When I see a title like "The Difference Between Film and Digital Photography", I expect to see exactly that in the article (or in this case, video). Apparently, that was not really discussed.
Yeah, one is film and it is cumbersome, while the other being digital, is much easier to share with others. However, what I was really expecting, is how it affects the images that are captured. What is the difference at the grassroot level between the two? When I'm taking pictures, I want to know what the advantages and disadvantages are, or something on those lines.
I did not get what I was expecting. It would have been a safer option to just call it "A conversation about digital photography with Sally Wiener Grotta". Yes, I'd still have watched it, but I would'nt have been so disappointed.:(
Yes, yes, for myself.:) Though this is when I'm not at work. The coffee at work is not what I'd call awesome, but it's not so bad that I don't touch the stuff. I make my own coffee when I'm at home, so I was not counting the coffee at work, which is about 4 cups on a good day.. many more on a bad one.
My caffeine intake is through the roof, but it soothes my nerves. I've suffered from insomnia since I was 14, and it was a really bad experience till I started having coffee when I was about 19 (Till then, it was just tea) and for some reason, I can now actually sleep for at least four to six hours every day.
My sleep specialist does not know why Caffeine doesn't always (sometimes it does actually keep me awake!) work on me the way it does for most others, so I have to visit him every couple of months for tests. But all in all, I think life's good as long as I feel I'm enjoying it better this way.
Well, I for one have tastes that change from day to day. Almost every time I make my coffee (which is about 6 to 8 times a day), I change something around. It's not that I absolutely MUST have variations in my coffee. But there's little joy in having the same stuff over long periods of time.
But you do have a very valid point. They're on duty 24/7 in the ISS, and they knew what they were getting into well in advance. A rough blend in their preferred proportions would be a much better idea.
..are fortuitously positioned for water, if any exists, to remain liquid on their surfaces — a condition believed to be necessary for life..
I find it frustrating that with so many capable biologists on our planet, we have an obsessive belief in the theory that life cannot evolve or exit on planets where liquid water is available. I think it's a despicable thought process that's in desperate need of modification.
I find it hard to believe this story even made it to/. Or anywhere for that matter. It's amazing the junk people decide to sell, and even more amazing what people are willing to buy.
But you know what really takes the amazing cake? It is how low a journalist will stoop to cover a scoop!
Bwa haha! I should have seen the obvious connection before I submitted my comment or I'd have made the reference myself. But with good souls like yours, this world shall never lack in welcome sharp minded assistance.;)
It can's detect silicone fingerprints. The cool thing about these, is that you don't have to cut off someones thumb and distracting a salesgirl while you press it to a scanner, you just act like nothing's wrong and thumb away.
I'm surprised anyone with even half a brain could have decided that a pulse was enough. Guns can make people do amazing things, like placing their prints wherever the guy controlling the gun wants them placed. You could engineer a pump to drive pulsed blood through the capillaries. Heck, you could even heat the blood while you're pumping it. (This device does not detect temperature btw)
It is a solution, certainly, but wrought with a myriad of flaws. This ought to be a very long time to market I expect. Unless of course, they decide to give the job of redesigning the scanner to someone who's passed the fourth grade.
Asimov is, I think, a very good choice. I began when I was 8.. "Stars Like Dust", "Caves of Steel" etc.. By the time I was 12, I was through the Foundation Trilogy. I stopped reading Sci-Fi for some reason then. But "Voyage of the Space Beagle" by A. E. Van Vogt brought me back and by 16, I'd read most everything by Asimov, by E.E. (Doc) Smith and Arthur C Clarke. That's more or less when I realized that I was a fan(atic).:)
Honestly, I do not think it would be a wise idea to press your likes and dislikes upon your child. However, I understand the desire to do so. As a kid, I stumbled across a fondness for Sci-Fi quite by accident. My father is a voracious reader and his appetite spans not just Sci-Fi, but a massive variety of work. Dad used to get me and my sister to help him dust the books and re-shelve them from time to time. He had a massive collection of books and would keep adding more every month. It became a fun game to categorize the books by author and then alphabetically by Title. Dad would later assemble them upon the shelves by genre. We were too young and uneducated to know what that meant or how he knew which book belonged to which genre. So we'd watch him and hand him books from whichever pile he'd ask for.
I'd always been fascinated by the covers on the Sci-Fi books in our shelves, and after a few months of handling each book and caring for them, a boring Sunday came and I decided to see what they were all about. My very first book was "Buy Jupiter" by Isaac Asimov. A classic, yes, but I had no idea what that meant back then. I just wanted to know what the story was behind the space-ship on the cover. The play of words in the title helped make the choice too. It seemed like it would be a fun read.
I think if Dad had tried to make me read any of those books, I'd have developed a life-long distaste for them. Instead, learning how to care for our books was pretty much the only thing he'd make me and my sister do, and even that, was kinda like a game. He took great pains to ensure that we would enjoy the whole process. I read the Hobbit when I was 6, and was fairly comfortable reading "big" books by 8. As a kid, time crawls around you, and learning new things comes easy. I'd suggest you just let the child familiarize himself with being in the company of books and let him make his choice. It's a discovery you don't want to force upon a child.:)
By the way, you might also want to have compilations from The Golden Age of Sci-Fi lying around. They're mostly easy reads, and have layers and layers of entertainment. I've read the Foundation Series about seven or eight times now, and every time I do so, I discover things I'd miraculously missed in the past. Perhaps my lack of awareness, education, and immaturity prevented me from seeing them before. But the point I'm trying to make, is that most books are not really age-restricted. You can enjoy them when you're a kid as well as when you're an adult. You just enjoy them in different ways.
I hope this turns out to be of some help. Even if it does not deter you from trying to mould your kids taste in books, I hope it nevertheless give you some ideas to encourage his affinity for the genre. Good luck!
Why are we talking about bioengineering humans to cope with climate change in such a complicated and silly way?
I'd have suggested bioengineering humans so that they are physically adapted to the new climate. After all, if you want to cross the ethical line somewhere, don't take twenty thousand baby steps at twenty thousand places along the border, take twenty steps at a single point and get it over and done with.
I'm perfectly at ease with the idea that genetic manipulation of humans and other creatures is merely us speeding up the evolutionary process. On the other hand, I think it needs to be done responsibly and in the open. The moment we slap moralistic irons onto every one who tries, we make outlaws who will work in secret for fear of being chewed out and having no peer to openly consult with, will flout or forget critical factors to acceptable research. Okay, that just came out of nowhere.:)
How exactly does it upload all this data onto the web if there are no nearby open access points?
I mean if you say it "makes the information immediately available online." I'd be stupid to believe in it blindly without an explanation as to how it manages to do this. TFA links to two pages, none of which mention how this incredible feat is accomplished.:)
If anyone happens to have an idea about how this is being done, I'd like to know.
It's heartening to see tax funded organizations saying what they mean and accurately with little, if any chance to misinform.:) "Green" is way out of slang and is way too vague a term to be used in reportage in my opinion.
Then again, with the corruption of the real meaning of words that is so popular these days, I suppose this island won't last long either.
Green fuel.. I mean seriously, who came up with that term anyway? I had a good laugh when i saw the headline. I laughed till the tears would not come anymore.
The laugh is over now and I'm irritated with the way people use "green" insteadt of "environmentally friendly" for in the end, that is really what you want to say!
The environment is anything but green! From space, even the planet looks blue! The Earth itself looks brown, but that's all beside the point. The point is if you mean something, say it! Don't say what you don't mean and expect people to believe you're really serious about being understood.
..is how on Earth they will be able to orient the lenses when they're in the eyes. I believe the lenses stick to the eyeball in more or less whatever way they are placed. However, even a slight misplacement would cause an image distortion when the brain gets around to processing what it sees, due to the fact that each eye needs to see the same thing (with corrections being made to take care of perspective).
To have VR, your eyes will have to be focusing on objects at different distances. The image displayed on the lenses therefore, will have to be configured therefore, to account for perspective variations. Even a slight change in lens orientation will be amplified with distance and wearers will end up with massive headaches and nausea.
Not to mention after all this, every time the wearer blinks, he could inadvertently re-orient the lenses.. Unless there's a way to prevent that from happening. I'm very curious to learn about it if there is!
Slashdot Mirror
When I see a title like "The Difference Between Film and Digital Photography", I expect to see exactly that in the article (or in this case, video). Apparently, that was not really discussed. Yeah, one is film and it is cumbersome, while the other being digital, is much easier to share with others. However, what I was really expecting, is how it affects the images that are captured. What is the difference at the grassroot level between the two? When I'm taking pictures, I want to know what the advantages and disadvantages are, or something on those lines. I did not get what I was expecting. It would have been a safer option to just call it "A conversation about digital photography with Sally Wiener Grotta". Yes, I'd still have watched it, but I would'nt have been so disappointed. :(
Zospeum tholussum, has no eyes or pigmentation on its shell
Yes, yes, for myself. :) Though this is when I'm not at work. The coffee at work is not what I'd call awesome, but it's not so bad that I don't touch the stuff.
I make my own coffee when I'm at home, so I was not counting the coffee at work, which is about 4 cups on a good day.. many more on a bad one.
My caffeine intake is through the roof, but it soothes my nerves. I've suffered from insomnia since I was 14, and it was a really bad experience till I started having coffee when I was about 19 (Till then, it was just tea) and for some reason, I can now actually sleep for at least four to six hours every day.
My sleep specialist does not know why Caffeine doesn't always (sometimes it does actually keep me awake!) work on me the way it does for most others, so I have to visit him every couple of months for tests. But all in all, I think life's good as long as I feel I'm enjoying it better this way.
Well, I for one have tastes that change from day to day. Almost every time I make my coffee (which is about 6 to 8 times a day), I change something around. It's not that I absolutely MUST have variations in my coffee. But there's little joy in having the same stuff over long periods of time.
But you do have a very valid point. They're on duty 24/7 in the ISS, and they knew what they were getting into well in advance. A rough blend in their preferred proportions would be a much better idea.
I find it frustrating that with so many capable biologists on our planet, we have an obsessive belief in the theory that life cannot evolve or exit on planets where liquid water is available. I think it's a despicable thought process that's in desperate need of modification.
I find it hard to believe this story even made it to /. Or anywhere for that matter. It's amazing the junk people decide to sell, and even more amazing what people are willing to buy.
But you know what really takes the amazing cake? It is how low a journalist will stoop to cover a scoop!
Bwa haha! I should have seen the obvious connection before I submitted my comment or I'd have made the reference myself. But with good souls like yours, this world shall never lack in welcome sharp minded assistance. ;)
It can's detect silicone fingerprints. The cool thing about these, is that you don't have to cut off someones thumb and distracting a salesgirl while you press it to a scanner, you just act like nothing's wrong and thumb away.
I'm surprised anyone with even half a brain could have decided that a pulse was enough.
Guns can make people do amazing things, like placing their prints wherever the guy controlling the gun wants them placed.
You could engineer a pump to drive pulsed blood through the capillaries.
Heck, you could even heat the blood while you're pumping it. (This device does not detect temperature btw)
It is a solution, certainly, but wrought with a myriad of flaws. This ought to be a very long time to market I expect. Unless of course, they decide to give the job of redesigning the scanner to someone who's passed the fourth grade.
Apple no?
I'm guessing no one noticed the bitten-apple logo laser etched on the bottom of each crystal?
Asimov is, I think, a very good choice. I began when I was 8.. "Stars Like Dust", "Caves of Steel" etc.. By the time I was 12, I was through the Foundation Trilogy. I stopped reading Sci-Fi for some reason then. But "Voyage of the Space Beagle" by A. E. Van Vogt brought me back and by 16, I'd read most everything by Asimov, by E.E. (Doc) Smith and Arthur C Clarke. That's more or less when I realized that I was a fan(atic). :)
Honestly, I do not think it would be a wise idea to press your likes and dislikes upon your child. However, I understand the desire to do so. As a kid, I stumbled across a fondness for Sci-Fi quite by accident. My father is a voracious reader and his appetite spans not just Sci-Fi, but a massive variety of work. Dad used to get me and my sister to help him dust the books and re-shelve them from time to time. He had a massive collection of books and would keep adding more every month. It became a fun game to categorize the books by author and then alphabetically by Title. Dad would later assemble them upon the shelves by genre. We were too young and uneducated to know what that meant or how he knew which book belonged to which genre. So we'd watch him and hand him books from whichever pile he'd ask for.
I'd always been fascinated by the covers on the Sci-Fi books in our shelves, and after a few months of handling each book and caring for them, a boring Sunday came and I decided to see what they were all about. My very first book was "Buy Jupiter" by Isaac Asimov. A classic, yes, but I had no idea what that meant back then. I just wanted to know what the story was behind the space-ship on the cover. The play of words in the title helped make the choice too. It seemed like it would be a fun read.
I think if Dad had tried to make me read any of those books, I'd have developed a life-long distaste for them. Instead, learning how to care for our books was pretty much the only thing he'd make me and my sister do, and even that, was kinda like a game. He took great pains to ensure that we would enjoy the whole process. I read the Hobbit when I was 6, and was fairly comfortable reading "big" books by 8. As a kid, time crawls around you, and learning new things comes easy. I'd suggest you just let the child familiarize himself with being in the company of books and let him make his choice. It's a discovery you don't want to force upon a child. :)
By the way, you might also want to have compilations from The Golden Age of Sci-Fi lying around. They're mostly easy reads, and have layers and layers of entertainment. I've read the Foundation Series about seven or eight times now, and every time I do so, I discover things I'd miraculously missed in the past. Perhaps my lack of awareness, education, and immaturity prevented me from seeing them before. But the point I'm trying to make, is that most books are not really age-restricted. You can enjoy them when you're a kid as well as when you're an adult. You just enjoy them in different ways.
I hope this turns out to be of some help. Even if it does not deter you from trying to mould your kids taste in books, I hope it nevertheless give you some ideas to encourage his affinity for the genre. Good luck!
As long as it is optional and not forced on people, I'm all for creating little Frankenstein's babies. :)
Why are we talking about bioengineering humans to cope with climate change in such a complicated and silly way?
I'd have suggested bioengineering humans so that they are physically adapted to the new climate. After all, if you want to cross the ethical line somewhere, don't take twenty thousand baby steps at twenty thousand places along the border, take twenty steps at a single point and get it over and done with.
I'm perfectly at ease with the idea that genetic manipulation of humans and other creatures is merely us speeding up the evolutionary process. On the other hand, I think it needs to be done responsibly and in the open. The moment we slap moralistic irons onto every one who tries, we make outlaws who will work in secret for fear of being chewed out and having no peer to openly consult with, will flout or forget critical factors to acceptable research. Okay, that just came out of nowhere. :)
I'm going to be waiting impatiently for the second run of RAM and ROM implants. I'm guessing the first batch will have naughty flaws. :)
I remember hearing someone say that if the services are free, YOU are the product.
Yet, you're not paying for using Slashdot. What does that make you?
Free! :D
How exactly does it upload all this data onto the web if there are no nearby open access points?
I mean if you say it "makes the information immediately available online." I'd be stupid to believe in it blindly without an explanation as to how it manages to do this. TFA links to two pages, none of which mention how this incredible feat is accomplished. :)
If anyone happens to have an idea about how this is being done, I'd like to know.
Why don't they use Odd Modern Nuke Plants instead?
It's heartening to see tax funded organizations saying what they mean and accurately with little, if any chance to misinform. :) "Green" is way out of slang and is way too vague a term to be used in reportage in my opinion.
Then again, with the corruption of the real meaning of words that is so popular these days, I suppose this island won't last long either.
Green fuel.. I mean seriously, who came up with that term anyway? I had a good laugh when i saw the headline. I laughed till the tears would not come anymore.
The laugh is over now and I'm irritated with the way people use "green" insteadt of "environmentally friendly" for in the end, that is really what you want to say!
The environment is anything but green! From space, even the planet looks blue! The Earth itself looks brown, but that's all beside the point. The point is if you mean something, say it! Don't say what you don't mean and expect people to believe you're really serious about being understood.
So that the Enemy just needs to walk up to the LS3 and shout "Follow ME!" to commandeer our units supplies?
That's how we fight future wars? Wow!
..is how on Earth they will be able to orient the lenses when they're in the eyes. I believe the lenses stick to the eyeball in more or less whatever way they are placed. However, even a slight misplacement would cause an image distortion when the brain gets around to processing what it sees, due to the fact that each eye needs to see the same thing (with corrections being made to take care of perspective).
To have VR, your eyes will have to be focusing on objects at different distances. The image displayed on the lenses therefore, will have to be configured therefore, to account for perspective variations. Even a slight change in lens orientation will be amplified with distance and wearers will end up with massive headaches and nausea.
Not to mention after all this, every time the wearer blinks, he could inadvertently re-orient the lenses.. Unless there's a way to prevent that from happening. I'm very curious to learn about it if there is!
iBorg!
is why they don't incorporate a tongue in these devices. Even the lips on the device are not lips. Just one big lip!
I mean.. this stuff is elementary dear Watson! It's hard to commercialize a single-lipped robot.
What kind of board meetings do you go to anyway? I see great potential for these devices in mega corp. board rooms! :-D
and SOPA/PIPA have their way, they'll probably ensure you get a Hook Prosthesis!