The best current graphics using that particular engine are obtained when the rendering processor is overclocked with lysergic acid diethylamide or a combination of specific aureal stimulation and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine. Either of these produce a substantially improved visual experience.
I use CD cracks all the time for playing games I OWN. Specifically I do this so I can play games under Wine (looks like I won't have to do this for much longer though!!!yipppeee).
If I'm not mistaken, the original reason for robots.txt was to prevent endless loops from confusing spiders, not to "cover" some information that would otherwise be easily accessible. Of course, others use it for other things now...
Actually I said: "I don't think the rovers really have the capabilities to positively identify life"
I still stand by that, there is very little information that they could provide that we could use and then say "yep, thats alive." Now they COULD provide information we could use to argue that life exist(s/ed) on Mars...
Wait a second, you also need the cameras to have plenty of resolution and magnification. Neither of which the onboard camera has.
Anyway, LIVING THINGS can be seen with a microscope sure, I didn't say that it COULDN'T see living things. At this point though, we are looking for SIGNS of life, such as ONCE living things. It is notoriously difficult to see the difference between many dead microscopic life forms and many other naturally occuring particles.
I never said we should discard the concept, simply that we shouldn't expect to see microscopic life forms with a camera that has a one megapixel resolution and no zoom lens to speak of. The mission of the rovers was NOT to see life forms, but to ascertain the existance of water... All I said was that with the same equipment there are BETTER ways of identifying signs of life than a damned camera.
Trust me light magnification isn't the best or most reliable way to recognise signs of life...even on Earth with humans at the scope. More than likely they could infer living organisms through spectrographic identification of by-products of theoretical living creatures...
I agree though, I don't think the rovers really have the capabilities to positively identify life.
"But efficient lens manufacturing is only half the issue. Proper diagnosis of vision problems is the other half. Current automatic diagnostic technologies are expensive, fragile and error-prone. Because they rely on a patient looking at electronically generated images a few inches away from his or her face, they can lead to incorrect diagnoses. Plus, highly skilled people are required to operate these machines.
To resolve this problem, Griffith has created a prototype device to test the human eye. Patients need only wear the device, which looks like an oversized pair of goggles, and look at the world around them. An electronic sensor superimposed on the goggles monitors the lens in the wearer's eye and adjusts the device's lens to cancel the refractive errors, thus determining the correct prescription. "
That would tend to imply that God is an asshole, or at least has a really sick sense of humor...neither of which modern theology seems to ascribe to any higher being...
Another possibility is that God created the universe and USED evolution as his tool to create life as we know it...ever think of that?
A final possibility is that there is no God and most of humanity is thoroughly stuck up its collective ass...
As much as I tend to despise religion in general, the literalists are the worst of them...
If I'm not mistaken, virtually all probes have some sort of radioisotope heater...
Radioactivity is NOT radioactivity when you are considering things like this. Saying the people who don't want nuclear powered rockets should hate this as well or else they are hypocrites is tantamount to saying that the people who don't like oil spills should bitch about how some motor oil ALWAYS stays in the plastic container it is shipped in. Not quite the same problem. Afterall, these things aren't much more radioactive than a Coleman lantern wick or a smoke detector element...
Think about the same thing, but in reverse. Have the script run ONLY when someone signs up for the free porn, it automatically connects to the free e-mail provider and the glyph is just tranfered to the viewer in truly real time...
I would actually say these gloves are MORE useful in moderate cold than in arctic climates. If it is 10 or 20 deg F outside you will loose some dexterity in your fingers from the cold, but with a decent coat etc you won't freeze to death any time soon under normal circumstances. Decreasing circulation to your hands doesn't help in any appreciable way. When it is -60 deg F though, these gloves may do more harm than good (as so many others already pointed out) by counteracting your body's homeostasis system.
When an organism eats this GM fish, it will be full. Nothing else. Why would it be any different than eating the anemone that the gene is from in the FIRST place?
Seriously, no higher organism sucks up genes from its diet and adds them to its genome, it just doesn't work like that.
I agree fully with what you have said, however I have a nitpick with the second half of your argument. Rendering something at 80 fps isn't the same as sketching it. The vast majority of humans can THINK out complex scenes that have never happened (hence aren't simply memory/pregenerated) in real time that a modern PC system couldn't even come CLOSE to doing, this is more akin to rendering the scene.
Slashdot Mirror
The best current graphics using that particular engine are obtained when the rendering processor is overclocked with lysergic acid diethylamide or a combination of specific aureal stimulation and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine. Either of these produce a substantially improved visual experience.
I use CD cracks all the time for playing games I OWN. Specifically I do this so I can play games under Wine (looks like I won't have to do this for much longer though!!!yipppeee).
If I'm not mistaken, the original reason for robots.txt was to prevent endless loops from confusing spiders, not to "cover" some information that would otherwise be easily accessible. Of course, others use it for other things now...
Actually I said: "I don't think the rovers really have the capabilities to positively identify life"
I still stand by that, there is very little information that they could provide that we could use and then say "yep, thats alive." Now they COULD provide information we could use to argue that life exist(s/ed) on Mars...
Wait a second, you also need the cameras to have plenty of resolution and magnification. Neither of which the onboard camera has.
Anyway, LIVING THINGS can be seen with a microscope sure, I didn't say that it COULDN'T see living things. At this point though, we are looking for SIGNS of life, such as ONCE living things. It is notoriously difficult to see the difference between many dead microscopic life forms and many other naturally occuring particles.
I never said we should discard the concept, simply that we shouldn't expect to see microscopic life forms with a camera that has a one megapixel resolution and no zoom lens to speak of. The mission of the rovers was NOT to see life forms, but to ascertain the existance of water... All I said was that with the same equipment there are BETTER ways of identifying signs of life than a damned camera.
Trust me light magnification isn't the best or most reliable way to recognise signs of life...even on Earth with humans at the scope. More than likely they could infer living organisms through spectrographic identification of by-products of theoretical living creatures...
I agree though, I don't think the rovers really have the capabilities to positively identify life.
how many of those are along the lines of "A++++ supa good Ebay seller!!!!!"
Contributing my ass...
Um...
From the article:
"But efficient lens manufacturing is only half the issue. Proper diagnosis of vision problems is the other half. Current automatic diagnostic technologies are expensive, fragile and error-prone. Because they rely on a patient looking at electronically generated images a few inches away from his or her face, they can lead to incorrect diagnoses. Plus, highly skilled people are required to operate these machines.
To resolve this problem, Griffith has created a prototype device to test the human eye. Patients need only wear the device, which looks like an oversized pair of goggles, and look at the world around them. An electronic sensor superimposed on the goggles monitors the lens in the wearer's eye and adjusts the device's lens to cancel the refractive errors, thus determining the correct prescription.
"
There is already a solution to that though that doesn't resort to drugs, the average American should NOT "super size" it...
Well, both UPS and FedEx charge a hell of a lot more for virtually all of their services...maybe THAT is why they make money.
Most efficient from the eyes of the consumer: USPS
Most efficient from the eyes of the company: FedEx
UPS is somewhere out in left field most of the time...
That would tend to imply that God is an asshole, or at least has a really sick sense of humor...neither of which modern theology seems to ascribe to any higher being...
Another possibility is that God created the universe and USED evolution as his tool to create life as we know it...ever think of that?
A final possibility is that there is no God and most of humanity is thoroughly stuck up its collective ass...
As much as I tend to despise religion in general, the literalists are the worst of them...
Personally, I would say that Wal-Mart does little different from K-Mart, Target, or any other discount retailer.
A related question would be why not make the wafers square?
Cricket is pretty close to nationwide in larger metro areas (100K+)...
Playboy shows uncut porn sometimes, totally up in the air as to which movies they will show everything and which are basically HBO level...
The others aren't edited, they just don't show movies with anal in them...everything else including money shots is there...
The figure is more like $300 million. Still not cheap, but a lot less than a billion...
u me ntc.html)
(http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codea/codeae/doc
I think his point was that the 2.4 Ghz band is really meant for microwave ovens...
If I'm not mistaken, virtually all probes have some sort of radioisotope heater...
Radioactivity is NOT radioactivity when you are considering things like this. Saying the people who don't want nuclear powered rockets should hate this as well or else they are hypocrites is tantamount to saying that the people who don't like oil spills should bitch about how some motor oil ALWAYS stays in the plastic container it is shipped in. Not quite the same problem. Afterall, these things aren't much more radioactive than a Coleman lantern wick or a smoke detector element...
Exactly...thanks for the clarification...
Think about the same thing, but in reverse. Have the script run ONLY when someone signs up for the free porn, it automatically connects to the free e-mail provider and the glyph is just tranfered to the viewer in truly real time...
I would actually say these gloves are MORE useful in moderate cold than in arctic climates. If it is 10 or 20 deg F outside you will loose some dexterity in your fingers from the cold, but with a decent coat etc you won't freeze to death any time soon under normal circumstances. Decreasing circulation to your hands doesn't help in any appreciable way. When it is -60 deg F though, these gloves may do more harm than good (as so many others already pointed out) by counteracting your body's homeostasis system.
When an organism eats this GM fish, it will be full. Nothing else. Why would it be any different than eating the anemone that the gene is from in the FIRST place?
Seriously, no higher organism sucks up genes from its diet and adds them to its genome, it just doesn't work like that.
Maybe it also has something to do with you not being able to spell "efficiency"...
I agree fully with what you have said, however I have a nitpick with the second half of your argument. Rendering something at 80 fps isn't the same as sketching it. The vast majority of humans can THINK out complex scenes that have never happened (hence aren't simply memory/pregenerated) in real time that a modern PC system couldn't even come CLOSE to doing, this is more akin to rendering the scene.
The link works, you just have to remove the space before the = sign...