Uh, "local time" would be my guess. The moon rises at about the same local time whether you're in the ET or PT time zone. Likewise, if you're on the west coast, you'll be looking at about the same part of the sky at 9:00 PT as east coasters were seeing at 9:00 ET.
The simple fact is that you are mistaken by a factor of about 50 in thinking that 200 megapixels is necessary for 4x5 prints that are comparable to 35mm film. Such results can be achieved with digital cameras today.
4x5 is a film format, not a print format. 4x5 inch sheet film. What Ansel Adams would consider a small negative. (He often shot 8x10.)
You can click a wheel in place of a third button perfectly well. A large portion of the consumer population seems to agree with me.
You can do work in Windows in place of Unix perfectly well. A large portion of the consumer population seems to agree with me.
This may be true, but it's irrelevant. Some of us, myself included, strongly prefer a real, honest-to-god, middle button that's just as big as the other two, and feels like the other two. Yes, we could use a wheel, just like we could drink Pepsi instead of Coke, or eat french fries instead of onion rings, or even drive a Ford.
Faking a proper button with a wheel, like faking a proper keyboard layout (control next to A, Esc next to 1) with xmodmap, is a pain in the ass inflicted on us by the Windows-centric market. Fortunately, I still have my Logitech 3-button mouse and my Sun mouse. My precious...
Re:Don't bet on a quick fix, but learn anyway
on
Sub-Zero Squirrels
·
· Score: 2, Funny
(pardon my potential redundancy if this was posetd on/. already)
This is Slashdot. We expect the same story to be posted two days straight, at least. Referring to an old story in passing is nothing to worry about.
I'm surprised there's no "Redundant (+1)" moderation option.
The Ansel Adams series is a great series. However, the Ansel Adams series may be a bit advanced for a beginning photographer.
You're probably right in general, but I figured someone asking on Slashdot probably has enough of a technical/physics background to start with the Ansel Adams books. But I'm sure your suggestions will be welcome if that's not the case.
I'll tack on an unrelated point that I should have mentioned earlier: It's a good idea to set aside some money for a quality tripod (something like a Bogen, not a plastic one from Best Buy or Wal-Mart). The right model will depend on what you want to do (for example, whether you want to carry it on hikes); there have been countless discussions on photo.net, which has been mentioned frequently in this thread. I've got a Bogen 3401B leg set with a 3410 head, which I can carry on short hikes and which has served me well. A good tripod is essential for closeup and low-light photography.
$200 for a first SLR body is only low if you're thinking about current-production, new bodies. I just bought a beautiful Canon A-1, from the highly reputable KEH, for $109. It is considerably more advanced than my Canon TLb, which has served me well for years (and will continue to do so). Both cameras are rugged, well-made machines that have endured for decades.
Countless excellent photographs were made before autofocus, autoexposure, digital, image stabilization, and other modern innovations. They are conveniences, not necessities, and may in fact be obstacles to learning the craft.
I agree with the parent. I've done most of my photography with my dad's old Canon TLb, which is very similar to the K-1000 in its capabilities (it's a match-needle metering, completely mechanical, manual-focus SLR). I've got about four fixed-length lenses.
I've taken a non-intro photo class at a top-notch art school, and I can assure you that the camera was not the limiting factor in my work, and there were plenty of talented students doing great things with equally primitive equipment.
One thing that's worth noting about old cameras and lenses is that they've already done most of their depriciating. Start with one of the good old systems mentioned here, and if you decide in a year that you'd be better off with autofocus, or digital, or a view camera, or whatever (based on your actual experience with the camera), you can sell your kit and get about as much as you paid for it.
I would recommend Ansel Adams' series The Camera, The Negative, and The Print for learning the big picture of how your camera, lenses, meter, film, and paper work together, and how to get them to meet your creative vision. Even if you don't plan to do darkroom work yourself, it's good to have an understanding of what's going on. I am a technical person, and find Adams' writing to be very clear and satisfactorily detailed with a strong grounding in physical principles. His contributions to photographic education and technique are at least as important as his images. This series is pretty light on the creative aspects of photography, so you'll have to look elsewhere for that.
See, to me pet is only a noun - it's a word for some domesticated animals like cats and dogs. I would never use it as a verb, nor would it ever occur to me to use it as a verb - saying it as a verb just "sounds wrong". Again, this is something I've only ever noticed in American writings, not British or Australian ones and it always leaps out at me because it just looks so wrong. I've always just assume that there's some weird reason you use the word "petting" the same way everyone else uses te word "patting".
The verbs "pet" and "pat" are both used in American English, and have distinct meanings. "To pat" suggests an open-palmed, light slapping motion. "Patting someone on the back" describes a gesture of celebration for some accomplishment.
"To pet" connotes a soft, stroking motion along the body. It is almost exclusively applied to animals, e.g. "pet the cat." The other main use is to refer to such stroking as a sexual act, e.g. "heavy petting."
So you use the verb "pat" for both meanings? The two actions seem fairly distinct to me.
$./xkey hal-9000:0 Xlib: connection to "hal-9000:0.0" refused by server Xlib: Client is not authorized to connect to Server Blah, can't open display: hal-9000:0
Wow, I'm shaking in my boots. Ever hear of not typing "xhost +"?
The point is, sports is not *productive* and therefore should not be unduly rewarded.
Of course sports is productive. It's big business, earning lots of money (in most cases) for the team's owners, the stations that broadcast it, and so forth. The athletes are essential to this profit, and are compensated accordingly.
Now, maybe you don't like that it's a successful industry, but luckily you don't get to tell me how to spend my money. Too bad.
Also there was a 'Christmas special' between the two series that has never been released on CD or anything. I can not remember much of the plot but it did explain what had become of Trillian.
Didn't she go to the planet of the Wookies with Bea Arthur?
Pretty much. It happens not to come with earth and sun radius in its supplied units file, which seems like an oversight. Their masses, for example, are supplied:
$ units 507 units, 54 prefixes You have: m_sun / m_earth You want: * 332945.99 / 3.0034902e-06
Adding the radii to/usr/share/misc/units.lib is trivial and appropriate. There are plenty of less-useful units included, such as the "military pace," "kip," and "cran."
For the good of society, I have just added r_earth, r_moon, and r_sun to FreeBSD's units.lib.
You have: r_sun^3 / r_earth^3 You want: * 1299437.7 / 7.6956365e-07
Would someone like to explain why Americans keep calling # "pound"?
Because "pound" is a legitimate use for that symbol here in America, where the pound is a unit of weight, not a currency. You might see a "5# bag of flour" for example.
All indications are that users, important members of the internet community we all serve, are benefiting from the improved web navigation offered by Site Finder.
This must be some new meaning of the word "all" that I was not previously familiar with. I'm pretty sure that some of us have made it clear that we're not benefitting.
Odd that it says THE PAGE YOU REQUESTED IS AVAILABLE ONLY TO SUBSCRIBERS when I click on it, then. (I suspect this is why it was modded down. I have points and was going to bring it back up if it was relevant, but I can't read it.)
So they are attributing a slashdotting, and a lot of media interest to people being positive about the service. I haven't seen one article, comment or anything that was even remotely positive. What are these guys on?
The same thing as the telemarketing firm ATA. Dave Barry used his column to inspire readers to slashdot them by phone. They stopped answering the phone, and provided a recorded message claiming that it was due to "overwhelming positive response to recent media."
The problem seems to be that you're running late, not slashdot. The above stories were each posted the day before you claim that the vulnerabilities were discovered.
Slashdot Mirror
This may be true, but it's irrelevant. Some of us, myself included, strongly prefer a real, honest-to-god, middle button that's just as big as the other two, and feels like the other two. Yes, we could use a wheel, just like we could drink Pepsi instead of Coke, or eat french fries instead of onion rings, or even drive a Ford.
Faking a proper button with a wheel, like faking a proper keyboard layout (control next to A, Esc next to 1) with xmodmap, is a pain in the ass inflicted on us by the Windows-centric market. Fortunately, I still have my Logitech 3-button mouse and my Sun mouse. My precious...
I'm surprised there's no "Redundant (+1)" moderation option.
Here is an excellent paper on the issue of mercury cells and their replacements.
I'll tack on an unrelated point that I should have mentioned earlier: It's a good idea to set aside some money for a quality tripod (something like a Bogen, not a plastic one from Best Buy or Wal-Mart). The right model will depend on what you want to do (for example, whether you want to carry it on hikes); there have been countless discussions on photo.net, which has been mentioned frequently in this thread. I've got a Bogen 3401B leg set with a 3410 head, which I can carry on short hikes and which has served me well. A good tripod is essential for closeup and low-light photography.
Countless excellent photographs were made before autofocus, autoexposure, digital, image stabilization, and other modern innovations. They are conveniences, not necessities, and may in fact be obstacles to learning the craft.
I've taken a non-intro photo class at a top-notch art school, and I can assure you that the camera was not the limiting factor in my work, and there were plenty of talented students doing great things with equally primitive equipment.
One thing that's worth noting about old cameras and lenses is that they've already done most of their depriciating. Start with one of the good old systems mentioned here, and if you decide in a year that you'd be better off with autofocus, or digital, or a view camera, or whatever (based on your actual experience with the camera), you can sell your kit and get about as much as you paid for it.
I would recommend Ansel Adams' series The Camera, The Negative, and The Print for learning the big picture of how your camera, lenses, meter, film, and paper work together, and how to get them to meet your creative vision. Even if you don't plan to do darkroom work yourself, it's good to have an understanding of what's going on. I am a technical person, and find Adams' writing to be very clear and satisfactorily detailed with a strong grounding in physical principles. His contributions to photographic education and technique are at least as important as his images. This series is pretty light on the creative aspects of photography, so you'll have to look elsewhere for that.
"To pet" connotes a soft, stroking motion along the body. It is almost exclusively applied to animals, e.g. "pet the cat." The other main use is to refer to such stroking as a sexual act, e.g. "heavy petting."
So you use the verb "pat" for both meanings? The two actions seem fairly distinct to me.
Now, maybe you don't like that it's a successful industry, but luckily you don't get to tell me how to spend my money. Too bad.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised, since they previously redefined the word "positive".
I checked it using Mozilla on my Sun, and w3m on my FreeBSD machine. Same result both places.
New ssh Exploit in the Wild
The problem seems to be that you're running late, not slashdot. The above stories were each posted the day before you claim that the vulnerabilities were discovered.