The CPU doesn't do it on the SNES - the graphics chip itself can do rotate/zoom effects on a single tilemap layer. It can't do it on sprites. Super Mario World (ab)uses it in boss fights by making the boss a tilemap layer so the bosses can do backflips and appear to move towards/away from the screen.
The MegaCD rotate/zoom works differently. You have to do it on individual tiles and then upload them to the VDP, which is fairly expensive. The bandwidth constraints mean you can't upload enough tiles for a full-resolution layer every frame, which is why you can't rotate/zoom an entire full-screen layer (or play full-screen video) with the MegaCD. However, it allows you to rotate/zoom individual sprites independently which the SNES can't do.
The SNES and Mega Drive CPU clock speeds aren't really comparable, as the SNES 65816 can do more per clock than the Mega Drive 68000. But the SNES was designed around having a weaker CPU and more powerful graphics chip, and allowing powerful add-on chips in cartridges. The SuperFX can DMA an entire 15-bit planar RGB layer every frame. The SNES actually can support an add-on providing full-screen FMV.
Germany has a federal law system, not a common law system. You can be called to serve as a judge, not to serve in a jury. As a judge, you're required to pass judgements according to the law (precedents do not create law). If there's no applicable law, you can exercise some discretion in a judgement, but you're required to justify it.
I don't think he's really a flat-earther at all. He was already doing daredevil stunts before he started talking about flat earth conspiracy theories, he just dind't get anywhere near the attention and funding. He's just pretending to be a flat-earther so other people will fund his hobby.
She clearly didn't write the majority of the code. However it's entirely possible she's responsible for the math and/or the actual algorithm the code implements. There's a system used at my company that I wrote relatively little of the code for (mostly low-level stuff like high-performance maths primitives and zero-copy networking), but I had a lot of input into the design and how it's supposed to achieve what it does. I don't know enough about this project to comment on whether Bouman is or isn't the brain behind it. I'm just saying that from experience, there are plenty of cases where the person who designed the algorithm isn't the person who ultimately implemented it. They might be a shitty coder, or just have other responsibilities.
That's absolute bullshit. The first widespread cellular networks were NMT, etc. in Europe. Australia, with roughly the same area as the contiguous states of the USA and lower population density, had AMPS built out, and managed to roll out GSM fairly rapidly.
Are they getting enough sun and water? Is the climate suitable? I found that on the north coast of NSW (high humidity, hot summers, mild winters, no frosts, high rainfall) I could grow basil effortlessly. The plants thrived and grew huge with minimal care. However in Melbourne (less humidity, less rainfall, colder winters, occasional frosts) the basil plants wouldn't grow anywhere near as big and required a lot of care or they'd die.
You've never used a Dell professional machine. I have a Precision desktop, a Latitude notebook, and PowerEdge servers. The service manuals are freely available, with step-by-step instructions and diagrams for accessing and replacing every component. Nothing is glued or taped together - everything uses fasteners of some kind. Spare parts are easy to order, too. There aren't iFixit teardowns for Dell notebooks because they're completely unnecessary. Dell doesn't have a problem with companies doing in-house repairs on their Dell computers, and even facilitates it.
I agree with him - if you want a simple transaction where you know upfront what you'll be paying and what you'll get for it, you should look at escorts, compensated dating, or prostitutes.
I've dealt with their wireless modems, and some of their network infrastructure equipment. The quality of the software they produce is terrible, and what's even worse is their attitude when you report issues. They will try to deflect, blame the customer, deny issues, and even resort to accusing you of racism. Then they'll go and fix the issue, and not mention it in the release notes for the update. You need to re-test everything yourself to work out if/when an issue is fixed.
I don't believe they're spying for the Chinese government and/or the communist party. They're just so damn incompetent when it comes to software that they're probably being hacked by anyone half competent. They seem to be at least somewhat aware of this reputation, and have promised to create a new security team, and spend money improving their processes. But I'll believe it when I see real changes.
Bangladesh will suffer the most - the whole country is basically at current sea level. They'll need to hold back the ocean Dutch-style or pack up and leave.
Eugh, there was software I'd been involved in the development of running on those Diebold voting machines (I didn't work for Diebold, just a vendor they bought software from). It wasn't the kind of software I'd want running on a voting machine.
Wash trading (buying then selling at the same price) is not illegal. It's unprofitable for anyone besides the exchange and possibly the broker depending on the fee structure, so people will try to avoid doing it, but it isn't illegal.
For example on Shanghai Futures Exchange (SHFE), there's a CNY3.6 commission per contract for opening position or closing position from previous day, and no commission for closing position the same day it's opened. So if I buy a future and then sell it at the same price seconds later, I've increased my turnover, but I've lost CNY3.6 in the process. Now if the broker gets on my back saying I'm not generating enough turnover and threatens to take away my 10Gbps Ethernet port and put me on 1Gbps Ethernet, I might tune my quoting strategy to tolerate more wash trades, but I need to be careful about it or I'll eat up all my quoting profit in commission.
Actually trading against your own orders is against the rules on some exchanges, but this is called self-trading or self-hitting, and isn't the same thing as wash trades. Self-trading is strictly prohibited in China, but allowed in Australia, for example. Participant IDs are visible on trades after settlement in Australia, so you can see how much self-trading was going on if you really want to. But as with wash trading, you don't generally want to do this because you'll be paying commission for nothing.
I get those extortion e-mails but they never have a password in them. I've never had a facebook account, though. I got an e-mail threatening to send my Ashley Madison account details to my wife if I didn't pay. It would've been funny if they did - my wife already knew I had an Ashley Madison account, as did a lot of my co-workers. I bet they didn't even know my wife's e-mail address. It's not like they could have gotten it from Ashley Madison.
Dead Hand wouldn't automatically launch a nuclear attack - it's more sophisticated and complex than that. It had a number of sensors for radiation, communication link availability, and other things in multiple places. If enough sensors triggered (e.g. high radiation in Moscow, loss of communication with fleet command in Vladivostok, etc.) it would allow two operators in a bunker to launch a nuclear strike on pre-programmed targets. It isn't a doomsday device in the sense of automatically launching a retaliatory attack. It's a system for ensuring that in the event of an attempted first strike that takes out the chain of command, someone will be able to launch a nuclear strike. The system wasn't designed to scare the USSR's enemies, it designed to make Soviet generals less trigger-happy, because they'd have the peace of mind that even in the event of a devastating attack, the USSR would have its revenge.
In any case, a meteorite wouldn't meet the requirements for activating the system. It wouldn't have the signature of a nuclear weapon (radiation and fission products), and it likely wouldn't take out communication with multiple command centres. Even if it did meet the requirements to activate the system, the result would be that some operators would be permitted to launch a nuclear strike, so there would still be two humans in the loop to realise what was going on.
I know this is a troll, but off the top of my head: Marie Curie, Lise Meitner, and Grace Murray Hopper. There have been brilliant women in plenty of fields.
I think they're still in that Ballmer "Developers! Developers! Developers!" mindset. They want to make Windows the preferred development platform, while allowing deployment to the customer's OS of choice. That's why they've got the Linux subsystem, cross-development in Visual Studio,.NET Core and SQL Server for Linux, and they rest of it. They have tools to simplify deploying to Azure from Visual Studio. They're trying to sell an integrated "experience" that requires the developer to use Microsoft's OS and tools on their desktop.
It was literally years before I found out it's supposed to be read as "Engine-X". I was pronouncing it "n'Jinx" (like "N'SYNC" I guess). Names are stupid if you need someone to explain how to say them. If they write it line N-gin-X or nGINx or something, it might be more intuitive. But I don't know anyone who worked it out without being told.
Pebble-bed reactors have been tried, and the results weren't too good. These advanced reactor designs are great in theory, but they seem to fall over in practice. Fast breeder reactors have had their fair share of issues. Pretty much any reactor that uses liquid metal as coolant seems to turn into expensive dead weight after an unexpected shutdown. The "generation 3+" reactors seem to be our best bet at the moment.
The MCAS system is not required for safety, ergo you're just flat out wrong about this.
The MAX has significantly worse handling characteristics than the NG due to the repositioned engines. It's far easier for it to enter an unrecoverable stall. Because of this, they wouldn't have been able to get type certification without the MCAS. It's definitely a safety system.
If the Lyon Air crew had experienced a runaway-trim condition caused by something other than MCAS, do you really think they would have reacted appropriately to it? Or would they have done exactly what they did in this situation? What exactly made this situation unique, in your mind?
The fact that you can't spell Lion Air and you can't tell Egypt and Ethiopia apart doesn't help your credibility. But the required action is different for the 737 NG and 737 MAX. On the 737 NG there isn't a system that will continue to increase the trim input like this. You can override automatic trim by pressing the manual trim button on the yoke. On the 737 MAX this will only override the MCAS for five seconds before it will try to nose down again. You need to disable the MCAS with a switch on the centre console. This switch is not present on the 737 NG as it lacks the MCAS, because it doesn't have such compromised aerodynamics.
Which Egypt Air flight would that be? The incidents involve Lion (Singapore) and Ethiopian (Ethiopia). You don't even have the airline straight. Switching to manual trim control won't work - pressing the trim control button on the yoke will override the MCAS for five seconds before it will re-engage. You need to actually hit the MCAS disable switch on the centre console to stop it. If your training hasn't covered the MCAS properly, you very likely won't make the mental connection to realise this is what you need to do. The Ethiopian crash happened after six minutes in the air. Given the MCAS won't engage until flaps are raised, and optimistically assuming they raised flaps after two minutes airborne, that gives them four minutes maximum to have worked out what was going on and fix it. Evidently it wasn't enough.
Slashdot Mirror
The CPU doesn't do it on the SNES - the graphics chip itself can do rotate/zoom effects on a single tilemap layer. It can't do it on sprites. Super Mario World (ab)uses it in boss fights by making the boss a tilemap layer so the bosses can do backflips and appear to move towards/away from the screen.
The MegaCD rotate/zoom works differently. You have to do it on individual tiles and then upload them to the VDP, which is fairly expensive. The bandwidth constraints mean you can't upload enough tiles for a full-resolution layer every frame, which is why you can't rotate/zoom an entire full-screen layer (or play full-screen video) with the MegaCD. However, it allows you to rotate/zoom individual sprites independently which the SNES can't do.
The SNES and Mega Drive CPU clock speeds aren't really comparable, as the SNES 65816 can do more per clock than the Mega Drive 68000. But the SNES was designed around having a weaker CPU and more powerful graphics chip, and allowing powerful add-on chips in cartridges. The SuperFX can DMA an entire 15-bit planar RGB layer every frame. The SNES actually can support an add-on providing full-screen FMV.
Germany has a federal law system, not a common law system. You can be called to serve as a judge, not to serve in a jury. As a judge, you're required to pass judgements according to the law (precedents do not create law). If there's no applicable law, you can exercise some discretion in a judgement, but you're required to justify it.
I thought you were this guy for a moment.
I don't think he's really a flat-earther at all. He was already doing daredevil stunts before he started talking about flat earth conspiracy theories, he just dind't get anywhere near the attention and funding. He's just pretending to be a flat-earther so other people will fund his hobby.
She clearly didn't write the majority of the code. However it's entirely possible she's responsible for the math and/or the actual algorithm the code implements. There's a system used at my company that I wrote relatively little of the code for (mostly low-level stuff like high-performance maths primitives and zero-copy networking), but I had a lot of input into the design and how it's supposed to achieve what it does. I don't know enough about this project to comment on whether Bouman is or isn't the brain behind it. I'm just saying that from experience, there are plenty of cases where the person who designed the algorithm isn't the person who ultimately implemented it. They might be a shitty coder, or just have other responsibilities.
That's absolute bullshit. The first widespread cellular networks were NMT, etc. in Europe. Australia, with roughly the same area as the contiguous states of the USA and lower population density, had AMPS built out, and managed to roll out GSM fairly rapidly.
Are they getting enough sun and water? Is the climate suitable? I found that on the north coast of NSW (high humidity, hot summers, mild winters, no frosts, high rainfall) I could grow basil effortlessly. The plants thrived and grew huge with minimal care. However in Melbourne (less humidity, less rainfall, colder winters, occasional frosts) the basil plants wouldn't grow anywhere near as big and required a lot of care or they'd die.
You've never used a Dell professional machine. I have a Precision desktop, a Latitude notebook, and PowerEdge servers. The service manuals are freely available, with step-by-step instructions and diagrams for accessing and replacing every component. Nothing is glued or taped together - everything uses fasteners of some kind. Spare parts are easy to order, too. There aren't iFixit teardowns for Dell notebooks because they're completely unnecessary. Dell doesn't have a problem with companies doing in-house repairs on their Dell computers, and even facilitates it.
And what are you doing about this way your government is curtailing your freedom? I can go to a legal brothel across the road if I want to.
Nintendo let you download an archive of your Miiverse posts when they shut down the service. I appreciated that.
I agree with him - if you want a simple transaction where you know upfront what you'll be paying and what you'll get for it, you should look at escorts, compensated dating, or prostitutes.
I've dealt with their wireless modems, and some of their network infrastructure equipment. The quality of the software they produce is terrible, and what's even worse is their attitude when you report issues. They will try to deflect, blame the customer, deny issues, and even resort to accusing you of racism. Then they'll go and fix the issue, and not mention it in the release notes for the update. You need to re-test everything yourself to work out if/when an issue is fixed.
I don't believe they're spying for the Chinese government and/or the communist party. They're just so damn incompetent when it comes to software that they're probably being hacked by anyone half competent. They seem to be at least somewhat aware of this reputation, and have promised to create a new security team, and spend money improving their processes. But I'll believe it when I see real changes.
Bangladesh will suffer the most - the whole country is basically at current sea level. They'll need to hold back the ocean Dutch-style or pack up and leave.
Eugh, there was software I'd been involved in the development of running on those Diebold voting machines (I didn't work for Diebold, just a vendor they bought software from). It wasn't the kind of software I'd want running on a voting machine.
Wash trading (buying then selling at the same price) is not illegal. It's unprofitable for anyone besides the exchange and possibly the broker depending on the fee structure, so people will try to avoid doing it, but it isn't illegal.
For example on Shanghai Futures Exchange (SHFE), there's a CNY3.6 commission per contract for opening position or closing position from previous day, and no commission for closing position the same day it's opened. So if I buy a future and then sell it at the same price seconds later, I've increased my turnover, but I've lost CNY3.6 in the process. Now if the broker gets on my back saying I'm not generating enough turnover and threatens to take away my 10Gbps Ethernet port and put me on 1Gbps Ethernet, I might tune my quoting strategy to tolerate more wash trades, but I need to be careful about it or I'll eat up all my quoting profit in commission.
Actually trading against your own orders is against the rules on some exchanges, but this is called self-trading or self-hitting, and isn't the same thing as wash trades. Self-trading is strictly prohibited in China, but allowed in Australia, for example. Participant IDs are visible on trades after settlement in Australia, so you can see how much self-trading was going on if you really want to. But as with wash trading, you don't generally want to do this because you'll be paying commission for nothing.
I get those extortion e-mails but they never have a password in them. I've never had a facebook account, though. I got an e-mail threatening to send my Ashley Madison account details to my wife if I didn't pay. It would've been funny if they did - my wife already knew I had an Ashley Madison account, as did a lot of my co-workers. I bet they didn't even know my wife's e-mail address. It's not like they could have gotten it from Ashley Madison.
Half a million is a low UID now? I remember being the n00b account here, and my UID is like a third of his. What does that make me now?
Who made you spokesman for the people of the EU?
Dead Hand wouldn't automatically launch a nuclear attack - it's more sophisticated and complex than that. It had a number of sensors for radiation, communication link availability, and other things in multiple places. If enough sensors triggered (e.g. high radiation in Moscow, loss of communication with fleet command in Vladivostok, etc.) it would allow two operators in a bunker to launch a nuclear strike on pre-programmed targets. It isn't a doomsday device in the sense of automatically launching a retaliatory attack. It's a system for ensuring that in the event of an attempted first strike that takes out the chain of command, someone will be able to launch a nuclear strike. The system wasn't designed to scare the USSR's enemies, it designed to make Soviet generals less trigger-happy, because they'd have the peace of mind that even in the event of a devastating attack, the USSR would have its revenge.
In any case, a meteorite wouldn't meet the requirements for activating the system. It wouldn't have the signature of a nuclear weapon (radiation and fission products), and it likely wouldn't take out communication with multiple command centres. Even if it did meet the requirements to activate the system, the result would be that some operators would be permitted to launch a nuclear strike, so there would still be two humans in the loop to realise what was going on.
I know this is a troll, but off the top of my head: Marie Curie, Lise Meitner, and Grace Murray Hopper. There have been brilliant women in plenty of fields.
I think they're still in that Ballmer "Developers! Developers! Developers!" mindset. They want to make Windows the preferred development platform, while allowing deployment to the customer's OS of choice. That's why they've got the Linux subsystem, cross-development in Visual Studio, .NET Core and SQL Server for Linux, and they rest of it. They have tools to simplify deploying to Azure from Visual Studio. They're trying to sell an integrated "experience" that requires the developer to use Microsoft's OS and tools on their desktop.
It was literally years before I found out it's supposed to be read as "Engine-X". I was pronouncing it "n'Jinx" (like "N'SYNC" I guess). Names are stupid if you need someone to explain how to say them. If they write it line N-gin-X or nGINx or something, it might be more intuitive. But I don't know anyone who worked it out without being told.
Pebble-bed reactors have been tried, and the results weren't too good. These advanced reactor designs are great in theory, but they seem to fall over in practice. Fast breeder reactors have had their fair share of issues. Pretty much any reactor that uses liquid metal as coolant seems to turn into expensive dead weight after an unexpected shutdown. The "generation 3+" reactors seem to be our best bet at the moment.
The MAX has significantly worse handling characteristics than the NG due to the repositioned engines. It's far easier for it to enter an unrecoverable stall. Because of this, they wouldn't have been able to get type certification without the MCAS. It's definitely a safety system.
The fact that you can't spell Lion Air and you can't tell Egypt and Ethiopia apart doesn't help your credibility. But the required action is different for the 737 NG and 737 MAX. On the 737 NG there isn't a system that will continue to increase the trim input like this. You can override automatic trim by pressing the manual trim button on the yoke. On the 737 MAX this will only override the MCAS for five seconds before it will try to nose down again. You need to disable the MCAS with a switch on the centre console. This switch is not present on the 737 NG as it lacks the MCAS, because it doesn't have such compromised aerodynamics.
Which Egypt Air flight would that be? The incidents involve Lion (Singapore) and Ethiopian (Ethiopia). You don't even have the airline straight. Switching to manual trim control won't work - pressing the trim control button on the yoke will override the MCAS for five seconds before it will re-engage. You need to actually hit the MCAS disable switch on the centre console to stop it. If your training hasn't covered the MCAS properly, you very likely won't make the mental connection to realise this is what you need to do. The Ethiopian crash happened after six minutes in the air. Given the MCAS won't engage until flaps are raised, and optimistically assuming they raised flaps after two minutes airborne, that gives them four minutes maximum to have worked out what was going on and fix it. Evidently it wasn't enough.