I wonder where they're going to find people familiar with infrastructure that obsolete. Presumably there's a wise old beard in a back office somewhere, getting the last laugh on his peers for refusing to let go of the 1980s.
I think you're reading too much into a flippant figure of speech that likens an unproductive (to the beekeper) bee to an unproductive (to his boss) worker.
Reading Abrash's article, he's talking about the inherent aliasing effects of sequential-colour devices as an example of why it's difficult to make screens (even showing photorealistic images at correct perspectives) seem real. It has nothing to do with whether there's head movement or not.
Suffice to say the process they used is a bit more nuanced than that; I can't link to the paper's figures because of the paywall, but they developed complex hierarchical microstructures of the filaments, and different ones for different applications. (E.g. one structure gives you a fabric with pores that open as it warms up.)
I'm pretty sure that "drone" to mean "remote-controlled military aircraft" predates the sense of "autonomous military aircraft". That was the usage in my old flight sim manuals in the '90s at any rate. The terminology is correct here, the issue is that public perception that drones are autonomous has built up a second meaning in direct conflict with the first.
Oh, I get you now. To me that's not "anti-intellectual", that's "sanding off the corners", although that's often passively anti-intellectual. For me the bigger issue with that approach is that often games are just a little bit too easy to drift through.
You mean the sort of "bro games" market that has jumped up? I see what you mean, but to my eyes, that's a new side that has grown up (admittedly occasionally overshadowing) existing good game development.
Those were decisions that should have made the Xbox One cheaper. It's basically the same architecture as the original Xbox 360, and is well-understood; by comparison the PS4's GDDR5 is luxuriously expensive. Kinect is definitely to blame.
Every product, no matter how ostensibly terrible, has a user base for whom it fits like a glove.
Case in point: pre-iPhone smartphones, which despite being expensive and a pain in the ass to use, were the only fully-fledged computers that fit in your pocket and therefore invaluable in some contexts. Or the much-maligned PSVita, which isn't exactly rolling in CoD and Final Fantasy but turns out to be the iPod for indie gaming and PSone software. Or the Windows Phone, in your case: it doesn't have a huge games selection or ultrasonic measuring tape apps, but I'm guessing you don't exactly need those.
Unfortunately other people outside of your niche might need other things, so these are bad devices for them. And right now, MS needs that bigger group of people.
It's not about protecting the Play Store. They know everyone wants it on their device, and they can exploit that need by bundling it with other, very profitable apps that Google wants to promote like G+, GMail, Maps, and Search. Those are Google's real profit centres.
Apps. Microsoft needs them, and they can either try to create their own App Store or they can have someone clean-room develop a system that hooks into Google's existing app store. (They can't ship the Play Store on its own: Google's licencing agreements would require them to prominently use GMail, Google Calendar etc. which rather defeats the MS-phone goal they're going for.)
FWIW I really doubt that's what the Nokia Android will turn out to be.
This needs to be emphasised: laymen frequently don't really get just how equivalent the mass-energy equivalence is, that they're literally the same quantity. This is why sci-fi characters shouldn't (for example) convert their alien invasion fleet into energy and store it in a tiny cube and put it in their pocket; it still has all of its original mass-energy.
The idea of Newspeak is predicated upon the idea that language is a rigid set of rules handed down by an outside authority (Orwell was a grammatical prescriptivist); if language is pliant and subject to change and reconsideration - as is happening with terms for gender - then that possible form of thought control is worn away. Look at the "euphemism treadmill": politically-correct terms for things become pejoratives within a generation, and the converse.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder where they're going to find people familiar with infrastructure that obsolete. Presumably there's a wise old beard in a back office somewhere, getting the last laugh on his peers for refusing to let go of the 1980s.
Heat isn't the limiting factor here, it's what causes the fibre to actuate.
I think you're reading too much into a flippant figure of speech that likens an unproductive (to the beekeper) bee to an unproductive (to his boss) worker.
Reading Abrash's article, he's talking about the inherent aliasing effects of sequential-colour devices as an example of why it's difficult to make screens (even showing photorealistic images at correct perspectives) seem real. It has nothing to do with whether there's head movement or not.
Err, the DLP system moves with your head, it's strapped right on there. Why would you see colour fringing with (nonrelativistic) head movements?
They're actually shape memory materials.
Suffice to say the process they used is a bit more nuanced than that; I can't link to the paper's figures because of the paywall, but they developed complex hierarchical microstructures of the filaments, and different ones for different applications. (E.g. one structure gives you a fabric with pores that open as it warms up.)
You're confusing drones with worker bees; their purpose is to breed, not to make honey. Hence its usage in English as a term for a slacker.
I found an about.com article that attributes it to the stripe patterning of those early training aircraft, but obviously that's not much to go on.
I'm pretty sure that "drone" to mean "remote-controlled military aircraft" predates the sense of "autonomous military aircraft". That was the usage in my old flight sim manuals in the '90s at any rate. The terminology is correct here, the issue is that public perception that drones are autonomous has built up a second meaning in direct conflict with the first.
Oh, I get you now. To me that's not "anti-intellectual", that's "sanding off the corners", although that's often passively anti-intellectual. For me the bigger issue with that approach is that often games are just a little bit too easy to drift through.
Well-argued, thanks.
You mean the sort of "bro games" market that has jumped up? I see what you mean, but to my eyes, that's a new side that has grown up (admittedly occasionally overshadowing) existing good game development.
You've completely missed the indie game movement, then. Gaming has never been so intellectually active.
Why did you have no reason to believe the PS4 was ad-free? It's not exactly a well-kept secret.
Those were decisions that should have made the Xbox One cheaper. It's basically the same architecture as the original Xbox 360, and is well-understood; by comparison the PS4's GDDR5 is luxuriously expensive. Kinect is definitely to blame.
Every product, no matter how ostensibly terrible, has a user base for whom it fits like a glove.
Case in point: pre-iPhone smartphones, which despite being expensive and a pain in the ass to use, were the only fully-fledged computers that fit in your pocket and therefore invaluable in some contexts. Or the much-maligned PSVita, which isn't exactly rolling in CoD and Final Fantasy but turns out to be the iPod for indie gaming and PSone software. Or the Windows Phone, in your case: it doesn't have a huge games selection or ultrasonic measuring tape apps, but I'm guessing you don't exactly need those.
Unfortunately other people outside of your niche might need other things, so these are bad devices for them. And right now, MS needs that bigger group of people.
Freedom is a continuum, not an absolute state. Unless you're a libertarian, in which case you have bigger problems.
It's not about protecting the Play Store. They know everyone wants it on their device, and they can exploit that need by bundling it with other, very profitable apps that Google wants to promote like G+, GMail, Maps, and Search. Those are Google's real profit centres.
Can you filter by permissions on a Google Store search? Genuinely curious.
Apps. Microsoft needs them, and they can either try to create their own App Store or they can have someone clean-room develop a system that hooks into Google's existing app store. (They can't ship the Play Store on its own: Google's licencing agreements would require them to prominently use GMail, Google Calendar etc. which rather defeats the MS-phone goal they're going for.)
FWIW I really doubt that's what the Nokia Android will turn out to be.
This needs to be emphasised: laymen frequently don't really get just how equivalent the mass-energy equivalence is, that they're literally the same quantity. This is why sci-fi characters shouldn't (for example) convert their alien invasion fleet into energy and store it in a tiny cube and put it in their pocket; it still has all of its original mass-energy.
Well obviously this doesn't apply to languages with different grammars, given that it's a grammatical issue of English.
...and?
The idea of Newspeak is predicated upon the idea that language is a rigid set of rules handed down by an outside authority (Orwell was a grammatical prescriptivist); if language is pliant and subject to change and reconsideration - as is happening with terms for gender - then that possible form of thought control is worn away. Look at the "euphemism treadmill": politically-correct terms for things become pejoratives within a generation, and the converse.