All three i personally attended in 3 different states on opposite coasts and several dozen more spread throughout the country that people I've conversed with have attended.
Nope, modern highschools in america consider 3 hours of homework per class per day to be reasonable. I averaged a couple papers, about 100-150 algebra problems, and a stack of worksheets.
READING was assigned on a weekly basis though, which usually meant you could get away with 100-200 pages per week depending on how long your book's chapters were.
When I was in school I woke up at 5:30-6:00am, and spent until 3:00 sitting in one seat or another before coming home and "officially" having 3 hours* of homework per class according to pretty much every document the school had.
Take 9 hours for sleeping and you've got 15 left during the day, 12 hours of something other than playing videogames for 4 months straight is a damn sight less unhealthy for kids than sitting at a desk for about 12 hours a day for ~10 months straight.
*Yes, 18 hours of homework starting at 3pm. Nobody I asked could ever find the problem with this until I pointed out that would last until after my second class the next day.
Which is basically what I've been saying locally for about a decade. The people we're having the most trouble with internationally don't just hate The West, they hate ANYONE that doesn't actively join their crusade. It's not enough to leave them alone, if you don't actively assist them in their genocidal goals you're going to be considered a target.
Basically extremist islam right now is pretty much the same problem with US right now, "You're with us, or you're against us."
I'll grant him one thing: As much as I like computers and my life as a computer nerd and gamer... I do utterly despise many aspects of the PHYSICAL computer itself.
Fragile yet sharp components, cramped working space even in a fulltower unless you get something truly enormous, extreme sensitivity to ESD, and it doesn't matter what you do you're probably guaranteed to wind up swearing at your heatsink at some point.
You're leveraging a vague complaint of blurriness that's contradictory with the way monitors work against a trinitron tube that you were running not just at lower resolutions and refresh rates than it was built for but also at the wrong aspect ratios. The p990 was designed for running a 4:3 resolution going up to 1600x1200 @75hz, anything lower and it should've been running at 85hz.
Either your specific monitor was damaged or you did something wrong. I can't magically find out it's history but you've admitted to not running it properly and your claims are contradictory to the way monitors work.
Saying that you switched from the wrong aspect ratio and a lower refresh rate to a higher resolution in the right aspect ratio and things got blurrier is like saying you put the car in drive and press the gas to stop going forwards. It just does not work that way unless something's broken, or you were wrong.
Probably because you didn't have your settings done right, or ran at 60hz, or ran at the wrong resolution.
Personally I always enjoyed my 21" CRT that ran at 1600x1200 and my 24" CRT that ran at 2048x1536 (both at 85hz) but if you like your two steps backwards enjoy it.
Reminds me of my Homeworld: Cataclysm manual. That thing's the size and thickness of a stack of comic books. It had everything from a full and illustrated backstory to complete (if out of date after patches) information on every ship in the game.
Coincidental, I've got them right now and seem to get them at least every other week. Probably has to do more with how your posts are rated and how often you metamoderate than anything else.
Same thing with widescreen. It's entirely hinged on the advertising of being "more cinematic" when in reality it's designed entirely for the purpose of selling more screens with lower overall pixel counts and less overall screen area.
Your eyes have apparently gotten worse as well if you haven't noticed that most modern console shooters are that easy because they're basically doing half the aiming for you.
Never saw a resolution iwth 640 vertical lines but in 2000 I was using a trinitron that did 1200P @85hz. If I'd had a little more $$$ I could've gotten the widescreen version that did 1500P.
Oh I'm sorry I forgot mentioning that makes the "Chyeah 1080P brah" crowd froth at the mouth a bit.
But that's the trick to his "No True Scottsman" fallacy. If you present Ebert with a videogame that fits his definition of art then he simply claims it's not a videogame and that you've proven his point for him.
Which is exactly why I said the argument's basically over. He's resorted to a circular no true scotsman fallacy. He keeps trying to define art, then whenever a videogame that meets that definition is presented he claims it's not really a videogame and that somehow proves his point.
At this point it's almost like he's desperately trying to find some way of defining "art" in a way that excludes video games purely because he, for some reason, NEEDS them to not be art.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that he's officially passed into hinging his entire worldview in relation to videogames as art on a "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
So if I understand this right TFA says that these cloaks just render something as appearing where it isn't rather than completely invisible when viewed from various angles?
If so that's still got the possibility of being pretty bloody useful.
I preferred a simpler argument: With such a large base of comparison and such a small set of acceptable solutions you will eventually reach a 100% plagiarism rate.
No, he's saying that if he buys the 200hp car for the 200hp price then it's his damn car and he payed for 200hp so they should not be allowed to turn it into a 100hp car Just Because.
Slashdot Mirror
All three i personally attended in 3 different states on opposite coasts and several dozen more spread throughout the country that people I've conversed with have attended.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&q=%223+hours+of+homework%22&fp=d9bfea1616ddd46f
Close, it was for a grade and they actually did tend to give absurd quantities of work.
Nope, modern highschools in america consider 3 hours of homework per class per day to be reasonable. I averaged a couple papers, about 100-150 algebra problems, and a stack of worksheets.
READING was assigned on a weekly basis though, which usually meant you could get away with 100-200 pages per week depending on how long your book's chapters were.
We have a winner!
When I was in school I woke up at 5:30-6:00am, and spent until 3:00 sitting in one seat or another before coming home and "officially" having 3 hours* of homework per class according to pretty much every document the school had.
Take 9 hours for sleeping and you've got 15 left during the day, 12 hours of something other than playing videogames for 4 months straight is a damn sight less unhealthy for kids than sitting at a desk for about 12 hours a day for ~10 months straight.
*Yes, 18 hours of homework starting at 3pm. Nobody I asked could ever find the problem with this until I pointed out that would last until after my second class the next day.
Considering that Generations and Some Old Games did this a decade or more ago I'd say no.
http://planetquake.gamespy.com/View.php?view=MOTW.Detail&id=51
Basically extremist islam right now is pretty much the same problem with US right now, "You're with us, or you're against us."
I did say that.
Which is basically what I've been saying locally for about a decade. The people we're having the most trouble with internationally don't just hate The West, they hate ANYONE that doesn't actively join their crusade. It's not enough to leave them alone, if you don't actively assist them in their genocidal goals you're going to be considered a target.
Basically extremist islam right now is pretty much the same problem with US right now, "You're with us, or you're against us."
People would still find a way, just look at what people were doing with modern games before their SDKs came out.
The REAL problem would be whether or not the publisher/owner got uppity and tried to claim they were violating some aspect of IP law.
I'll grant him one thing: As much as I like computers and my life as a computer nerd and gamer... I do utterly despise many aspects of the PHYSICAL computer itself.
Fragile yet sharp components, cramped working space even in a fulltower unless you get something truly enormous, extreme sensitivity to ESD, and it doesn't matter what you do you're probably guaranteed to wind up swearing at your heatsink at some point.
You're leveraging a vague complaint of blurriness that's contradictory with the way monitors work against a trinitron tube that you were running not just at lower resolutions and refresh rates than it was built for but also at the wrong aspect ratios. The p990 was designed for running a 4:3 resolution going up to 1600x1200 @75hz, anything lower and it should've been running at 85hz.
Either your specific monitor was damaged or you did something wrong. I can't magically find out it's history but you've admitted to not running it properly and your claims are contradictory to the way monitors work.
Saying that you switched from the wrong aspect ratio and a lower refresh rate to a higher resolution in the right aspect ratio and things got blurrier is like saying you put the car in drive and press the gas to stop going forwards. It just does not work that way unless something's broken, or you were wrong.
That would be a Trinitron CRT, you can buy more online from many places. They go up to 24" and ~2000x1500.
Probably because you didn't have your settings done right, or ran at 60hz, or ran at the wrong resolution.
Personally I always enjoyed my 21" CRT that ran at 1600x1200 and my 24" CRT that ran at 2048x1536 (both at 85hz) but if you like your two steps backwards enjoy it.
Reminds me of my Homeworld: Cataclysm manual. That thing's the size and thickness of a stack of comic books. It had everything from a full and illustrated backstory to complete (if out of date after patches) information on every ship in the game.
Coincidental, I've got them right now and seem to get them at least every other week. Probably has to do more with how your posts are rated and how often you metamoderate than anything else.
2048x1536 = 3,145,728 pixels @ 4:3 aspect
1280x720 = 921 pixels @ 16:9 aspect
I can handpick comparisons to say whatever I want too!
Now try comparing a 4:3 screen to a 16:9 screen with the same diagonal measurement (of actual viewable area...) which is the REAL comparison.
Same thing with widescreen. It's entirely hinged on the advertising of being "more cinematic" when in reality it's designed entirely for the purpose of selling more screens with lower overall pixel counts and less overall screen area.
Your eyes have apparently gotten worse as well if you haven't noticed that most modern console shooters are that easy because they're basically doing half the aiming for you.
Never saw a resolution iwth 640 vertical lines but in 2000 I was using a trinitron that did 1200P @85hz. If I'd had a little more $$$ I could've gotten the widescreen version that did 1500P.
Oh I'm sorry I forgot mentioning that makes the "Chyeah 1080P brah" crowd froth at the mouth a bit.
But that's the trick to his "No True Scottsman" fallacy. If you present Ebert with a videogame that fits his definition of art then he simply claims it's not a videogame and that you've proven his point for him.
Which is exactly why I said the argument's basically over. He's resorted to a circular no true scotsman fallacy. He keeps trying to define art, then whenever a videogame that meets that definition is presented he claims it's not really a videogame and that somehow proves his point.
At this point it's almost like he's desperately trying to find some way of defining "art" in a way that excludes video games purely because he, for some reason, NEEDS them to not be art.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that he's officially passed into hinging his entire worldview in relation to videogames as art on a "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
So if I understand this right TFA says that these cloaks just render something as appearing where it isn't rather than completely invisible when viewed from various angles?
If so that's still got the possibility of being pretty bloody useful.
I preferred a simpler argument: With such a large base of comparison and such a small set of acceptable solutions you will eventually reach a 100% plagiarism rate.
No, he's saying that if he buys the 200hp car for the 200hp price then it's his damn car and he payed for 200hp so they should not be allowed to turn it into a 100hp car Just Because.
Simple, they bought it.