This is the biggest problem with houses... I really think that this is a good place when government regulation could help. The number of times police, courts, etc get involved with noise and neighbour disputes that stem from noise - If you mandated decent walls, you'd save money, grief, and hassle.
By the way, for people in the US, the _average_ house price in Chelsea is about £1.5 million, so well over 2 million dollars. The average semi-detached house price is £12 million. It's not a normal part of the the UK, by any means.
You can't say the public is responsible for individual people's health, and then not also give the public power to use force to make individuals be healthy despite their wishes.
Yes you can. Most places with a national health service do just that. I'm happy with the system, too, despite currently hardly using the NHS at all. Yes, it's not _fair_, but getting cancer is not _fair_, either, and I know that if I did I would not be tens of thousands in debt just because of my illness.
When you vote for government responsibility, you are voting for government power. That power will come at the expense of people's liberty. It has to. I'm not saying this is good or evil (though I certainly have an opinion), but it is the reality.
I'm not quite sure how the NHS reduces my liberty (apart from paying a bit more in taxes). Here in the UK there's no real restriction on private medicine, like there is in some countries, so having the NHS does not prevent me from doing anything privately.
There are quite a few high definition Korean monitors available cheap now. This page has a decent round up. They all seem to be running the same LG panel, an IPS at 2560*1440. The prices start at about £200, or $300, which doesn't include any tax, and those at that price only have 1 hdmi, and don't include scalers (which makes them great for gaming, because of the lower screen lag).
If you open that email AT ALL, it's all HTML code. You just opened a page on their site custom designed for you.
Not with thunderbird. By default (I think), it blocks remote content. It doesn't matter if the email is in html or not, it can't get access to the internet.
This is false, wrong, bullshit, or whatever else you want to call it.
What the EU has banned is the labelling of the wine as wine if it is produced with grapes sourced outside the EU. Which I think is personally a bit stupid, but it's a different issue entirely. It's nothing to do with protecting the wine industries of mainland Europe, since the ruling applies to them too. English wine is still wine (well, as much as it ever was;P).
Actually, I'm being a bit unfair with that last snarky comment - there are some great English whites and sparkling wines... never had a good English red yet, though.
On topic - I think this ruling will hopefully be a good thing for the consumer - currently, ISP's can decide how you use the internet with little or no regulation.
So I'm sorry friend but there really isn't a point in ePeen cards unless you are just going for bragging rights or are doing serious GPGPU work because the games just ain't stressing the systems that hard.
This page has benchmarks for that card with modern games. The 4850 seems to average 30-40 fps in most games at 1680*1050 (Crysis 2 was worse), the benchmarks there don't show a minimum (which is usually about half the average). That's a bit crappy.
I run at 1920*1200, and thinking about getting one of these soon, so will be running at 2560*1440. This page shows benchmarks for Crysis, a game that is 5 years old.
I don't brag about my computer, I don't care about my "ePeen".
Vista was a beta (alpha?) of Win7 that they got people to pay for, so that's kinda of win really.
Meh... I bought Vista when it was first released, 15 seconds boot time from boot manager to desktop (slower than that now with about 1/2 a gazillion apps installed), currently over 1 month uptime, directx11. YMMV, but it's good enough for me.
That being said it was buggy as hell when I bought it - it would not install with my motherboard chipset and 4gb or more RAM (known bug). Needless to say, I was unimpressed with BSOD reboots on installation, and took quite a while troubleshooting the problem.
After a certain threshold, it's irrelevant if you get to run your computer games any faster, and you can't possibly justify spending twice as much on a piece of hardware if the only thing that gets you is the ability to run a computer game at 200fps instead of 150fps. Sure, it might look good in a marketing blurb to claim that your product is 33% faster than the competitor's, but the practical result of that is perfectly irrelevant for any user.
Most turn based strategy games use the CPU at the end of the turn to generate the computer's moves. So the user is literally waiting for the CPU, looking at the screen. _Any_ increase in CPU power leads to an improvement in the game, without limit, in most turn based games. Civ 5 has large, late game end of turn waits measured in minutes for most people.... yes, each turn.
The CPU, 99% of the time, is not going to affect the frames per second in a computer game significantly (within reasonable limitations). Your FPS will be limited by your graphics card and your PC architecture, and possibly your RAM (but most people have enough nowadays). Upgrading your CPU to increase your FPS is the wrong way to go about it.
There is a fundamental problem with elections in the US and many other places, regardless of electronic versus paper. The problem is that once the election is over it is OVER.
This is a fundamental problem of all fixed term office. Once someone is elected, there's nothing to stop them turning around and literally saying "fuck you" to the people who elected them. They'll still be in power for the next 4 years, whatever anyone wants to say about it.
only 32% of the nation using the FPTP system elected the conservatives in to government.
Hrm... don't know if you noticed or not, but the Conservatives weren't elected into government. They also got 36% of the vote.
The 2005 election was more warped. Labour got 35% of the vote, and 55% of the seats. Nearly two third of the voters did not want Labour, and they formed a majority government.
If anyone's confused by this, it's essentially what happens when you have more than two parties and lots of places with first past the post elections. This is a decent page to see some of the anomalies - that first graph is why the Lib Dems are pushing for electoral reform.
The second point is a note that there is a lack of evidence, which again doesn't point one way or the other.
There's also a lack of evidence for many other things, but we don't believe them. Making a categorical statement that something does not exist is, in my opinion, a little pointless. Most atheists do not seek to prove god does not exist. They just point out there's no compelling evidence for god, just as there is no compelling evidence for the billions of other things we do not believe in.
The idea of God's existence and the idea of God's inexistence are just two more "things."
No, they're not. There are almost infinite things we do not believe in. Claiming that each of those beliefs is equivalent to believing in god is wrong. I do not believe that undetectable miniature pink William Shatner lookalikes riding green unicorns swat quarks with orange flyswats, resulting in quantum mechanics weirdness. No one in the history of time has ever believed that. Believing that is not as valid a standpoint as not believing it.
Note here - I'm not trying to make belief in god look silly, I'm purely refuting the argument that believing in something without evidence is the same thing as not believing in something without evidence.
Atheism is the belief, without evidence, in the lack of existence of any deity.
Very few atheist would argue they can prove the lack of existance of any deity. To do so is stupid. Similarly, very few people would claim to be able to disprove many other theories, like the Shatners above. That doesn't mean believing in them is an equivalent "thing" to not believing in them.
Even at 2560x1440 I'd have to pay more for a single monitor than for a 680 GTX
No you wouldn't. I mentioned this monitor earlier in the discussion... I'm not trying to sell them, by the way, I was suprised at the cheapness. Most of the consumer feedback with them has been good, too.
This is a 2560*1440 monitor for $320. The early ones had higher quality internals, and could actually run at 100hz at that resolution. They're shipped direct from Korea.
People saying they're running on maximum settings, without mentioning the pixel count are being disingenuous. The above monitor pushes over 3.5 million pixels. 1336*768 is about 1 million.
Git is a general term of abuse, which can be applied to anyone. Gimp is a specific term of abuse which can be applied to a small subset of people. There is a difference.
That being said, I've no problem with it being called gimp.... but others have, and it would be advantageous IMO to rename.
Sure it does. On quality operating systems with well designed windowing systems, there is a program called a "window manager" whose job it is to decorate and arrange application windows as the user sees fit.
As mentioned in another post, the GIMP used to bring up a window for ever layer you were using. Forcing more windows on you is not necessarily a good thing.
To stem the flow of bitter griping
Why do you think there was this "bitter griping"? Do you think it was just Microsoft users who couldn't figure out more than one window? Or perhaps, maybe, just perhaps it could be that the UI for the GIMP was just weird. I personally learnt to live with it, and got along with it.... but it was a hurdle.
Re:Gimp still limping after all these years...
on
Gimp 2.8 Finally Released
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Talking crap about the GIMP and its UI is very easy. What's far more difficult is designing that UI, programming the features, and getting it into a coherent program.
Seriously, most of the the posts here are talking about how bad it is, from people who probably wouldn't know how to use it or its brethren for anything more than applying an effect to a photo.
Without GIMP, you'd be looking at completely inferior open source projects for image manipulation. As it is, it still leaves a little to be desired, but it's close enough for comparison.
As someone else pointed out, all DRM is meant to do is to preserve the same security that physical limitations provided before digital editions, i.e. you can only read a book if you're physically holding it, which limits you to one copy.
If that is what it is meant to do, it has gone horribly wrong. If DRM did do just that, very many fewer people would have a problem with it.
As a writer, I want to get paid for the work I put into writing something, and DRM is one way of ensuring that no one is reading something of mine without my permission.
No it's not. Seriously, it's not. DRM is not a way of ensuring that. It does not work.
BUT, I also want people to want to buy my stuff, and they're more likely to do that if the ebook version has the same utility as a physical book, meaning portability. Ergo, standardization solves a lot of the piracy issue by increasing the perceived value of each ebook and reducing the burden that DRM places on the consumer.
This is your problem : reducing the burden that DRM places on the consumer. You're saying DRM will always be some kind of burden for the consumer. When the illegal version is _better_ than the one you pay for, people are going to be loathe to money up. People are buying ebooks now, but just torrenting them so they can avoid the DRM.
Me and my friend were driving round Europe on holiday when we were 18. We'd got to Munich late, and decided just to park up between 2 cars in a small road in the middle of Munich, and sleep in the car. So, we both got in our sleeping bags, and went to sleep, in the front two seat reclined back almost horizontal.
The next thing I know, my friend was asking me what the fuck I thought I was doing. We were now parked in the middle of the road, completely blocking it.
Apparently, I'd just sat up, entered in the 4 digit immobiliser code, started the car, carefully driven the car into the middle of the road, parked and then happily gone back to sleep. This was in a manual car in my sleeping bag. I had absoluteley no recollection of any of this.
Anyway, I managed to get the car back in approximately the right place (about a foot and a half from the kerb though). My friend did spend a few minutes persuading me that we were parked in the middle of the road in Munich. I had been having a dream that we were in a campsite in Holland, for some reason, and the campsite manager had been telling me to move the car.
I had been known to sleepwalk a little in the past, but this was my only sleep-drive (that I know of, anyway).
Slashdot Mirror
What are you going to do with that much disk?
My Steam account has about a terabyte of games on it now. It's easy to see how it'd get used, if Sony go download only.
Heh... the sludge that most people drink, and contaminate with 3 sugars and 1/4 a pint of milk doesn't taste like tea anyway.
Guess it's a little like coffee in that respect...
paper thin walls
This is the biggest problem with houses... I really think that this is a good place when government regulation could help. The number of times police, courts, etc get involved with noise and neighbour disputes that stem from noise - If you mandated decent walls, you'd save money, grief, and hassle.
By the way, for people in the US, the _average_ house price in Chelsea is about £1.5 million, so well over 2 million dollars. The average semi-detached house price is £12 million. It's not a normal part of the the UK, by any means.
You can't say the public is responsible for individual people's health, and then not also give the public power to use force to make individuals be healthy despite their wishes.
Yes you can. Most places with a national health service do just that. I'm happy with the system, too, despite currently hardly using the NHS at all. Yes, it's not _fair_, but getting cancer is not _fair_, either, and I know that if I did I would not be tens of thousands in debt just because of my illness.
When you vote for government responsibility, you are voting for government power. That power will come at the expense of people's liberty. It has to. I'm not saying this is good or evil (though I certainly have an opinion), but it is the reality.
I'm not quite sure how the NHS reduces my liberty (apart from paying a bit more in taxes). Here in the UK there's no real restriction on private medicine, like there is in some countries, so having the NHS does not prevent me from doing anything privately.
You can buy 27" 2560*1440 IPS panels for $300 now. see my post above.
There are quite a few high definition Korean monitors available cheap now. This page has a decent round up. They all seem to be running the same LG panel, an IPS at 2560*1440. The prices start at about £200, or $300, which doesn't include any tax, and those at that price only have 1 hdmi, and don't include scalers (which makes them great for gaming, because of the lower screen lag).
If you open that email AT ALL, it's all HTML code. You just opened a page on their site custom designed for you.
Not with thunderbird. By default (I think), it blocks remote content. It doesn't matter if the email is in html or not, it can't get access to the internet.
This is false, wrong, bullshit, or whatever else you want to call it.
What the EU has banned is the labelling of the wine as wine if it is produced with grapes sourced outside the EU. Which I think is personally a bit stupid, but it's a different issue entirely. It's nothing to do with protecting the wine industries of mainland Europe, since the ruling applies to them too. English wine is still wine (well, as much as it ever was ;P).
Actually, I'm being a bit unfair with that last snarky comment - there are some great English whites and sparkling wines... never had a good English red yet, though.
On topic - I think this ruling will hopefully be a good thing for the consumer - currently, ISP's can decide how you use the internet with little or no regulation.
So I'm sorry friend but there really isn't a point in ePeen cards unless you are just going for bragging rights or are doing serious GPGPU work because the games just ain't stressing the systems that hard.
This page has benchmarks for that card with modern games. The 4850 seems to average 30-40 fps in most games at 1680*1050 (Crysis 2 was worse), the benchmarks there don't show a minimum (which is usually about half the average). That's a bit crappy.
I run at 1920*1200, and thinking about getting one of these soon, so will be running at 2560*1440. This page shows benchmarks for Crysis, a game that is 5 years old.
I don't brag about my computer, I don't care about my "ePeen".
Vista was a beta (alpha?) of Win7 that they got people to pay for, so that's kinda of win really.
Meh... I bought Vista when it was first released, 15 seconds boot time from boot manager to desktop (slower than that now with about 1/2 a gazillion apps installed), currently over 1 month uptime, directx11. YMMV, but it's good enough for me.
That being said it was buggy as hell when I bought it - it would not install with my motherboard chipset and 4gb or more RAM (known bug). Needless to say, I was unimpressed with BSOD reboots on installation, and took quite a while troubleshooting the problem.
After a certain threshold, it's irrelevant if you get to run your computer games any faster, and you can't possibly justify spending twice as much on a piece of hardware if the only thing that gets you is the ability to run a computer game at 200fps instead of 150fps. Sure, it might look good in a marketing blurb to claim that your product is 33% faster than the competitor's, but the practical result of that is perfectly irrelevant for any user.
Most turn based strategy games use the CPU at the end of the turn to generate the computer's moves. So the user is literally waiting for the CPU, looking at the screen. _Any_ increase in CPU power leads to an improvement in the game, without limit, in most turn based games. Civ 5 has large, late game end of turn waits measured in minutes for most people.... yes, each turn.
The CPU, 99% of the time, is not going to affect the frames per second in a computer game significantly (within reasonable limitations). Your FPS will be limited by your graphics card and your PC architecture, and possibly your RAM (but most people have enough nowadays). Upgrading your CPU to increase your FPS is the wrong way to go about it.
There is a fundamental problem with elections in the US and many other places, regardless of electronic versus paper. The problem is that once the election is over it is OVER.
This is a fundamental problem of all fixed term office. Once someone is elected, there's nothing to stop them turning around and literally saying "fuck you" to the people who elected them. They'll still be in power for the next 4 years, whatever anyone wants to say about it.
only 32% of the nation using the FPTP system elected the conservatives in to government.
Hrm... don't know if you noticed or not, but the Conservatives weren't elected into government. They also got 36% of the vote.
The 2005 election was more warped. Labour got 35% of the vote, and 55% of the seats. Nearly two third of the voters did not want Labour, and they formed a majority government.
If anyone's confused by this, it's essentially what happens when you have more than two parties and lots of places with first past the post elections. This is a decent page to see some of the anomalies - that first graph is why the Lib Dems are pushing for electoral reform.
The second point is a note that there is a lack of evidence, which again doesn't point one way or the other.
There's also a lack of evidence for many other things, but we don't believe them. Making a categorical statement that something does not exist is, in my opinion, a little pointless. Most atheists do not seek to prove god does not exist. They just point out there's no compelling evidence for god, just as there is no compelling evidence for the billions of other things we do not believe in.
The idea of God's existence and the idea of God's inexistence are just two more "things."
No, they're not. There are almost infinite things we do not believe in. Claiming that each of those beliefs is equivalent to believing in god is wrong. I do not believe that undetectable miniature pink William Shatner lookalikes riding green unicorns swat quarks with orange flyswats, resulting in quantum mechanics weirdness. No one in the history of time has ever believed that. Believing that is not as valid a standpoint as not believing it.
Note here - I'm not trying to make belief in god look silly, I'm purely refuting the argument that believing in something without evidence is the same thing as not believing in something without evidence.
Atheism is the belief, without evidence, in the lack of existence of any deity.
Very few atheist would argue they can prove the lack of existance of any deity. To do so is stupid. Similarly, very few people would claim to be able to disprove many other theories, like the Shatners above. That doesn't mean believing in them is an equivalent "thing" to not believing in them.
According to this page, a GTX 560 _averages_ 25fps at 1920x1200. That's not that good.
Even at 2560x1440 I'd have to pay more for a single monitor than for a 680 GTX
No you wouldn't. I mentioned this monitor earlier in the discussion... I'm not trying to sell them, by the way, I was suprised at the cheapness. Most of the consumer feedback with them has been good, too.
This is a 2560*1440 monitor for $320. The early ones had higher quality internals, and could actually run at 100hz at that resolution. They're shipped direct from Korea.
People saying they're running on maximum settings, without mentioning the pixel count are being disingenuous. The above monitor pushes over 3.5 million pixels. 1336*768 is about 1 million.
Git is a general term of abuse, which can be applied to anyone. Gimp is a specific term of abuse which can be applied to a small subset of people. There is a difference.
That being said, I've no problem with it being called gimp.... but others have, and it would be advantageous IMO to rename.
I wear a suite to a job interviews
Ok, this is a start of a comedy sketch show. What, you didn't get the job?
Maybe the speaker's a jerk. Maybe the listener is a whining crybaby.
This is the problem with the name GIMP.
It makes people think "Maybe the speaker's a jerk".
Sure it does. On quality operating systems with well designed windowing systems, there is a program called a "window manager" whose job it is to decorate and arrange application windows as the user sees fit.
As mentioned in another post, the GIMP used to bring up a window for ever layer you were using. Forcing more windows on you is not necessarily a good thing.
To stem the flow of bitter griping
Why do you think there was this "bitter griping"? Do you think it was just Microsoft users who couldn't figure out more than one window? Or perhaps, maybe, just perhaps it could be that the UI for the GIMP was just weird. I personally learnt to live with it, and got along with it.... but it was a hurdle.
Talking crap about the GIMP and its UI is very easy. What's far more difficult is designing that UI, programming the features, and getting it into a coherent program.
Seriously, most of the the posts here are talking about how bad it is, from people who probably wouldn't know how to use it or its brethren for anything more than applying an effect to a photo.
Without GIMP, you'd be looking at completely inferior open source projects for image manipulation. As it is, it still leaves a little to be desired, but it's close enough for comparison.
As someone else pointed out, all DRM is meant to do is to preserve the same security that physical limitations provided before digital editions, i.e. you can only read a book if you're physically holding it, which limits you to one copy.
If that is what it is meant to do, it has gone horribly wrong. If DRM did do just that, very many fewer people would have a problem with it.
As a writer, I want to get paid for the work I put into writing something, and DRM is one way of ensuring that no one is reading something of mine without my permission.
No it's not. Seriously, it's not. DRM is not a way of ensuring that. It does not work.
BUT, I also want people to want to buy my stuff, and they're more likely to do that if the ebook version has the same utility as a physical book, meaning portability. Ergo, standardization solves a lot of the piracy issue by increasing the perceived value of each ebook and reducing the burden that DRM places on the consumer.
This is your problem : reducing the burden that DRM places on the consumer. You're saying DRM will always be some kind of burden for the consumer. When the illegal version is _better_ than the one you pay for, people are going to be loathe to money up. People are buying ebooks now, but just torrenting them so they can avoid the DRM.
Me and my friend were driving round Europe on holiday when we were 18. We'd got to Munich late, and decided just to park up between 2 cars in a small road in the middle of Munich, and sleep in the car. So, we both got in our sleeping bags, and went to sleep, in the front two seat reclined back almost horizontal.
The next thing I know, my friend was asking me what the fuck I thought I was doing. We were now parked in the middle of the road, completely blocking it.
Apparently, I'd just sat up, entered in the 4 digit immobiliser code, started the car, carefully driven the car into the middle of the road, parked and then happily gone back to sleep. This was in a manual car in my sleeping bag. I had absoluteley no recollection of any of this.
Anyway, I managed to get the car back in approximately the right place (about a foot and a half from the kerb though). My friend did spend a few minutes persuading me that we were parked in the middle of the road in Munich. I had been having a dream that we were in a campsite in Holland, for some reason, and the campsite manager had been telling me to move the car.
I had been known to sleepwalk a little in the past, but this was my only sleep-drive (that I know of, anyway).