I love gmail, but that's one part I hate. Even though they now do virus scanning of all attachments, you still cannot send an.exe file (such as a non-infected winzip self-extractor) the message says this is "For security reasons". The extremely lame part of this, is that gmail does not tell you it's going to refuse to send the.exe, until you hit send, wait for it to upload, and then after wasting your time it will fail and tell you why. Stupid and lame.
This is a cool car to have if you love racing/driving games, because you've got a car that you'd need to have anyway, plus the most awesome driving game controller. I don't know about you, but a wheel clamped to my desk and a block with pedals on it while sitting in a swivel chair doesn't quite do it. Here you totally feel like being in a car because you really are in one. Next thing to do with this would be to have it so the windows could actually go opaque with a 360 display of the game environment. Maybe it could watch your head move too, and adjust the view accordingly, to give the illusion of depth more realism...
I see a major problem with this scenario though. If the game's physics allow a handicap for lesser driving skill, you could get yourself into trouble with muscle memory. Game on. You're in your car, experiencing speeding down a winding mountain road, pulling sharp curves at high speed and everything's going just fine. You used to crash a lot on this course but you've got it down now, good. Turn off the game, all you've done is switched perceptions of realities. You start driving again, but now real physics are involved. You're still at the same set of controls. You've 'learned' what those controls can do, everything still feels the same way to you in most ways. You feel that you 'know' what this vehicle is capable of. This is potentially a huge problem. A shame, because it would be so cool to have a car like that.
The game would have to strive to be as realistic as possible, tied into what that car is really capable of, tire wear and all, anticipating every possible stress and vector and appropriate consequences, with no 'beginner' setting of any kind. Otherwise you'd safely be able to learn some pretty dangerous habits.
They're talking about glasses of the same volume, but of differing dimensions. A shot glass and a beer glass hold rather different amounts of liquid, but since the beer glass contains beer, in which alcohol is less concentrated than the stuff that goes in shooters, they still have about the same alcohol content so they are a whole different problem.
What we have here is a short but wide glass, and a narrow but tall glass, and both hold the same amount of liquid. It's easier to overpour when using the wider glass, and that's because it's wider, not because it's shorter. It's harder to eyeball how much you need to bring up the level of liquid in the wider glass because your accuracy automatically goes down the wider the container gets.
Let's say you go to the extent of marking the glasses at the appropriate place that makes 1.5 ounces, and staring right at each line with reasonable care, and having decent reflex to stop pouring at what appears to be the right time. On the narrow glass, you seem to be just a 'hair' over the middle of the line. Ok that's pretty good. On the wider glass, also, you're just about a 'hair' over on that one too. We're talking a small amount of error here, but, still a larger error than on the narrow glass, because when you double the diameter of a circle, you've also multiplied the area by four. That 'hair' on the double-width glass is worth 4 'hairs' on the narrow one. Visually, when looked at from the side and compared with the line drawn on each glass, they both appear within the same tolerance, but you have to remember to compensate for the wider area, to go a bit lower to cover that in your estimate.
A graduated cylinder, for precise measuring in a lab, is narrow for this reason, plus you get an easier visual on the surface tension as well which you can use to calibrate your perception of the height, using more than one mark to gauge your accuracy.
Then again knowing the Bible it might even be unacceptable for him.
Actually, he was quoted somewhere as saying that the violence in the Bible is fine because no innocent victims were involved. Basically he's saying that it's ok to kill if God tells you to. Any other time it's bad, but if God says so, then git 'er dun! Terrorists think that way, don't they?
He might as well attack Pac Man for being a training simulator for devouring small objects, harmful to children under 3
But it's true! I played CSI and now I know how to find and catch murderers. I'd just have to watch for my hand to change as I waved it about the room and that would tell me I could start randomly running through my tools in that area to get some sort of clue, and that's it, I'd have him cold.
And whenever I feel like getting a hot chick to slap me across the face I just fall back on my early Leisure Suit Larry training.
Any time you have somebody making an unplanned stop in such a hurry,
There's no such thing as an unplanned stop at a traffic light. Instead it would be a "too distracted to pay attention to what one is doing with a 2000 pound chunk of steel and glass" stop. One is supposed to look ahead of them on the road and anticipate changing conditions, such as observing that the "Do not walk" light has started, you know the amber isn't far behind. Knowing that "Red REALLY means stop or I'll get an automatic ticket" shouldn't change a single thing about your attitude towards the intersection. Red means stop, period. Drive like there's a cop sitting on the roof of your car and you'll be fine in all situations. Worried that winter conditions mean you won't be able to slow down enough once the yellow comes up? Guess what? You're driving too fast for the road conditions, stop doing that.
When you get in a rear-end collision, the car in the back is ALWAYS at fault. Why? Because they were driving too close (too fast for conditions), and there is never a reasonable excuse for running into the back of somebody. Just as there is never a valid excuse to run a red light except in an emergency of some kind. Being late for work is NOT an emergency, that's just bad planning. Don't endanger other drivers just because you can't get out of bed on time.
Ok, I'm replying to my own post, whatever.. Anyway here's something you could try to make: That small dot-matrix display, make it much more useful by developing a less expensive way to make tons of these 3d pixels that don't break down often. Work on that. Make a display that could show an actual VGA output at a low-but-acceptable resolution if you could make a good enough array of pins. Colours could be represented by the heights of the pins: a special driver would be involved to assign incoming colours to different elevations and the user would learn to understand them as indications of an image. If they used to have sight they might get a considerably raised internet experience over time. Even born blind too, they'd just have different ideas of what the colours were. In the web browser, everything's there on the tablet like it would be on a normal screen, except the text is in braille, and all images have a well-defined 'box' of fully raised (white?) pixels around them so the user knows right away that they're coming onto an image. They could learn to feel graphics this way. This might open up other avenues to blind users of computers, like better access to games. Some styles of games still wouldn't be suitable for them, but they'd get a hell of a lot more than what they've got now.
And for sighted hardcore game addicts, they could pick up the skill and use the device to finally be able to play in their sleep.
There are already TTY operators that deaf people have access to through their telephone line and a special device, and this same service can also be accessed over the internet these days. Conceivably, a deaf-blind person that is challenged with a graphical captcha right now just has to go to his TTY operator on the net, using a computer with a braille display, and talk them into going to the site and signing them up. Why not? It's already there, they're there to help a deaf person get some bit of business done as it is. A braille display is basically a line or more of dot-matrix printheads arranged on a flat board that lies flat on the desk under the hand. The user places their fingers over it and they just have to wiggle back and forth a bit to scan the lines that change in neat ripples, and it can be read pretty quickly from what I saw. I once watched a blind man use one to read the weather, the news, get his email, and it was a trip. I was there to install his internet service, and it was ironic because, since he had no use for a CRT monitor, he didn't have one, so I was the one 'working blind'.
Though they might need the operator for more than just that sometimes, as there are some sites (such as LotGD.net) that use captchas at intervals throughout the html-based game to prove you're not using macros. Maybe not many sites do things like that, and as it is, LotGD only does it about every 100 turns I think, which takes a few days to rack up.
Maybe it's all just because men always want to see female sexuality, but women are squeamish about seeing male sexuality.
I think that women do want to see male sexuality. The problem is that males don't. Too much homophobia, they're afraid they'll find it interesting somehow. "If you look at it longer than three seconds you're gay" or some stupid shit like that. At any rate it isn't a comfortable thing for a lot of men to be confronted with. Confronting women with female sexuality on the other hand, that's just fine because it gets males excited. It bothers some of the women but hey, some might wind up liking it, so we have to take that chance. Gotta try and make that girl-girl-guy threesome a reality somehow.
Exactly, it only proves that DaVinci made a painting of someone who, in the painting, looked 83% happy etc. They did some other study several years ago too where they thought the model for Mona Lisa was actually a boy. Based on looking at a painting created by a fallible human being, a computer made the determination that DaVinci actually had a boy in front of him but tried to make it look like a woman. How stupid is that?? How about he just painted his model as well as he was able, and this is what we got?
Lumbergsan: "Hitome, did you get that memo about the decimal places, that went out the other day?"
Hitome: "Yes, I have it right here."
Lumbergsan: "Yeah... It's just that we're making sure all the decimal points are in the right places now, and we've noticed you seem to have had a bit of a problem yesterday... "
Hitome: "Yes sir, I made a mistake, but I will be more careful."
Lumbergsan: "Yeah... Well see we need to make sure all the decimal points are in the right places, that's what the memo was about. I'll get you a copy of it."
Hitome: "No it's okay, I have it right here, I read it, I just made a mistake. It won't happen again."
Lumbergsan: "No... I don't think it will. I'm going to have to ask you to go ahead and... commit suicide, ok? Good..."
Well for me, any word that has 'cyber' in it momentarily loses the suffix, as the horrid word 'cyber' highlights itself in sympathetic response to deeply-laid engrams from over-exposure to a certain usage of it, the verb form, meaning: "To pretend that some fat 40-year old guy is a hot cum-crazy teen slut that wants to have sex with you". I cannot hear the word or any larger word that contains it without briefly shuddering in disgust.
Slashdot Mirror
Brain uplink established - transmitting...
** Hulk SMASH!!!! **
-Why does Hulk smash?
** Hunh?!?! Hulk head make funny sound. Hulk SMASH!!!!! **
Uplink terminated
add attachments - it's really not that hard.
.exe file (such as a non-infected winzip self-extractor) the message says this is "For security reasons". The extremely lame part of this, is that gmail does not tell you it's going to refuse to send the .exe, until you hit send, wait for it to upload, and then after wasting your time it will fail and tell you why. Stupid and lame.
I love gmail, but that's one part I hate. Even though they now do virus scanning of all attachments, you still cannot send an
This is a cool car to have if you love racing/driving games, because you've got a car that you'd need to have anyway, plus the most awesome driving game controller. I don't know about you, but a wheel clamped to my desk and a block with pedals on it while sitting in a swivel chair doesn't quite do it. Here you totally feel like being in a car because you really are in one. Next thing to do with this would be to have it so the windows could actually go opaque with a 360 display of the game environment. Maybe it could watch your head move too, and adjust the view accordingly, to give the illusion of depth more realism...
I see a major problem with this scenario though. If the game's physics allow a handicap for lesser driving skill, you could get yourself into trouble with muscle memory. Game on. You're in your car, experiencing speeding down a winding mountain road, pulling sharp curves at high speed and everything's going just fine. You used to crash a lot on this course but you've got it down now, good. Turn off the game, all you've done is switched perceptions of realities. You start driving again, but now real physics are involved. You're still at the same set of controls. You've 'learned' what those controls can do, everything still feels the same way to you in most ways. You feel that you 'know' what this vehicle is capable of. This is potentially a huge problem. A shame, because it would be so cool to have a car like that.
The game would have to strive to be as realistic as possible, tied into what that car is really capable of, tire wear and all, anticipating every possible stress and vector and appropriate consequences, with no 'beginner' setting of any kind. Otherwise you'd safely be able to learn some pretty dangerous habits.
They're talking about glasses of the same volume, but of differing dimensions. A shot glass and a beer glass hold rather different amounts of liquid, but since the beer glass contains beer, in which alcohol is less concentrated than the stuff that goes in shooters, they still have about the same alcohol content so they are a whole different problem.
What we have here is a short but wide glass, and a narrow but tall glass, and both hold the same amount of liquid. It's easier to overpour when using the wider glass, and that's because it's wider, not because it's shorter. It's harder to eyeball how much you need to bring up the level of liquid in the wider glass because your accuracy automatically goes down the wider the container gets.
Let's say you go to the extent of marking the glasses at the appropriate place that makes 1.5 ounces, and staring right at each line with reasonable care, and having decent reflex to stop pouring at what appears to be the right time. On the narrow glass, you seem to be just a 'hair' over the middle of the line. Ok that's pretty good. On the wider glass, also, you're just about a 'hair' over on that one too. We're talking a small amount of error here, but, still a larger error than on the narrow glass, because when you double the diameter of a circle, you've also multiplied the area by four. That 'hair' on the double-width glass is worth 4 'hairs' on the narrow one. Visually, when looked at from the side and compared with the line drawn on each glass, they both appear within the same tolerance, but you have to remember to compensate for the wider area, to go a bit lower to cover that in your estimate.
A graduated cylinder, for precise measuring in a lab, is narrow for this reason, plus you get an easier visual on the surface tension as well which you can use to calibrate your perception of the height, using more than one mark to gauge your accuracy.
Yeah, because it's just so very simple to explain things rationally to a toddler.
'It' is always better when it's fun. If it's not, you're probably using the wrong hole.
You obviously have never worked in tech support.
Then again knowing the Bible it might even be unacceptable for him.
Actually, he was quoted somewhere as saying that the violence in the Bible is fine because no innocent victims were involved. Basically he's saying that it's ok to kill if God tells you to. Any other time it's bad, but if God says so, then git 'er dun! Terrorists think that way, don't they?
He might as well attack Pac Man for being a training simulator for devouring small objects, harmful to children under 3
But it's true! I played CSI and now I know how to find and catch murderers. I'd just have to watch for my hand to change as I waved it about the room and that would tell me I could start randomly running through my tools in that area to get some sort of clue, and that's it, I'd have him cold.
And whenever I feel like getting a hot chick to slap me across the face I just fall back on my early Leisure Suit Larry training.
How is it he has so much time to squander on this childish crusade of his?
Well, it's certainly evident that he needs practice.
a smart guy can stir up quite abit of trouble
So you're saying there won't be a problem then?
I've got an idea, just put $sys$ in front of the plate number, then only humans can see it. ;)
Any time you have somebody making an unplanned stop in such a hurry,
There's no such thing as an unplanned stop at a traffic light. Instead it would be a "too distracted to pay attention to what one is doing with a 2000 pound chunk of steel and glass" stop. One is supposed to look ahead of them on the road and anticipate changing conditions, such as observing that the "Do not walk" light has started, you know the amber isn't far behind. Knowing that "Red REALLY means stop or I'll get an automatic ticket" shouldn't change a single thing about your attitude towards the intersection. Red means stop, period. Drive like there's a cop sitting on the roof of your car and you'll be fine in all situations. Worried that winter conditions mean you won't be able to slow down enough once the yellow comes up? Guess what? You're driving too fast for the road conditions, stop doing that.
When you get in a rear-end collision, the car in the back is ALWAYS at fault. Why? Because they were driving too close (too fast for conditions), and there is never a reasonable excuse for running into the back of somebody. Just as there is never a valid excuse to run a red light except in an emergency of some kind. Being late for work is NOT an emergency, that's just bad planning. Don't endanger other drivers just because you can't get out of bed on time.
Ok, I'm replying to my own post, whatever.. Anyway here's something you could try to make: That small dot-matrix display, make it much more useful by developing a less expensive way to make tons of these 3d pixels that don't break down often. Work on that. Make a display that could show an actual VGA output at a low-but-acceptable resolution if you could make a good enough array of pins. Colours could be represented by the heights of the pins: a special driver would be involved to assign incoming colours to different elevations and the user would learn to understand them as indications of an image. If they used to have sight they might get a considerably raised internet experience over time. Even born blind too, they'd just have different ideas of what the colours were. In the web browser, everything's there on the tablet like it would be on a normal screen, except the text is in braille, and all images have a well-defined 'box' of fully raised (white?) pixels around them so the user knows right away that they're coming onto an image. They could learn to feel graphics this way. This might open up other avenues to blind users of computers, like better access to games. Some styles of games still wouldn't be suitable for them, but they'd get a hell of a lot more than what they've got now.
And for sighted hardcore game addicts, they could pick up the skill and use the device to finally be able to play in their sleep.
would an internet nurse be so far fetched?
There are already TTY operators that deaf people have access to through their telephone line and a special device, and this same service can also be accessed over the internet these days. Conceivably, a deaf-blind person that is challenged with a graphical captcha right now just has to go to his TTY operator on the net, using a computer with a braille display, and talk them into going to the site and signing them up. Why not? It's already there, they're there to help a deaf person get some bit of business done as it is. A braille display is basically a line or more of dot-matrix printheads arranged on a flat board that lies flat on the desk under the hand. The user places their fingers over it and they just have to wiggle back and forth a bit to scan the lines that change in neat ripples, and it can be read pretty quickly from what I saw. I once watched a blind man use one to read the weather, the news, get his email, and it was a trip. I was there to install his internet service, and it was ironic because, since he had no use for a CRT monitor, he didn't have one, so I was the one 'working blind'.
Though they might need the operator for more than just that sometimes, as there are some sites (such as LotGD.net) that use captchas at intervals throughout the html-based game to prove you're not using macros. Maybe not many sites do things like that, and as it is, LotGD only does it about every 100 turns I think, which takes a few days to rack up.
Maybe it's all just because men always want to see female sexuality, but women are squeamish about seeing male sexuality.
I think that women do want to see male sexuality. The problem is that males don't. Too much homophobia, they're afraid they'll find it interesting somehow. "If you look at it longer than three seconds you're gay" or some stupid shit like that. At any rate it isn't a comfortable thing for a lot of men to be confronted with. Confronting women with female sexuality on the other hand, that's just fine because it gets males excited. It bothers some of the women but hey, some might wind up liking it, so we have to take that chance. Gotta try and make that girl-girl-guy threesome a reality somehow.
Exactly, it only proves that DaVinci made a painting of someone who, in the painting, looked 83% happy etc. They did some other study several years ago too where they thought the model for Mona Lisa was actually a boy. Based on looking at a painting created by a fallible human being, a computer made the determination that DaVinci actually had a boy in front of him but tried to make it look like a woman. How stupid is that?? How about he just painted his model as well as he was able, and this is what we got?
searching desperately, for anything that might retard the techical progress which they regard as unnatural.
Yeah, how dare they try to get us to be careful about processes that we don't yet fully understand? The nerve.
Lumbergsan: "Hitome, did you get that memo about the decimal places, that went out the other day?"
Hitome: "Yes, I have it right here."
Lumbergsan: "Yeah... It's just that we're making sure all the decimal points are in the right places now, and we've noticed you seem to have had a bit of a problem yesterday... "
Hitome: "Yes sir, I made a mistake, but I will be more careful."
Lumbergsan: "Yeah... Well see we need to make sure all the decimal points are in the right places, that's what the memo was about. I'll get you a copy of it."
Hitome: "No it's okay, I have it right here, I read it, I just made a mistake. It won't happen again."
Lumbergsan: "No... I don't think it will. I'm going to have to ask you to go ahead and... commit suicide, ok? Good..."
This is exactly why we need lyric sites!
Everyone knows it's:
Sax-a-ma-phone!
Sax--a--ma--phone!
Well for me, any word that has 'cyber' in it momentarily loses the suffix, as the horrid word 'cyber' highlights itself in sympathetic response to deeply-laid engrams from over-exposure to a certain usage of it, the verb form, meaning: "To pretend that some fat 40-year old guy is a hot cum-crazy teen slut that wants to have sex with you". I cannot hear the word or any larger word that contains it without briefly shuddering in disgust.
It seems the general trend is: don't hear uncensorted stupid thoughts, therefore smart (regardless of actual intelligence).
It is better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. - Mark Twain
But I'm not sure what marketing can say to Joe User that they didn't say the first time in order to get him to switch.
Every time you get a porn popup in IE, it makes Jesus cry. And then he goes and kills a kitten.
I thought it meant there was only one Finnish movie in existance and some Star Trek Spoof had topped it.
I'm willing to bet a good amount soap bubbles isn't the correct answer...
You're right, I've never managed to blow bubbles with my favorite toy. Best I can get is that windshield-washer effect first thing in the morning...