I sort of knew Theora was a bit behind than Mpeg-4, but I didn't realize by how much. The Theora clip that has a 60% higher bitrate than the Mpeg-4 still looks fuzzier to my eyes (especially the moving grass).
Look closer. They use "his/him" about half the time and "her" about half the time. This makes complete sense to me, at least statistically -- with no prior information your best guess is 50/50.
Though now that i think of it from that perspective, D&D should probably use more of a 20/80 ratio given the demographic.
That's a pretty simplistic view. For, I don't know, gerbils or something that argument might hold alright, but humans have built much of our reproductive success on non-kin caretaking. It's so important to us that we have a whole lot of words for it, words like 'community', 'cooperation', 'government', 'institution', and 'neighborliness' (to name just a few). The popular view of Dawkins-y evolution ('must...spread...genome!') has serious trouble explaining any level of human society (see also Sober and Wilson [link]).
The point is, with the level of social organization we as a species have, and evolutionary-psychological tendency to adopt others' children is really not very unlikely.
I saw one of these in operation at the Venice Biennale in 2003. It was really remarkable to watch, but then I was thinking of it as more of an art project pointing out the absurd nature of economic forecasting than a serious research tool.
But still, those ads are talking about how dangerous it is to smoke pot in general, which we all know is a load of horse shit. That's a lot different than an ad that says "Go have fun, enjoy yourself, smoke up with your friends, just don't be stupid and get behind the wheel of a car. Make sure you have a designated driver".
I agree completely with everything you've said. I still don't see where you've made the case that legalizing pot would increase the number of people that drive stoned, even with an increase in amount of pot smoked or number of people smoking it.
While I do not recommend driving while high for the novice smoker, people who have been accommodated to marijuana frequently drive with little (read: no) consequences... marijuana relaxes and causes the user to 'zone' into driving mode... *Real* smokers tend to laugh at people who think driving high is dangerous or difficult.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. I've talked with so many people that say that others may have trouble driving while drunk/high, but they're really good at it because they know what they're doing. Same argument: "but I'm good at driving drunk/stoned/tripping/on speed."
If pot were legal and we could have open public discourse (media etc) on the subject, we could start to bring some of this to light. Driving is dangerous, and it gets more so the more mind-altering drugs you've taken. I'd agree that driving stoned is probably less dangerous than driving drunk, but that doesn't mean it's not more dangerous than driving sober (Somewhere else in the comments someone referenced some studies on this).
This whole argument is a red herring. Is there any evidence that more people would drive stoned if pot were legal? I'd make an argument for the converse:
Currently there can be no widespread campaigns to stigmatize driving stoned (as there have been for driving drunk) because they would be seen as implicit approval of getting stoned and not driving. But if pot were legal you'd be sure to see a slew billboards and PSAs talking about the dangers of driving stoned.
Thanks! I was just watching "Live Free or Die Hard" in which all the lights turn green and accidents ensue. I was thinking to myself that there must be some sort of hardware failsafe in traffic lights to prevent this sort of thing.
Wouldn't the word "their" have been an equally qualified option?
Show me a programmer creating "perfectly engineered code", and I'll show you a programmer building up their resume.
The above looks okay to me, but I'm not an English major.
Absolutely not. 'Their' is plural, as in, "I'll show you a collection of programmers building up their resumes". You gotta use 'his' or 'hers' ('its' is not a personal pronoun and implies non-person).
I think I got this thread off on the wrong foot. Text anti-aliasing has been around for a long time in OO.o (as a comment above says). In fact the new antialiasing is for the in-document drawings, which makes a huge difference both for working with images and for good-looking presentations.
It actually is a big deal that they did this, and I congratulate the developers on their good work.
I didn't know that. I guess OS X felt so different because of the massive UI and API changes on top of all of the underlying stuff. I always just assumed there was some level of consistency between the Windows versions because applications were all forward-compatible without resorting to emulation.
Anti-virus, what's that? (sorry, couldn't resist. have to gloat while I still can).
You're right that OS X generally becomes more of a disk-space hog. The OS itself tends to get better at memory usage, though, and absolutely more efficient with its CPU use.
Slashdot Mirror
I sort of knew Theora was a bit behind than Mpeg-4, but I didn't realize by how much. The Theora clip that has a 60% higher bitrate than the Mpeg-4 still looks fuzzier to my eyes (especially the moving grass).
Doesn't seem to work for hulu...
Not all the time. Try that with Hulu or Megavideo.
Look closer. They use "his/him" about half the time and "her" about half the time. This makes complete sense to me, at least statistically -- with no prior information your best guess is 50/50.
Though now that i think of it from that perspective, D&D should probably use more of a 20/80 ratio given the demographic.
Wait, the iPhone now trolls? That'll save me some time.
The point is, with the level of social organization we as a species have, and evolutionary-psychological tendency to adopt others' children is really not very unlikely.
If you'll reread your quoted text, it seems he's referring to the hardware manufacturer's stupid placement of the IR receiver, not the grandmother's.
I saw one of these in operation at the Venice Biennale in 2003. It was really remarkable to watch, but then I was thinking of it as more of an art project pointing out the absurd nature of economic forecasting than a serious research tool.
Heh, no I haven't.
But still, those ads are talking about how dangerous it is to smoke pot in general, which we all know is a load of horse shit. That's a lot different than an ad that says "Go have fun, enjoy yourself, smoke up with your friends, just don't be stupid and get behind the wheel of a car. Make sure you have a designated driver".
I agree completely with everything you've said. I still don't see where you've made the case that legalizing pot would increase the number of people that drive stoned, even with an increase in amount of pot smoked or number of people smoking it.
While I do not recommend driving while high for the novice smoker, people who have been accommodated to marijuana frequently drive with little (read: no) consequences... marijuana relaxes and causes the user to 'zone' into driving mode ... *Real* smokers tend to laugh at people who think driving high is dangerous or difficult.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. I've talked with so many people that say that others may have trouble driving while drunk/high, but they're really good at it because they know what they're doing. Same argument: "but I'm good at driving drunk/stoned/tripping/on speed."
If pot were legal and we could have open public discourse (media etc) on the subject, we could start to bring some of this to light. Driving is dangerous, and it gets more so the more mind-altering drugs you've taken. I'd agree that driving stoned is probably less dangerous than driving drunk, but that doesn't mean it's not more dangerous than driving sober (Somewhere else in the comments someone referenced some studies on this).
This whole argument is a red herring. Is there any evidence that more people would drive stoned if pot were legal? I'd make an argument for the converse:
Currently there can be no widespread campaigns to stigmatize driving stoned (as there have been for driving drunk) because they would be seen as implicit approval of getting stoned and not driving. But if pot were legal you'd be sure to see a slew billboards and PSAs talking about the dangers of driving stoned.
Sloppy writing is a very good predictor of sloppy coding.
[citation needed]
Hmm, for some reason the query "prime factors of 2^142154695-1" is timing out...
Thanks! I was just watching "Live Free or Die Hard" in which all the lights turn green and accidents ensue. I was thinking to myself that there must be some sort of hardware failsafe in traffic lights to prevent this sort of thing.
No, "His" is appropriate. English allows fallback to the male gender when the subject's gender is unknown or mixed.
As is "Her", by most accounts.
Wouldn't the word "their" have been an equally qualified option?
The above looks okay to me, but I'm not an English major.
Absolutely not. 'Their' is plural, as in, "I'll show you a collection of programmers building up their resumes". You gotta use 'his' or 'hers' ('its' is not a personal pronoun and implies non-person).
You have it backwards. If hacking the copy protection is harder, then that just makes the task that much more alluring.
I think I got this thread off on the wrong foot. Text anti-aliasing has been around for a long time in OO.o (as a comment above says). In fact the new antialiasing is for the in-document drawings, which makes a huge difference both for working with images and for good-looking presentations.
It actually is a big deal that they did this, and I congratulate the developers on their good work.
Finally with antialiasing !
Isn't one of the doomsday theories surrounding the LHC that our section of spacetime will get shoved elsewhere in the universe?
Dell's boards had "Intel" silkscreened on them, since they were literally carbon copies of Intel's reference board and nobdoy bothered to change it.
Not literally carbon copies, unless there's a lot less to board design and manufacture than I think.
XP! Pre configured, fully loaded with rootkits, fully patched, and pre hacked. Please seed!
fixed that for you
I didn't know that. I guess OS X felt so different because of the massive UI and API changes on top of all of the underlying stuff. I always just assumed there was some level of consistency between the Windows versions because applications were all forward-compatible without resorting to emulation.
Anti-virus, what's that? (sorry, couldn't resist. have to gloat while I still can).
You're right that OS X generally becomes more of a disk-space hog. The OS itself tends to get better at memory usage, though, and absolutely more efficient with its CPU use.