Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Also relevant text from TFA:
In this paper we use code inspired by real, production software [...]
Sadly, that's probably 100% accurate.
But the right solution is to use a small buffer, say 16KB to 100KB in size, fill that with characters and flush that buffer to disk every time it's full.
Which is to say, do what every programming language with buffered I/O does.
For extra cultural cred, you could use Butterfield 8 as the area code.
(Sadly, Pennsylvania 65000 doesn't work any more.)
That's true (Blender has supported Aqsis for some years now), however PRMan has quite a lot of features not in the RI spec.
Erm... maybe because Pixar make good money by selling RenderMan to the makers of films like Titanic, Star Wars I-III and the Lord of the Rings.
IIRC, Industrial Light & Magic has a perpetual licence to use PRMan for free. Pixar, you may recall, used to be part of Lucasfilm. Of course, now Disney owns both.
Cycles (Blender's built-in renderer) is slower and less-featured than PRMan. That doesn't prevent you from making great stuff with it, of course, but when scale becomes an issue, you'll want something a bit more industrial-strength.
Actually, it's the exact opposite of that.
As Neal Stephenson famously pointed out in The Diamond Age, when you have no shared notion of ethics or morality, the only "sin" is hypocrisy. I can't judge you for not sharing my ideals, but I can judge you for violating your own.
The Barney Frank Rule states that it's okay to out someone for publicly oppressing people for doing what they do in private, no more and no less.
Of course if they actually did this it would cost ONE MILLION DOLLARS per device...
Unless it was military surplus gear, which is where the police get most of their "massive overkill" stuff. It'd be bargain basement prices, then.
How about they not take anonymous calls like that so seriously?
Because nobody wants to be the law enforcement agency which downplayed a real tipoff.
Since we're on the topic, how about they not turn themselves into paramilitary organisations in the first place? Calling out the SWAT team is a dangerous waste of money, partly because having a SWAT team is a dangerous waste of money in the vast majority of jurisdictions.
PopeRatzo was making a reference to the Barney Frank Rule. It's okay that you didn't spot it (not everyone knows everything), but now you know.
Github would sensibly decide it is not going to be the censor police for project names, content, comments, submissions etc.
If Github wanted to be really smart about this, they would issue a press release which said that they were not going to protect idiots like this from the consequences of their own actions. If Randy Hunt wants to do his own damage control, that's up to him. Github is not going to do it for him.
Oh, and just what is being "demanded" of this "project"? Most people don't give a darn, because the project is bogus - just an attention-getting stunt done in bad taste. I don't think it rises even to the level of a tempest in a teapot. This non-story should never have seen the light of day. It's just clickbait.
I wish I had mod points, because this paragraph would get all of them.
For me, this whole non-story is straightforward and uncontroversial: It's not Github's job to prevent people from making fools of themselves in public. Now that it's gone viral, their response is simple. They should issue a press release which says "we're not going to protect him from himself", leave the project as-is, and let him live with the consequences.
^ teenager detected
(Fun fact: Anyone who uses the word "beta male" non-ironically is being marketed to.)
Now, it's "Good luck finding a real job with this on your resume, cuck."
You'd hope so, but this is the US tech industry we're talking about here.