Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: By not using CGI (Score 1) 14 14

Ever wonder how they make robots look so awesomely real in movies?

By not overdoing the CGI, that's how. And not using shaky-running cam just because you have motion matching now.

And if you must use CGI, by not allowing it to dictate the shots you film or the lighting you use.

In other news, does Gillian Anderson have a painting hidden in her attic, or what?

Comment: Re:What? (Score 1) 61 61

i have some bad news about newspaper titles and proper noun for you.

The bad news is that it's a stupid idea and no-one should be doing it. "Everyone else does it" is not a decent justification for continuing the out-dated and pointless tradition of title case headlines. The good news is that more and more people seem to be eschewing it these days.

Putting the names of publications like Wired in italics would also have been a great help in this case, but knowing Slashdot that kind of thing would take six months of behind-the-scenes testing, followed by a day of actual use during which at least eighty cross-scripting vulnerabilities would be discovered because they implemented it with Javascript.

Also, "photogs"? Has management handed down an arbitrary word-length limit to go with the arbitrary video-length limit that means they have to resort to slang?

Comment: Re:Why two videos? For the love of dog, why?! (Score 1) 47 47

Well, apologies for not spotting that. I allowed my automatic assumption that there was no possible good reason for doing this to lead me to not checking the text.

That said, I still can't see any good reason for doing this. "Management-imposed restraints" could mean anything. Does "management" think two 5 minute videos costs less in bandwidth than one 10 minute video?

Was "management" perhaps previously in charge of disposable razor marketing?

Comment: Why two videos? For the love of dog, why?! (Score -1, Offtopic) 47 47

Is there any actual reason you've decided to put TWO videos in this article?

Does the end of part one mark a change in topic? It doesn't seem to from the transcript. In fact, you seem to have cut one of your own questions out, according to the transcript.

One video is already an abominable waste of space. Two is just freakin' stupid unless you've got a good reason. A very good reason.

Comment: Re:Because titan has ice, pluto isn't even a plane (Score 1) 98 98

Technically the Pluto-Charon system is not a primary with a satellite, but a double system. The center of mass of the system is not within either body, but in the space between them.

Technically, I don't think any such defintion has ever been formally adopted by the IAU (and they're the people who matter when it comes to deciding whether anyhing is technically anything in space).

There was a proposal to reclassify Pluto and Charon as a double planet system, but it was rejected, so they remain (dwarf) planet and moon.

Comment: What don't I like about this headline? (Score 5, Informative) 98 98

Why Didn't Voyager Visit Pluto?

Why is this asked as a question, when the summary does in fact have the answer? Why not just headline it thus:

Why Voyager didn't visit Pluto

Then I'd be less likely to mistake it for another speculative piece of guff from a professional blog writer, which we already have plenty of.

Your good nature will bring you unbounded happiness.