I guess that depends on how big the budget is for hiring goons to put stuff up against walls. Again, if the people making the decisions have any sense they'll not worry about any training that involves sitting at a keyboard.
Probably cost prohibitive for all but the best funded, but I'm told these, especially CQT and Urban, are the next best thing to actually seeing the elephant.
In return for knocking down the Berlin Wall so we could build McDonaldses all over East Germany, the US gave them 8 hours of film time at Studio Moonbase.
I can't find a link at the moment but I'm sure one is out there somewhere.
Maybe if you were better equipped to comprehend what you've read you would have noticed, long before arriving at the flaw spotting stage, that I did not mention cost as a consideration.
I have 5 iPods because they are the best way to store photographs when on a long assignment where stable electrical current is a forlorn hope. A couple of them are old, but an 80GB iPod offers the best combination of battery life, size, weight, and storage space there is.
are you honestly trying to tell us that the cable apple ships, with each ipod, the cable used to connect it to your computer is a charger cable)? of course it isn't, so stop saying they don't.
Calm down. I have like 5 iPods. And at least as many Macs. I don't hate Apple. It will be ok.
But they no longer ship the wall charger that they once did with iPods. That device did not even have its own cable, it used the same cable that connects the iPod to a computer. That is the device they no longer ship with iPods, the wall charger. The one that used the currently shipping cable to provide power to an iPod via the electrical wiring in a building.
Not that this will explain it, but it helps: In manufacturing environments computers are quickly replacing electrical panels as the operator interface for machines.
Where an equipment builder would once have used giant metal panel full of buttons and toggle switches and analog meters as the means to run his product, he now plugs in a computer with an HMI/SCADA package. And these computers are usually running Windows. In the US Rockwell Automation has a good chunk of the market, and RS Views is Windows only. Wonderware, Siemens, Citect, Intellution, all of the big names are Windows only. Some of them even offer various partnership programs that cut license fees for Windows licenses, MSSQL in particular.
I was working in this industry when this kind of thing started taking off and I still do from time to time. One of the biggest problems in the early days was the poor stability of Windows and I'd hoped that Linux (or Mac even) could make some headway. That problem has largely been fixed and the Window of opportunity has gotten a lot smaller.
Most good welding helmets now use auto-darkening glass. The tint is light enough to see the piece being worked on until the arc is struck, then it darkens enough to protect the eyes.
I have a relatively cheap one, but it has adjustable darkening, adjustable delay, and goes from light to full dark in 1/10,000th of a second. Some of the better ones have can tell if the light is from an arc or a grinding wheel and adjust their tint accordingly. Pretty cool stuff.
I;m a good test case for incapacitating light as I am kind of a fan of high powered flashlights, and my eyes are on the photosensitive side. If I'm dark adjusted and I accidentally shine a Surefire M6 at my face I almost immediately become sick to my stomach. My cheap welding helmet can cut that beam down to pretty much nothing though.
Phone salesmen don't even need training to sell it. They just say "Now over here, this phone has a 5 megapixel camera, where the other just has a 2.". Everyone knows 5 > 2.
As for the actual photos that come out of it, people are still mesmerized by the fact that their phone has a 5 megapixel camera in it.
I await the day when phones have good, bright, 100% coverage optical viewfinders combined with a Leica M mount. Cell phone cameras will be useless to me until I can put a Noctilux on one.
Both the Challenger and Columbia disasters had plenty of blame to cover both management and engineering.
As Feynman demonstrated in the hearings over Challenger, the o-rings were not designed for use at the ambient temperature at launch time. That could have been known, and the launch stopped, if there had not been a stacking up of mistakes by NASA managers and engineers as well as those same groups at Morton Thoikol. All of those people spent time looking at what amounted to a handful of Powerpoint slides but none of them saw the relationship between temperature and rocket motor problems.
Same thing with Columbia. Steps were taken to keep insulation from falling off, it was a known problem. They even had reasonable video of the actual piece that did the damage, doing the damage. While the thing was up in space they knew the steps the Lockheed engineers took didn't work. That problem was again compounded by the poor use of what information they had to determine what they should do in response.
I'm picking nits here, but it illustrates the complexity of doing something like this. A whole bunch of intelligent people at NASA and Lockheed and Morton had a whole bunch of information to work with but they couldn't (or wouldn't) makes sense of it.
By the time products like iPhone become ubiquitous for the general public it will probably be illegal to use a mobile phone while driving, nearly everywhere.
As for your texting with the phone in your pocket.....I'm not one to question the habits of others but that is a new one on me.
Thank christ someone showed up to point out this grevious error.
Obviously we all here at Slashdot thought that Linux had failed across all desktops everywhere and had you not taken pains to point out that it was still working on some of them no one here would have even bothered to press the Power button, assuming instead that their computers would not even POST due to Linux being installed on the hard drive.
Thank you for the service you have provided us here today.
Obviously they are doing more than nothing now and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. So claims as to the death of various business models, however meritous you feel they are, really serve no purpose.
I don't care to look it up but non-digital portion of the four industries you note are 'worth' many many billions of dollars. No right minded executive is going to walk away from those billions because his long term forecasts indicate that they are shrinking, especially an executive in a market that makes most of its bones by prodding and manipulating the taste of the masses. It isn't some kind of ethical decision for people like this, like it is for Slashdotters. If there is money to be made in a given market they will serve it.
And when it becomes obvious that another, similar, market wants digital distribution rather than tangible media, they'll serve that one as well. All the industries you list have taken steps to provide content in a digital only format. It likely doesn't meet your requirements, not being in an obscure enough format or being distributed by companies you have some personal distaste for or the like, but it is available to most of us.
There were companies making still cameras that used 35mm format Kinetograph film before Leica did it right (in 1923). But Leica was (and still is, for film) well out front due to their uncompromisingly good lenses and overall construction.
Their digital offering, the M8, is still made in Germany. I expect that it will be the last model though.
I wrote 'who' instead of 'would' for some reason known only to my keyboard.
I'm not sure how many individual GNU bits and pieces there are but at $20 each I can see how that could quickly become expensive relative to Stallman's reportedly minimal expenditures. Unless he is stacking his cash up in a barn somewhere I assume he doesn't worry about bringing a whole lot in.
Under your plan I could find myself in a similar situation if I sought to fund copyright for each individual photograph I publish. In the few cases where what I release isn't shot for hire I'm really not even trying to make any money, I retain the copyright so the photos can't (legally) be used for purposes I don't agree to.
As I understand it that is Stallman's main aim with the GPL. It seems he went so far as to revise the license to keep software from being Tivo'd, not to make money.
One common problem is that a great many points cannot be described quickly or concisely. Some actually need verbose description. Some might even need a data table or, shockingly enough, a graphic. I'd make the case that plenty of topics are misunderstood by very intelligent people because various standard models force the information that describes them into molds it does not fit.
Another problem is that there are many ways to deliver a decent overview of the topic at hand without having to rely on some kind of one size fits all model. I'd even go so far as to state that if a writer has to rely on a standard model he should practice at home until he doesn't before releasing any of his writing to the public.
I'm not making a case for the summary as it is. It sucks, no doubt, but it doesn't need a standard model to resuce it, it needs someone who knows how to communicate in writing.
And your professor might possibly by making fun of you. If a person needs to start off by expecting the audience to be full of imbeciles who need to be told the same thing 3 times those of us who might actually be able to contribute something useful are going to lose interest halfway through the second telling and get up to leave. If he is serious he should try to get a sit down with Edward Tufte to maybe get straightened out.
Yeah, everyone has to follow some standardized model of writing because readers can't be expected to actually read the whole thing or understand it, if it isn't standardized. Put the Executive Summary right up there at the top so people can read it and make up their minds without too much effort.
Also, show your work on long division. Don't make marks outside the circles. Use a #2 pencil. If you draw a sailboat in the footer you fail the entire test regardless of what you know. This is all because your success over the entire rest of your life is going hinge moron your ability to follow instructions to the letter rather than your ability to think.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess that depends on how big the budget is for hiring goons to put stuff up against walls. Again, if the people making the decisions have any sense they'll not worry about any training that involves sitting at a keyboard.
Probably cost prohibitive for all but the best funded, but I'm told these, especially CQT and Urban, are the next best thing to actually seeing the elephant.
Yes.
I suspect the paintball facilities will be shut down before WoW, if the people doing the shutting down have any sense, which they might not.
Best answer to any question ever on Slashdot.
The obvious answer here is: Because they have a corrupt senator working for them.
Nice to know it is cheaper to buy a corrupt senator than a bridge. Supply and demand comes to our rescue again.
In return for knocking down the Berlin Wall so we could build McDonaldses all over East Germany, the US gave them 8 hours of film time at Studio Moonbase.
I can't find a link at the moment but I'm sure one is out there somewhere.
Maybe if you were better equipped to comprehend what you've read you would have noticed, long before arriving at the flaw spotting stage, that I did not mention cost as a consideration.
Lick my sack.
I have 5 iPods because they are the best way to store photographs when on a long assignment where stable electrical current is a forlorn hope. A couple of them are old, but an 80GB iPod offers the best combination of battery life, size, weight, and storage space there is.
are you honestly trying to tell us that the cable apple ships, with each ipod, the cable used to connect it to your computer is a charger cable)? of course it isn't, so stop saying they don't.
Calm down. I have like 5 iPods. And at least as many Macs. I don't hate Apple. It will be ok.
But they no longer ship the wall charger that they once did with iPods. That device did not even have its own cable, it used the same cable that connects the iPod to a computer. That is the device they no longer ship with iPods, the wall charger. The one that used the currently shipping cable to provide power to an iPod via the electrical wiring in a building.
That is the cable I mean.
And it is ok that Apple does that.
Fine with me.
We'll all be ok.
I was just pointing it out.
It's all ok.
You might want to update your conspiracy theory: Apple doesn't include the first charger either.
Lots of people think so, because Apple stopped including wall chargers with iPods somewhere around Gen 4ish. You just get the USB to iPod cable.
They can be had for about $5US at Fry's.
Not that this will explain it, but it helps: In manufacturing environments computers are quickly replacing electrical panels as the operator interface for machines.
Where an equipment builder would once have used giant metal panel full of buttons and toggle switches and analog meters as the means to run his product, he now plugs in a computer with an HMI/SCADA package. And these computers are usually running Windows. In the US Rockwell Automation has a good chunk of the market, and RS Views is Windows only. Wonderware, Siemens, Citect, Intellution, all of the big names are Windows only. Some of them even offer various partnership programs that cut license fees for Windows licenses, MSSQL in particular.
I was working in this industry when this kind of thing started taking off and I still do from time to time. One of the biggest problems in the early days was the poor stability of Windows and I'd hoped that Linux (or Mac even) could make some headway. That problem has largely been fixed and the Window of opportunity has gotten a lot smaller.
Most good welding helmets now use auto-darkening glass. The tint is light enough to see the piece being worked on until the arc is struck, then it darkens enough to protect the eyes.
I have a relatively cheap one, but it has adjustable darkening, adjustable delay, and goes from light to full dark in 1/10,000th of a second. Some of the better ones have can tell if the light is from an arc or a grinding wheel and adjust their tint accordingly. Pretty cool stuff.
I;m a good test case for incapacitating light as I am kind of a fan of high powered flashlights, and my eyes are on the photosensitive side. If I'm dark adjusted and I accidentally shine a Surefire M6 at my face I almost immediately become sick to my stomach. My cheap welding helmet can cut that beam down to pretty much nothing though.
The point is that 5 is more than 2.
Everyone knows this.
Phone salesmen don't even need training to sell it. They just say "Now over here, this phone has a 5 megapixel camera, where the other just has a 2.". Everyone knows 5 > 2.
As for the actual photos that come out of it, people are still mesmerized by the fact that their phone has a 5 megapixel camera in it.
I await the day when phones have good, bright, 100% coverage optical viewfinders combined with a Leica M mount. Cell phone cameras will be useless to me until I can put a Noctilux on one.
Both the Challenger and Columbia disasters had plenty of blame to cover both management and engineering.
As Feynman demonstrated in the hearings over Challenger, the o-rings were not designed for use at the ambient temperature at launch time. That could have been known, and the launch stopped, if there had not been a stacking up of mistakes by NASA managers and engineers as well as those same groups at Morton Thoikol. All of those people spent time looking at what amounted to a handful of Powerpoint slides but none of them saw the relationship between temperature and rocket motor problems.
Same thing with Columbia. Steps were taken to keep insulation from falling off, it was a known problem. They even had reasonable video of the actual piece that did the damage, doing the damage. While the thing was up in space they knew the steps the Lockheed engineers took didn't work. That problem was again compounded by the poor use of what information they had to determine what they should do in response.
I'm picking nits here, but it illustrates the complexity of doing something like this. A whole bunch of intelligent people at NASA and Lockheed and Morton had a whole bunch of information to work with but they couldn't (or wouldn't) makes sense of it.
By the time products like iPhone become ubiquitous for the general public it will probably be illegal to use a mobile phone while driving, nearly everywhere.
As for your texting with the phone in your pocket.....I'm not one to question the habits of others but that is a new one on me.
Thank christ someone showed up to point out this grevious error.
Obviously we all here at Slashdot thought that Linux had failed across all desktops everywhere and had you not taken pains to point out that it was still working on some of them no one here would have even bothered to press the Power button, assuming instead that their computers would not even POST due to Linux being installed on the hard drive.
Thank you for the service you have provided us here today.
Obviously they are doing more than nothing now and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. So claims as to the death of various business models, however meritous you feel they are, really serve no purpose.
I don't care to look it up but non-digital portion of the four industries you note are 'worth' many many billions of dollars. No right minded executive is going to walk away from those billions because his long term forecasts indicate that they are shrinking, especially an executive in a market that makes most of its bones by prodding and manipulating the taste of the masses. It isn't some kind of ethical decision for people like this, like it is for Slashdotters. If there is money to be made in a given market they will serve it.
And when it becomes obvious that another, similar, market wants digital distribution rather than tangible media, they'll serve that one as well. All the industries you list have taken steps to provide content in a digital only format. It likely doesn't meet your requirements, not being in an obscure enough format or being distributed by companies you have some personal distaste for or the like, but it is available to most of us.
Or their even more effective propaganda battle to convince everyone that it is illegal to download copyrighted material from a peer.
There were companies making still cameras that used 35mm format Kinetograph film before Leica did it right (in 1923). But Leica was (and still is, for film) well out front due to their uncompromisingly good lenses and overall construction.
Their digital offering, the M8, is still made in Germany. I expect that it will be the last model though.
I wrote 'who' instead of 'would' for some reason known only to my keyboard.
I'm not sure how many individual GNU bits and pieces there are but at $20 each I can see how that could quickly become expensive relative to Stallman's reportedly minimal expenditures. Unless he is stacking his cash up in a barn somewhere I assume he doesn't worry about bringing a whole lot in.
Under your plan I could find myself in a similar situation if I sought to fund copyright for each individual photograph I publish. In the few cases where what I release isn't shot for hire I'm really not even trying to make any money, I retain the copyright so the photos can't (legally) be used for purposes I don't agree to.
As I understand it that is Stallman's main aim with the GPL. It seems he went so far as to revise the license to keep software from being Tivo'd, not to make money.
You paid for the manual with the car, assuming you bought it new.
Car manufacturers, like pretty much all manufacturers of everything, don't give things away free despite what advertisers might want you to believe.
Under you pay to play plan, do you think Stallman who pay to have all the various GNU items copyrighted?
One common problem is that a great many points cannot be described quickly or concisely. Some actually need verbose description. Some might even need a data table or, shockingly enough, a graphic. I'd make the case that plenty of topics are misunderstood by very intelligent people because various standard models force the information that describes them into molds it does not fit.
Another problem is that there are many ways to deliver a decent overview of the topic at hand without having to rely on some kind of one size fits all model. I'd even go so far as to state that if a writer has to rely on a standard model he should practice at home until he doesn't before releasing any of his writing to the public.
I'm not making a case for the summary as it is. It sucks, no doubt, but it doesn't need a standard model to resuce it, it needs someone who knows how to communicate in writing.
And your professor might possibly by making fun of you. If a person needs to start off by expecting the audience to be full of imbeciles who need to be told the same thing 3 times those of us who might actually be able to contribute something useful are going to lose interest halfway through the second telling and get up to leave. If he is serious he should try to get a sit down with Edward Tufte to maybe get straightened out.
Yeah, everyone has to follow some standardized model of writing because readers can't be expected to actually read the whole thing or understand it, if it isn't standardized. Put the Executive Summary right up there at the top so people can read it and make up their minds without too much effort.
Also, show your work on long division. Don't make marks outside the circles. Use a #2 pencil. If you draw a sailboat in the footer you fail the entire test regardless of what you know. This is all because your success over the entire rest of your life is going hinge moron your ability to follow instructions to the letter rather than your ability to think.
No, I doubt we will be willing to do that. You people fooled us once and nearly converted the entire place to cornfield. It won't happen again.
Well, not again again. You got us to rename the town of Reynolds as "Biotown", but that was a fluke.
It would be a lot of land if it were land but it isn't land it's ocean so it isn't a lot.