac machine may believe the disk is empty and re-partition/re-format it! I would not only put a big explanatory label on the disk's case, but also name the volume something like "Linux-..." or "Linux-ext3-...", and also explain to persons involved (manager(s) + people handling the disks) that they are not readable in Windows (some people don't read even big labels...).
In fact, all (about a dozen) editors I know use both (FCP and Avid). Some prefer FCP, and others prefer Avid. The choice for each particular project depends on many factors, in which the editor's personal preference usually doesn't count much. The production company or director may have their own editing room with an Avid or FCP in it, or they may get a good renting deal for one or the other. In the best case (not too often), the choice is made knowingly to ease the global workflow. Depending on source material and post-production choices, one or the other may make the workflow simpler.
Premiere is really in a different league. It seems to be used by home users, students, some local TV stations, and a few graphics designers. I never heard of a motion picture film or any feature-length project edited on Premiere. Even if it is a nice editing program (I don't know), it probably just doesn't fit well into a professional workflow with sound editing (usually ProTools around here) and color correction and finishing (FCP for very cheap projects, or Avid Symphony or Nitris, DaVinci, etc.).
They don't.
Final Cut Pro compares to Avid. After Effects is for effects, as you might guess from the name. People editing in FCP or Avid sometimes use After Effects to render some special effects before re-importing them into their editor.
As for Cinelerra, I would guess that no professional editor would have ever even heard the name, let alone have a clue about what it is. Well, even I couldn't quite figure out what it was supposed to be last time I looked at their site. Apparently also some sort of special effects rendering thing, except it cannot import from or export to your editing program, so I'm not sure what it might be used for.
A little experiment: search the Cinelerra site (which includes the documentation) for various very specific keywords which would be relevant for any professional film/video editing program:
Time code stuff:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
Edit lists stuff:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
NLE programs:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aheroinewarr
Now try the same searches on the avid.com site.
What makes Softmaker think there is room in the market for their product ?
I don't know how much room there is, but I can tell you why I use TextMaker:
Because I never liked MS Word which is terribly complicated and unpractical, and it is also very expensive.
Because OpenOffice Writer is an abomination of an awkward and slow as molasses would-be clone of that MS Word which I don't like.
(Yes, I guess this will modded flamebait, but I really hated OpenOffice every time I thought I would give it another chance)
TextMaker brought some fresh air into my (simple) word processing needs: it is extremely fast, it has all the features I need, and the ones I use (styles and occasional frames) are much more practical than in Word. Styles are accessible from the right-click menu, frames seemed much easier to work with than when I had to use them in Word, etc.
The only thing I don't like in TextMaker is it's proprietary default document format. I wish they would switch to ODF. (But maybe ODF is also an abomination like the OOo programs? I wouldn't know but I certainly hope not. We need an open document format)
(I bought the Windows version. Haven't tried the Linux version yet.)
I wish I could also sue them for all the crap that comes ON TOP OF Windows. Google Desktop (even if you say no to the license, it stays there), Google Toolbar, Diskeeper Lite which hijacks standard OS tools like defrag and wants you to buy a worse version, Symantec Internet Security (notoriously hard to uninstall), and all those useles IBM utilities and whatnot.
I always do. If I didn't, everything (not just fonts) would always be blurred, indepentently of the clearType settings. I suppose that most people just like blurred fonts, or don't really notice. After all, most people watch 4:3 videos strecthed to 16:9 without noticing the deformation. And all Macs seem to have these fuzzy fonts also.
I cannot understand this ClearType thing. It just makes all text look fuzzy and out of focus and harder to read. Just today, while setting up a new notebook, I had to endure these horribly blurred fonts until I took the time to go turn off ClearType completely. Suddenly, everything was clear and sharp again, with no weird artifacts. Fortunately, it's usually not on by default. This (HP) notebook was an exception. It should have been called FuzzyType. Turn it off to get clear type.