That wasn't funny. It was a lame jab at MS. Not at all funny, sorry.
Now, if you'd quoted or even paraphrased Monty Python, that might have been at least funny enough to offset the total lack of humor of that comment. I am, of course, referring to the scene in Holy Grail involving the Castle AUUUUGGGGHhhhhhhh.
You can't watch film from the original archive streamed for two very good reasons -- it is very very difficult to stream and it ruins the film. Furthermore, just because it is archived, why does it have to be for public consumption? They're not exactly public records. They are private property, for the studios to use or abuse as they please, and I for one think it's great that they want to archive them for the future, regardless of the motive behind it. Perhaps this is some extension of the bullshit "free as in speech" nonsense pitched by the Open Source fools?
What is with this whole "free as in speech" metaphor anyway? If I say something that does not inherently give you the right to use my speech in any way you see fit, especially not the right to reuse my speech as your own. This "free as in speech" nonsense has got to go. Pick a different metaphor that actually makes sense, instead of one designed to garner sympathy for your cause from people who haven't actually thought about what it means.
Sorry.
I get a little worked up sometimes when I hear the insane ravings of the "information wants to be free" crowd (arrrrggh! Another nasty one)
Too bad major movie studios don't care about that.
I beg to differ. I spent some time as an intern at Warner Bros. TV animation, and I watched someone do editing for Powerpuff Girls. He would make his edits on the Avid, then go over to the other desk and make the same edits on film. He explained to me that they archive everything on film, because nobody really knows what will happen to digital media in 20 years or more, but film they know will last several lifetimes. So if they care enough to archive a children's cartoon to film, you'd better believe they keep good archives of their motion pictures, etc. They just may not have them publically accessable, and understanably so, so that you really wouldn't know if they did have good archives.
I'll criticize Nader. He's a socialist idiot. Anyone who votes for Nader either isn't very bright or hasn't spent enough time thinking about the issues. Vote Browne and the Libertarians!
Microsoft is currently trying to replace 98 with ME, and NT 4 / 3.51 with 2000, thereby making there really only two versions of Windows, both with (almost) completely different markets and not much common ground. They are not really even different flavors of the same OS--Just because they look the same does not make them the same. And they've been talking about replacing the 95/98/ME line with the NT/2000 line for quite some time, meaning that at some indeterminate point in the future there will only really be one Windows.
As for BSD, it is my impression that in any given flavor of BSD (BSD/OS, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD) there is still only one official distribution. I would not define FreeBSD and OpenBSD as different distributions of the same OS, as I would with Slackware and Red Hat -- the code is quite different in different versions of BSD, and there is no central authority defining kernel version X as the standard as there is in Linux.
Now MacOS. MacOS X server is a completely different OS from OS X. Just because they are made by the same company does not make them the same OS, as is also the case with Windows ME/2000.
Actually, when you think about, the very concept of distributions is unique to the Linux world. Whether this is a good thing or bad we have yet to see. I certainly think that with such a novel concept of the same OS being distibuted by different companies rather than the same company distributing different OSes it is impossible to predict accurately what the future holds for the different Linux vendors.
OK, how fucking stupid do you have to be to reply to your own post, not notice the #2 indicating you are the second poster, also not notice the actual first post (not something I condone anyway, but it is what it is), and still in your reply write "BTW, FP!"? That really is just sad.
Does McDonalds have "More than 99,287,322,398 Hamburgers Sold" posted on all their stores?
Of course they don't. They don't say how many hamburgers they've sold. It simply says something like "More than 92 billion sold". 92 billion what? As it turns out, that's patties, not hamburgers. A Quarter Pounder counts as one. A Big Mac counts as two. And so on and so forth.
Just another useless tidbit with which to impress your friends. =-)
Oh, come on. Give 'em a break. I mean, at least they didn't use hacker in the traditional media sense, i.e. $kr1p7 |<1dd13. Not only that, but I'm sure some of the, uh, more average readers are going to come away from this article confused ("Huh? Someone hacked TiVo? Damn computer geeks better not hack my TiVo... hmmm, maybe I should disconnect this phone line or something...")
In fact, I laud them for this article. They even get extra points from me for not adding a footnote or something explaining the difference between a hacker and a god damn rootshell brat cracker.
You're missing the point. We don't concern ourselves with the effect one body has on the other. It is irrelevant WHY the objects move as they do when we choose a reference point. We can pick any point in space and say the entire universe orbits around it and be no less correct than if we calculated the perfect center of the universe around which everything in the universe orbits with a basically circular pattern.
And anyway, your argument (if I understand what you're trying to say) falls apart when you realize that gravity from one object affects every other object in the universe, making it perfectly logical that objects don't orbit other objects in a perfectly circular fashion, and thereby making it moot what orbital patterns are changed by changing our reference points (if you understand what I'm trying to say =-) ).
Well, technically the Earth doesn't have to be defined as orbiting the Sun. Since we are on the Earth, relative to us the Sun orbits the Earth, and so do all the other planets AND the asteroid belt (albeit in sort of a silly elliptical orbit).
It's all a question of frames of reference. Since it's all moving in directions we can't really perceive anyway, it is just as logical to define Earth as the fixed point as it is to define the Sun as such. We simply say the Sun is fixed in space as a matter of convenience for us, since it being the fixed object allows us to describe every planet as maintainig a (more or less) circular path in space.
Even in this age of computers, and in the forseeable future, one hell of a lot of work goes into producing high quality animation. Someone still writes it, and someone still storyboards it.
The voices for the characters are recorded. Then someone actually has to go through the entire voice track and mark up exactly what mouth positions the characters should have to match the voice track. To make it look good (i.e. not like anime) that comes out to about 6-12 mouth positions per second. None of this is done by computers.
The characters are then drawn roughly (keep in mind that a single animator can only work on a few seconds of each 7 minute TV cartoon). In fact, for most of the Cartoon Network shows anyway (which I have actual experience with the creation of) , the only part done on computer is the ink and paint, compositing (combining two or more layers to make up a single scene, such as when we draw Bugs' head, torso, and arms on seperate layers), and the actual combining of the frames to do the animation, but someone's still gotta operate the computer. See all those names at the end of the cartoon? Those people all did quite a lot, and that doesn't even mention all of the people who contributed. Don't even get me started on the 70 piece orchestra they bring in to score the cartoons.
A bit off topic, but I'm sensistive about animation =-)
I would hardly call this a great precedent for anything. We don't need more laws that don't work interfering with private business. And it's a Sisyphean task to try to do anything to stop the onslaught of spammers, phone solicitors, etc. Kind of like trying to plug a raging river with corks. Look at/. -- even as more "lameness filters" are added to the code, the quantity of trolls has gone way up (apparently inversely proportional to the quality). Almost always, the government is not the best route for this kind of thing.
Does it seem to resemble an SGI O2 machine to anyone else? Wow, now I can impress my geeky friends for the low low price of $599! Kinda like those fake pagers they sell in the Johnson-Smith catalogs...
The "advantages" of the metric system are not really all that useful. Yeah, sure, we all know 100 cm to the meter, 1000 meters to the km... but the important question is "who cares?" I personally have NEVER had to convert between inches and miles, or feet and miles for that matter. They are simply used for different things. And base 10 really is so arbitrary anyway... I'm partial to base 16, but there are good arguments for both 12 and 60, and all of them are better than 10.
Centigrade is useless too -- who cares what temperature water boils at for most things anyway? I just put it on the stove and when it bubbles I add the pasta.
There is no reason for people to use the rigid base 10 system, when we can easily specify a third of a foot, or a quarter inch. For me, anyway, thirds and quarters are easier to multiply and divide in my head -- there is almost no chance of being off by an order of magnitude. I can instantly tell you there are 80 quarters in $20.00, but I would think twice before saying that's 200 dimes. Again though, when was the last time you needed to know how many quarters or dimes in $20.00?
Granted, this may not apply for scientific purposes where it is necessary to convert between different types of units quickly, but still... what self respecting engineer doesn't carry an HP48 with him at all times?;-)
I was cutting moved away in some trabalh-related material, when I started this note of an administrator in my ISP:
Subject: Its cgi characterized in Slashdot of: marcotte@panix.com: date of jdf@panix.com: Seated, 28 August 1999 01:20:39 -0400 (EDT) its cgi that was characterized in slashdot caused all the luck of the problems in our server. Since that it needs to make many questions to one another server, makes examination of a long time to function. This coupled to the fact that slashdot is a place of the volume very raised caused its processes of the Perl to the back part above and makes with that both our server of the Web stop. It is full probable that babelfish estêve also overloaded. I needed to rebaptize it thus what he would not make with that the server they were below another time. You can want to put above some examples what the certificate can make preferivelmente. To little until the traffic he is even outside.
If you want to put together a video studio with professional digital equipment, a Linux box would be a mistake. Your best bet would be an AVID system, which is often found in professional shops (most of the cartoons on Cartoon Network, for example, are done on an AVID), but if you don't want to spend the $12,000 or so on that, you should get a Mac G3 system, or an older one with a Firewire card if you really feel you need the extra PCI slot. Since practically all digital devices (VCRs, cameras, etc.) have Firewire ports you wouldn't even need a capture card. While you probably could cobble together a Linux based system, video production has never really been one of its strengths. But if it ever improves substantially, hey, there's always PPCLinux. In any event, if you're willing to pay the upwards of $3,500 for a professional digital camera, and God knows what for the rest of that setup, you don't want to choke on a nonlinear system that isn't up to the quality of the rest of your equipment.
Slashdot Mirror
That wasn't funny. It was a lame jab at MS. Not at all funny, sorry.
Now, if you'd quoted or even paraphrased Monty Python, that might have been at least funny enough to offset the total lack of humor of that comment. I am, of course, referring to the scene in Holy Grail involving the Castle AUUUUGGGGHhhhhhhh.
You can't watch film from the original archive streamed for two very good reasons -- it is very very difficult to stream and it ruins the film. Furthermore, just because it is archived, why does it have to be for public consumption? They're not exactly public records. They are private property, for the studios to use or abuse as they please, and I for one think it's great that they want to archive them for the future, regardless of the motive behind it. Perhaps this is some extension of the bullshit "free as in speech" nonsense pitched by the Open Source fools?
What is with this whole "free as in speech" metaphor anyway? If I say something that does not inherently give you the right to use my speech in any way you see fit, especially not the right to reuse my speech as your own. This "free as in speech" nonsense has got to go. Pick a different metaphor that actually makes sense, instead of one designed to garner sympathy for your cause from people who haven't actually thought about what it means.
Sorry.
I get a little worked up sometimes when I hear the insane ravings of the "information wants to be free" crowd (arrrrggh! Another nasty one)
I'll go back to bed now.
Too bad major movie studios don't care about that.
I beg to differ. I spent some time as an intern at Warner Bros. TV animation, and I watched someone do editing for Powerpuff Girls. He would make his edits on the Avid, then go over to the other desk and make the same edits on film. He explained to me that they archive everything on film, because nobody really knows what will happen to digital media in 20 years or more, but film they know will last several lifetimes. So if they care enough to archive a children's cartoon to film, you'd better believe they keep good archives of their motion pictures, etc. They just may not have them publically accessable, and understanably so, so that you really wouldn't know if they did have good archives.
I'll criticize Nader. He's a socialist idiot. Anyone who votes for Nader either isn't very bright or hasn't spent enough time thinking about the issues. Vote Browne and the Libertarians!
Microsoft is currently trying to replace 98 with ME, and NT 4 / 3.51 with 2000, thereby making there really only two versions of Windows, both with (almost) completely different markets and not much common ground. They are not really even different flavors of the same OS--Just because they look the same does not make them the same. And they've been talking about replacing the 95/98/ME line with the NT/2000 line for quite some time, meaning that at some indeterminate point in the future there will only really be one Windows.
As for BSD, it is my impression that in any given flavor of BSD (BSD/OS, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD) there is still only one official distribution. I would not define FreeBSD and OpenBSD as different distributions of the same OS, as I would with Slackware and Red Hat -- the code is quite different in different versions of BSD, and there is no central authority defining kernel version X as the standard as there is in Linux.
Now MacOS. MacOS X server is a completely different OS from OS X. Just because they are made by the same company does not make them the same OS, as is also the case with Windows ME/2000.
Actually, when you think about, the very concept of distributions is unique to the Linux world. Whether this is a good thing or bad we have yet to see. I certainly think that with such a novel concept of the same OS being distibuted by different companies rather than the same company distributing different OSes it is impossible to predict accurately what the future holds for the different Linux vendors.
OK, how fucking stupid do you have to be to reply to your own post, not notice the #2 indicating you are the second poster, also not notice the actual first post (not something I condone anyway, but it is what it is), and still in your reply write "BTW, FP!"? That really is just sad.
Does McDonalds have "More than 99,287,322,398 Hamburgers Sold" posted on all their stores?
Of course they don't. They don't say how many hamburgers they've sold. It simply says something like "More than 92 billion sold". 92 billion what? As it turns out, that's patties, not hamburgers. A Quarter Pounder counts as one. A Big Mac counts as two. And so on and so forth.
Just another useless tidbit with which to impress your friends. =-)
Oh, come on. Give 'em a break. I mean, at least they didn't use hacker in the traditional media sense, i.e. $kr1p7 |<1dd13. Not only that, but I'm sure some of the, uh, more average readers are going to come away from this article confused ("Huh? Someone hacked TiVo? Damn computer geeks better not hack my TiVo... hmmm, maybe I should disconnect this phone line or something...")
In fact, I laud them for this article. They even get extra points from me for not adding a footnote or something explaining the difference between a hacker and a god damn rootshell brat cracker.
You're missing the point. We don't concern ourselves with the effect one body has on the other. It is irrelevant WHY the objects move as they do when we choose a reference point. We can pick any point in space and say the entire universe orbits around it and be no less correct than if we calculated the perfect center of the universe around which everything in the universe orbits with a basically circular pattern.
And anyway, your argument (if I understand what you're trying to say) falls apart when you realize that gravity from one object affects every other object in the universe, making it perfectly logical that objects don't orbit other objects in a perfectly circular fashion, and thereby making it moot what orbital patterns are changed by changing our reference points (if you understand what I'm trying to say =-) ).
Well, technically the Earth doesn't have to be defined as orbiting the Sun. Since we are on the Earth, relative to us the Sun orbits the Earth, and so do all the other planets AND the asteroid belt (albeit in sort of a silly elliptical orbit).
It's all a question of frames of reference. Since it's all moving in directions we can't really perceive anyway, it is just as logical to define Earth as the fixed point as it is to define the Sun as such. We simply say the Sun is fixed in space as a matter of convenience for us, since it being the fixed object allows us to describe every planet as maintainig a (more or less) circular path in space.
Even in this age of computers, and in the forseeable future, one hell of a lot of work goes into producing high quality animation. Someone still writes it, and someone still storyboards it.
The voices for the characters are recorded. Then someone actually has to go through the entire voice track and mark up exactly what mouth positions the characters should have to match the voice track. To make it look good (i.e. not like anime) that comes out to about 6-12 mouth positions per second. None of this is done by computers.
The characters are then drawn roughly (keep in mind that a single animator can only work on a few seconds of each 7 minute TV cartoon). In fact, for most of the Cartoon Network shows anyway (which I have actual experience with the creation of) , the only part done on computer is the ink and paint, compositing (combining two or more layers to make up a single scene, such as when we draw Bugs' head, torso, and arms on seperate layers), and the actual combining of the frames to do the animation, but someone's still gotta operate the computer. See all those names at the end of the cartoon? Those people all did quite a lot, and that doesn't even mention all of the people who contributed. Don't even get me started on the 70 piece orchestra they bring in to score the cartoons.
A bit off topic, but I'm sensistive about animation =-)
I would hardly call this a great precedent for anything. We don't need more laws that don't work interfering with private business. And it's a Sisyphean task to try to do anything to stop the onslaught of spammers, phone solicitors, etc. Kind of like trying to plug a raging river with corks. Look at /. -- even as more "lameness filters" are added to the code, the quantity of trolls has gone way up (apparently inversely proportional to the quality). Almost always, the government is not the best route for this kind of thing.
FWIW, Kennesaw /requires/ gun ownership, and violent crime there has been amazingly low.
http://www.aimtec.com/rkba/kennesaw.html
Does it seem to resemble an SGI O2 machine to anyone else? Wow, now I can impress my geeky friends for the low low price of $599! Kinda like those fake pagers they sell in the Johnson-Smith catalogs...
The "advantages" of the metric system are not really all that useful. Yeah, sure, we all know 100 cm to the meter, 1000 meters to the km... but the important question is "who cares?" I personally have NEVER had to convert between inches and miles, or feet and miles for that matter. They are simply used for different things. And base 10 really is so arbitrary anyway... I'm partial to base 16, but there are good arguments for both 12 and 60, and all of them are better than 10.
;-)
Centigrade is useless too -- who cares what temperature water boils at for most things anyway? I just put it on the stove and when it bubbles I add the pasta.
There is no reason for people to use the rigid base 10 system, when we can easily specify a third of a foot, or a quarter inch. For me, anyway, thirds and quarters are easier to multiply and divide in my head -- there is almost no chance of being off by an order of magnitude. I can instantly tell you there are 80 quarters in $20.00, but I would think twice before saying that's 200 dimes. Again though, when was the last time you needed to know how many quarters or dimes in $20.00?
Granted, this may not apply for scientific purposes where it is necessary to convert between different types of units quickly, but still... what self respecting engineer doesn't carry an HP48 with him at all times?
My 20 m$ worth.
And to Portuguese and back:
English As it is spoken
FLASH!
I was Slashdotted[tm ]!
I was cutting moved away in some trabalh-related material, when I started this note of an administrator
in my ISP:
Subject: Its cgi characterized in Slashdot of: marcotte@panix.com: date of jdf@panix.com: Seated, 28
August 1999 01:20:39 -0400 (EDT) its cgi that was characterized in slashdot caused all the luck of the
problems in our server. Since that it needs to make many questions to one another server, makes
examination of a long time to function. This coupled to the fact that slashdot is a place of the volume very
raised caused its processes of the Perl to the back part above and makes with that both our server of
the Web stop. It is full probable that babelfish estêve also overloaded. I needed to rebaptize it thus what
he would not make with that the server they were below another time. You can want to put above some
examples what the certificate can make preferivelmente. To little until the traffic he is even outside.
If you want to put together a video studio with professional digital equipment, a Linux box would be a mistake. Your best bet would be an AVID system, which is often found in professional shops (most of the cartoons on Cartoon Network, for example, are done on an AVID), but if you don't want to spend the $12,000 or so on that, you should get a Mac G3 system, or an older one with a Firewire card if you really feel you need the extra PCI slot. Since practically all digital devices (VCRs, cameras, etc.) have Firewire ports you wouldn't even need a capture card. While you probably could cobble together a Linux based system, video production has never really been one of its strengths. But if it ever improves substantially, hey, there's always PPCLinux. In any event, if you're willing to pay the upwards of $3,500 for a professional digital camera, and God knows what for the rest of that setup, you don't want to choke on a nonlinear system that isn't up to the quality of the rest of your equipment.