I agree, resolution isn't everything. However all of my displays are HD now (either 720p or 1080p or computer monitors), and digital (i.e. they don't scale as well as a good ol' analog CRT would). So I won't be buying one until they come out with an HD Wii. I won't care if they use the same models and textures, I just don't like blurry and/or poorly aliased text and edges.
This sort of thing will increasingly become an issue as people buy new displays. In fact, it's not surprising that demand has dipped a little in the months following the digital switchover (which prompted many people to get digital displays) which, atm, happens to overlap a little with the lead-in to the holiday buying season.
And how, even though it's allegedly only a $3 change, all the economy cars aren't doing it. Their doors still sound like crap, even though they don't have to.
No, I just used kWh where I should have mean Wh. I still don't think 6e6 kWh is all that much though. Certainly not enough to add even $1 to the cost of every television purchased in California.
You can go much, much further by
Convincing people to buy smaller TVs instead of gigantic, theater-replacing fun TVs.
Convince people to watch fewer hours of TV.
Now, Hollywood is pretty interested in going green, so they're doing their part by putting out lots of boring drek to turn people off...
I wouldnt' do astrophysical calculations on a graphing calculator either. That's what Matlab, Maple, Mathematica, Fortran, etc. are for.
All of those tools are better than a graphing calculator in every way except one: they're slightly less portable. Very slightly. If you're at a conference, you've got a laptop handy. Only a student in a classroom could possibly require a machine as portable (and capable) as a graphing calculator any more, and then only if the instructor didn't see fit to run the class in a computer lab on the days that computers are needed.
Graphing calculators aren't a useful tool. They're a contrivance that students have to put up with because of other factors.
Namely: they're a small, nearly useless computer that fits in a backpack and can be dropped. They don't do anything that couldn't be done 100x as fast on a netbook. Heck, they don't do anything that couldn't be done better on a PDA or an eBook reader if it has enough juice to play mp3s.
That's like a million bucks worth of electricity. Per year.
Enough to employ 10 lobbyists, or 3--5 lobbyists and their commensurate grafting presents. But not nearly enough to even ramp down a single oil plant. A single, small wind turbine will produce 6 million kWh in about six hours of good wind.
I have a 40" television that consumes a rather obscene 220W. at my rates, after 5 years, the 10% extra cost would have to have made the thing consume zero energy over that time. There's no way that an LCD tv produced at the time mine was will last 15 years anyway, with with LED/LCD tvs coming out all without any californian intervention, so it's kind of moot.
Sigh. He's not claiming to be an actual jedi. He's claiming to be the creator of jediism. A religion based on a popular sci fi movie franchise. Not a religion actually depicted within that franchise. Who's to say it's any more ridiculous than, say, a religion based on a prophet who read the sacred text off of secret gold tablets from inside a hat?
You're talking about faith here. It only matters that someone believes it and that their belief carries with it a costume of devotion. Christ didn't wear a collar. Abram didn't wear a Tallit. But people have dress to show their devotion. If you're going to allow one faith to wear their costume but not another, then you're discriminating, plain and simple. It really doesn't matter how ridiculous you think that faith is.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree, resolution isn't everything. However all of my displays are HD now (either 720p or 1080p or computer monitors), and digital (i.e. they don't scale as well as a good ol' analog CRT would). So I won't be buying one until they come out with an HD Wii. I won't care if they use the same models and textures, I just don't like blurry and/or poorly aliased text and edges.
This sort of thing will increasingly become an issue as people buy new displays. In fact, it's not surprising that demand has dipped a little in the months following the digital switchover (which prompted many people to get digital displays) which, atm, happens to overlap a little with the lead-in to the holiday buying season.
Wow. So, Sydney looks like Blade Runner!
And how, even though it's allegedly only a $3 change, all the economy cars aren't doing it. Their doors still sound like crap, even though they don't have to.
No, I just used kWh where I should have mean Wh. I still don't think 6e6 kWh is all that much though. Certainly not enough to add even $1 to the cost of every television purchased in California.
You can go much, much further by
Now, Hollywood is pretty interested in going green, so they're doing their part by putting out lots of boring drek to turn people off...
Whatever deficiencies the 48G+ had were more than satisfied by the good folks at http://www.hpcalc.org/
FYI, that wasn't why we went to war against Germany in WWII.
I wouldnt' do astrophysical calculations on a graphing calculator either. That's what Matlab, Maple, Mathematica, Fortran, etc. are for.
All of those tools are better than a graphing calculator in every way except one: they're slightly less portable. Very slightly. If you're at a conference, you've got a laptop handy. Only a student in a classroom could possibly require a machine as portable (and capable) as a graphing calculator any more, and then only if the instructor didn't see fit to run the class in a computer lab on the days that computers are needed.
Graphing calculators aren't a useful tool. They're a contrivance that students have to put up with because of other factors.
Namely: they're a small, nearly useless computer that fits in a backpack and can be dropped. They don't do anything that couldn't be done 100x as fast on a netbook. Heck, they don't do anything that couldn't be done better on a PDA or an eBook reader if it has enough juice to play mp3s.
Perhaps you didn't see the "ellipsis of sarcasm" at the end of the sentence.
If they want to be as successful as HP calculators, they need to do more to encourage more enthusiasts...
That's like a million bucks worth of electricity. Per year.
Enough to employ 10 lobbyists, or 3--5 lobbyists and their commensurate grafting presents. But not nearly enough to even ramp down a single oil plant. A single, small wind turbine will produce 6 million kWh in about six hours of good wind.
I have a 40" television that consumes a rather obscene 220W. at my rates, after 5 years, the 10% extra cost would have to have made the thing consume zero energy over that time. There's no way that an LCD tv produced at the time mine was will last 15 years anyway, with with LED/LCD tvs coming out all without any californian intervention, so it's kind of moot.
It's hard enough to convince them to have good actual hygiene...
And message integrity. Since an MITM attacker can just xor his own fraudtext over the ciphertext.
The two drawbacks are key length and message integrity...
Damping the engine noises. Dampening means they got it wet.
What's nerdy about it? It looks like a ford focus hatchback.
When was the PS3 hard to find?
That was the gut instinct.
Well, that depends. How long have you been dead and your work out of print?
The idea of Nuremberg is that you cannot hide behind what the government orders.
Well, not if you lose, anyway.
Bush might not be dumb, but he also isn't the President...
Ok. Now read the two paragraphs after the joke. If they're part of some larger joke, then I'm very confused, indeed.
Sigh. He's not claiming to be an actual jedi. He's claiming to be the creator of jediism. A religion based on a popular sci fi movie franchise. Not a religion actually depicted within that franchise. Who's to say it's any more ridiculous than, say, a religion based on a prophet who read the sacred text off of secret gold tablets from inside a hat?
You're talking about faith here. It only matters that someone believes it and that their belief carries with it a costume of devotion. Christ didn't wear a collar. Abram didn't wear a Tallit. But people have dress to show their devotion. If you're going to allow one faith to wear their costume but not another, then you're discriminating, plain and simple. It really doesn't matter how ridiculous you think that faith is.
I doubt it, what with the eighth amendment and all...
And of course, I figured out the difference as soon as I clicked the submit button.
I blame drive manufacturers using different conventions to make their drives appear larger for marketing purposes.