I can "comprehend the intended meaning" just fine. I am just pointing out it's a really bad saying, because a good saying will say what it means, without any need to second-guess it.
That's not what the quote says. It says:
Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results Not "doing specific insane things over and over". Just "doing the same thing".
Not necessarily. Anchors usually fall in water, where drag is high and terminal velocity is quickly reached. Thus the speed of fall mainly depends on the combined drag of the two anchors, which may or may not be twice the drag of one anchor, depending on all kinds of factors.
No, it's not even necessarily a good first step. Traditional raytracing becomes severely limiting as soon as you try to do any kind of realistic lighting. It needs huge kludges, tons of processing power, and additional techniques that work just as well with other rendering methods.
And with the limitations that trying to render in realtime imposes on you, it's no wonder game developers aren't interested.
Ray tracing is good if you want to render silver balls on infinite checkerboards. For real scenes, it's not all that useful.
Good job buying into the chemical company propaganda.
As the earlier poster pointed out, DDT is still perfectly legal, and used, for malaria prevention in Africa and elsewhere.
The real kicker is this: It's agricultural use that is banned. And agricultural use dumps much huger amounts of DDT into the environment. And even if you don't care about the damage it does, then perhaps you should consider that using large amounts of DDT also breeds DDT-resistant mosquitoes, thus increasing the occurance of malaria.
The word "bricking" means rendering something useless permanently (short of a trip to the shop for repairs). This is temporary. It has nothing to do with Apple, nothing to do with fanboys, and nothing to do with any RDF. It's simply a misuse of a term.
As one of these black holes pick up mass, they slow down. They may not pick up enough mass when passing through the Earth, but there are are some pretty big suns out there, with some pretty thick interiors. And they get hit by high-energy cosmic rays too, far more than the Earth.
The point I was making, which you keep refusing to listen to, is that you hear these vague complaints about the interface because interfaces are vague, and most people don't have the experience and language needed to talk about them. They just know they don't like it, but they can't quite tell you why, just like a person can tell a doctor he feel sick, but can't tell him why.
Even if I could give you a thorough analysis of the problems with the Gimp's interface - and I can't, I'm just an amateur in these matters, doing my best to pick up enough knowledge to not make utterly horrible GUIs - you would probably not even understand most of them, because you too lack the relevant specialized knowledge required to properly discuss and design a good GUI.
If I sat down and used the Gimp, something I try my best to avoid, I could probably list you some random suggestions that absolutely need to be fixed. But that takes quite a bit of work on my part, and I'm not going to do that for some random guy on the internet who can't do anything about it. And I would only be addressing minor symptoms, not the underlying cause - what Gimp really needs is a real HCI expert who can make the effort to analyze and re-design the interface as a whole, probably from scratch.
However, this is unlikely to happen any time soon. The Gimp team, and large parts of the open source fandom, share your misguided rationalization that people only complain because it's different, not because it is fundamentally broken.
Slashdot Mirror
No, as they are naturally occurring, they are quite normal atoms.
It's just that the electrons are of little interest to the people doing the experiments. It's the nucleus that is of interest.
I'm hoping they'll finally stop recycling locations from GTA 1 and get back to GTA London 1969.
http://www.rockstargames.com/gtalondon/
No. It also allows re-ordering code for better readability.
I can "comprehend the intended meaning" just fine. I am just pointing out it's a really bad saying, because a good saying will say what it means, without any need to second-guess it.
That's not "doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results".
"Second-rate fantasy"? Have you looked at the other fantasy novels out there?
Are you OK? Do you need some water?
Perhaps they licensed the 20%?
And in English?
They are.
It still is. Google won't do POST, just GET.
Not necessarily. Anchors usually fall in water, where drag is high and terminal velocity is quickly reached. Thus the speed of fall mainly depends on the combined drag of the two anchors, which may or may not be twice the drag of one anchor, depending on all kinds of factors.
That only matters if somebody is trying to crack it. 99.999% of the time, nobody is, you're just getting hit by automated bots.
No, it's not even necessarily a good first step. Traditional raytracing becomes severely limiting as soon as you try to do any kind of realistic lighting. It needs huge kludges, tons of processing power, and additional techniques that work just as well with other rendering methods.
And with the limitations that trying to render in realtime imposes on you, it's no wonder game developers aren't interested.
Ray tracing is good if you want to render silver balls on infinite checkerboards. For real scenes, it's not all that useful.
Good job buying into the chemical company propaganda.
As the earlier poster pointed out, DDT is still perfectly legal, and used, for malaria prevention in Africa and elsewhere.
The real kicker is this: It's agricultural use that is banned. And agricultural use dumps much huger amounts of DDT into the environment. And even if you don't care about the damage it does, then perhaps you should consider that using large amounts of DDT also breeds DDT-resistant mosquitoes, thus increasing the occurance of malaria.
Ray-tracing is nearly just as much of a hack as rasterizing polygons is. It's miles away from anything like a realistic model of lighting.
And it would still require just as much tweaking to make it look good, and make it fast.
Those are not mutually exclusive. You more often than not combine ray tracing with some kind of global illumination method like radiosity.
The word "bricking" means rendering something useless permanently (short of a trip to the shop for repairs). This is temporary. It has nothing to do with Apple, nothing to do with fanboys, and nothing to do with any RDF. It's simply a misuse of a term.
Then why do they sell music that plays on other players?
As one of these black holes pick up mass, they slow down. They may not pick up enough mass when passing through the Earth, but there are are some pretty big suns out there, with some pretty thick interiors. And they get hit by high-energy cosmic rays too, far more than the Earth.
They're still there.
The point I was making, which you keep refusing to listen to, is that you hear these vague complaints about the interface because interfaces are vague, and most people don't have the experience and language needed to talk about them. They just know they don't like it, but they can't quite tell you why, just like a person can tell a doctor he feel sick, but can't tell him why.
Even if I could give you a thorough analysis of the problems with the Gimp's interface - and I can't, I'm just an amateur in these matters, doing my best to pick up enough knowledge to not make utterly horrible GUIs - you would probably not even understand most of them, because you too lack the relevant specialized knowledge required to properly discuss and design a good GUI.
If I sat down and used the Gimp, something I try my best to avoid, I could probably list you some random suggestions that absolutely need to be fixed. But that takes quite a bit of work on my part, and I'm not going to do that for some random guy on the internet who can't do anything about it. And I would only be addressing minor symptoms, not the underlying cause - what Gimp really needs is a real HCI expert who can make the effort to analyze and re-design the interface as a whole, probably from scratch.
However, this is unlikely to happen any time soon. The Gimp team, and large parts of the open source fandom, share your misguided rationalization that people only complain because it's different, not because it is fundamentally broken.