isantop

That’s just creepy.

Maybe, but blending the looks of a Ferrari with the looks of a Porsche does not a pretty car make.

And don’t even get me started on Siri…

A wild Open Source program appears!

I’m of the camp believing you can teach anyone anything if you go at it from the right angle, as long as the student is as invested in the effort as the teacher.

Failing Intro to CS isn’t about the difficulty of the subject matter, it’s about the effort the student puts in.

But you do know that the engine makes things spin, and that spinning gets transmitted to the wheels. You don’t get baffled by how the car moves when you press the accelerator. You don’t need to understand how the engine generates movement, but you should know that there is an engine in there, and you should know why it’s there. Same thing with computers.

But we should teach people how to use computers. They’re becoming a staple appliance of modern society. Learning some basic programming just gives you some fast, simple, useful knowledge of computers in a really abstract way.

There are tons of high-schools offering CS courses ranging from Intro all the way through AP (usually in Java or Python).

And if source comes to Linux, the rest of steam coming is a much stronger possibility.

(I believe that valve are targeting Ubuntu pretty specifically. Remember, calling them all Linux is like calling all modern Windows’s “NT”)

>reproduce the film you see in you head

Which, ironically, is exactly what he’s doing since most people see things at visual smoothness in their heads rather than in frames.

Sometimes, standardization sucks.

Take your speculation back to Wall Street (On second thought, don’t).

Or it can allow the artist to more clearly express his intent.

It sounds like you don’t like your job…

Digital storage is super cheap

Humans don’t see in frames.

If you increase the resolution, they’ll just build in more detail. It works for both spatial and temporal resolution.

This “cinematic effect” only exists because the frame rates haven’t changed in 100 years.

Nope, the human visual system doesn’t see in terms of frames, it works with a continuous flow of light information

That still doesn’t mean we can’t see in infinite temporal resolution.

The source file is 24 fps. Standard shooting speed is usually higher, IIRC.

digital

I actually heard a great discussion on Science Friday a couple of weeks ago about this, and a lot of people in the industry think that 24 fps is barely sufficient, and has only stuck around this long because, basically, “all the cool kids are doing it”.

You have to remember, this is exactly how the director envisioned it in this case.