The option is "Show preview in image window". If you're tweaking the quality settings, it also shows you what the compressed image will look like (in addition to showing you the file size).
I kind of assumed that GP knew you have to click this before it will calculate a size. Maybe not.
In previous versions, the entire text region was a single font, style, and color. If you wanted one word to be bold, you would have to put it in a separate text layer.
Unpack the iTunes installer with 7-Zip. Install the applications that you actually want. There are about five separate applications bundled in the standard iTunes installation, iirc.
Note that either QuickTime or QuickTime Alternative must be installed before installing iTunes itself.
The term is "afterimage". The best analogy is monitor burn-in (if any of the kids here are old enough to remember that). It's basically the same, except that in the case of your eyes, it's not permanent (usually).
When the light receptors have received the same thing for so long, they eventually just stop responding to it, or their response drops by some significant fraction. I.e. if you're staring at a red object for a while, gradually the "red" receptors in your eye just stop firing that information to your brain so quickly, and the object will gradually look more dull, though you probably won't notice it. If you then rapidly shift your gaze to a white object, however, it will look very noticeably cyan (blue-green) because the "red" receptors still aren't running at 100%. Staring at something that's gray or black gives them a chance to recover.
I've heard it described in terms of both the light-sensing cells gradually lessening their response, and of the neurons in the brain gradually learning to disregard the stimulus; I'm not sure which is primarily the cause for the visual effect, or if it's a combination of both (likely).
I meant "paper trail" in the non-literal sense; an electronic record would be adequate.
However, what you're suggesting is that a school district / teacher would have to rely on Facebook getting its shit together and providing data if or when a teacher is accused of wrongdoing. That's not a very ideal position for them to be in.
A single person having more than one account violates Facebook's TOS. One or both accounts could be deactivated at any time, without warning.
Not to mention there's no proper way to create a paper trail of your Facebook activities. What exactly are you suggesting when you say "tapped logged and filed"? How would you do that?
I voted world peace. To me, it seems the world as a whole is getting richer and more democratic, and both seem to prevent war. Western Europe has lost most of its internal fighting during the past decades, both counted in wars between nations and political terrorism.
Of course it does. Until it topples and anarchy rules. This has all happened before, and it will all happen again. The Roman Empire brought peace to nearly the entire world. It got richer and more democratic. And it fell.
If you're an optimist, you pick world peace. If you're a pessimist, you realize the two options are identical.
You had my interest the moment you said you agreed in principal...
I use AdBlock Plus to nix the Facebook tracking. At the cost of seeing "Like" buttons everywhere I go (yes, that's a joke), these filters or some similar will do the trick:
||facebook.com^$third-party,domain=~facebook.net|~fbcdn.com|~fbcdn.net
||facebook.net^$third-party,domain=~facebook.com|~fbcdn.com|~fbcdn.net
||fbcdn.com^$third-party,domain=~facebook.com|~facebook.net|~fbcdn.net
||fbcdn.net^$third-party,domain=~facebook.com|~facebook.net|~fbcdn.com
You will occasionally see a button when the image is hosted on the website you're visiting, but the Facebook connect js won't load and the button will be non-functional. When that bothers my sense of aesthetics, I usually write an element-hiding rule to get rid of the button, e.g.
#a(href*=facebook.com/sharer)
#a(href*=plus.google.com/)
#a(href*=twitter.com/intent)
slashdot.org##*.comment_share
slashdot.org##*.comment_share_toggle
Nope.
document.write("<script type='text/javascript'>");
works just fine. You're thinking of the closing tag:
document.write("</scr"+"ipt>");
is a necessity to get past the HTML parser.
The D2 posting system has been "fixed": it automatically replaces permitted characters with the corresponding HTML entities. It strips out any other characters and non-allowed HTML entities. Hence, "fixed"... it doesn't really work, it just works some of the time.
I.e. to enter £...
Alt-156 (£) works in D2 only
£ works in either D1 or D2
£ is stripped out in both D1 and D2; Slashdot doesn't recognize it and strips it out of your post.
That's probably enough of an explanation, but if you care to know the why and how...
The D1 posting system parses your post as 8-bit text. It is not actually 8-bit text; it is actually UTF-8 encoded. Since UTF-8 encodes characters with code points U+0000-U+007F in a single byte, it is backward-compatible for this range of characters; characters above U+007F require multiple bytes to encode in UTF-8, which is why Slashdot ends up garbling them. The D1 system doesn't do any conversion from UTF-8 to 8-bit.
Try it: paste £ into Notepad and save as UTF-8, then open the file a hex editor. The file will be 5 bytes: the byte-order mark (a zero-width non-breaking space, code point U+FEFF) encoded in UTF-8 (EF BB BF*), followed by the pound character (163, U+00A3) encoded in UTF-8 (C2 A3** - which, as 8-bit text, is the characters £ - which is what you ended up with in your post; it appears that you used the D1 system to post the comment).
Note that the £ character is actually code point 163, not 156. Typing Alt-156 produces the pound symbol as a throwback to the DOS code page 437, which contained the £ character at position 156. In Unicode, the £ symbol is code point 163 and can be typed Alt-0163.
* 0xFEFF, 11111110 11111111, mapped into the 24-bit mask 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx = 11101111 10111011 10111111 (EF BB BF)
** 0xA3, 10100011, mapped into 110xxxxx 10xxxxxx = 11000010 10100011 (C2 A3)
Yeah, tried and failed in Tripoli. Oh wait... nope.
Pirate ships and crews from the North African Berber states of Algiers, Tunis, Morocco, and Tripoli (the Barbary Coast) were the scourge of the Mediterranean. Capturing merchant ships and enslaving or ransoming their crews... Barbary pirates led attacks upon American merchant shipping in an attempt to extort ransom for the lives of captured sailors, and ultimately tribute from the United States to avoid further attacks, much like their standard operating procedure with the various European states.
tl;dr version: the good guys acquired guns, the bad guys acquired bigger guns and became nastier, the good guys sent in the marines, who had the biggest guns of all. The end.
From the halls of Montezuma
to the shores of Tripoli
to Somalia.
I've thought about this a bit. You're right in what you say - it does short the right channel to the ground sleeve - but I don't think you're correct in what you think the results of this actually will be.
If the device is correctly designed, there should be a little resistance between the plug's "ground" and the actual ground. That way, when the ground/right channel are shorted together, they will follow the right channel's signal, with the resistance providing a small voltage drop between that and the true ground.
You should, ideally, get the peak-to-peak between the left and right channels, because the "ground" can float along with the right channel due to that voltage drop.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
