They're hush on details as to what that "magic" is, but this seems to be for augmented applications such as the Google Glass. So my question is, is the 3D object variable-focused as a whole on the Z-plane to match the focal distance in the real world? Meaning, are all objects augmented independently variable, or is the variable-focus fixed for the entire view at any single point at a time?
I've heard great things about Montessori schools. They're expensive, but only because of the student/teacher ratio. But most importantly, children are of mixed ages and develop at their own pace. Students are also mentors to younger children as well. I find this idea fantastic. For one, it forces students to recall learned information as they teach other students; both benefit from this activity. Secondly, students get taught the material from a different POV to help clarify and missing gaps in understanding. Effectively they double as a tutor.
The only downside (aside from cost) of Montessori is that once your child leaves and goes into a public school, they're quickly bored as they're already way past the level they're put in.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if community based home schooling makes a comeback with periodic standardized testing to keep all teachers in check. Meaning, you can't go all religious in teaching as the student wouldn't pass an element of science based knowledge that's required.
Just like every time someone says, "Product A is $2 cheaper than Product B," I have to guess that, "Product B is $2 more than Product A." Maybe we shouldn't have slept through math class.
Math doesn't help in the absence of context. If Product A is $2 cheaper than Product B, but Product B costs $10,000
There is no confusion that it might mean something else.
Yes, there IS confusion. Are we supposed to infer that the thing that the new 10-times-smaller version is being compared to was already considered small? That's what implied, but nobody knows for sure because the person saying it is lazily using a common, and poorly thought out, construction that doesn't actually tell us that.
No, you're not. It is perfectly reasonable for someone to say something like, "The Small Magellanic Cloud is the smaller of the two Magellanic Clouds," without implying it is smaller than a breadbox or even small in general.
OK. But let's say you don't know how big the Small Magellanic Cloud is, relative to, say, the Milky Way, or Andromeda, or anything else. And then someone says, "We've just found a new galaxy, hiding behind a dust cloud, and it's three times smaller than the Magellanic Cloud." What are you supposed to gather from that use?
Fine, you don't like the wording
No, I don't like people conveying information in a way that forces you to go research something they mentioned without providing any useful context. When somebody cites a comparative size, but doesn't explain why (or if) that comparison is meaningful, then it's a waste of time. Especially when the communication is theoretically about science and/or technology.
Agreed. If someone was smart, they would release a final product this year with the option to replace the LCD for a 4k version as a drop-in upgrade. It would be a way of capturing early market share now while still being a viable product once the competition follows behind with their offering.
even though everybody knows what it means right away
You're missing the point.
When someone says, "The new battery is ten times smaller than the old battery," yes
But there's a reason those are TWO DIFFERENT SENTENCES.
When you use the word smallER in that context, you're communicating that the old battery is small, and the new battery is even smaller. Why? Because you're saying that the new battery has time times the smallness of the old one. That has a completely different connotation than a sentence that suggests that the old battery was what it was (or was large), and the new battery is comparatively small.
The reason we have lots of vocabulary words, adjectives, and constructions is so that we can be nuanced and more precise in simple communication. When you use a sentence that essentially forces the audience to go find out what you actually meant by "ten times smaller" (was the old one small, or huge?) then you've done the opposite of providing useful information. All of that in order to avoid using slightly different words that we also all know?
This is pure laziness, that's all. It's mimicking a sound or phrase without thinking about what's actually being communicated. It's no different than people who say, "I could care less," when they mean exactly the opposite. They are uttering sounds without thinking about the actual words they're using. One small, lazy spoken step for man, part of one cumulative giant leap towards dumbing everybody down.
you wouldn't steal a policeman's hat!
Well, not before coming across Netflix's Jeeves and Wooster videos. Now I'm not so sure.
I'm guessing the next rev will have a 4k display. I believe the competition is also looking into that as well. Given the extra R&D on an entirely new concept with equally impressive tech; I give the launch date late 2016 or early 2017 for a consumer product.
That's just it; the fact doing the right thing is news. And news is defined by the reporting the exception to the rule.
Just side-step the issue and go with Netflix or HBO streaming. There's a lot of premium content worth purchasing online. No need to keep purchasing the same rehashed movie content.
The war against DRM didn't win or lose, rather, the war became obsolete.
Suricou sorta has a point though. Intel HD video is all processed on CPU; which is the majority of OEM laptops and desktop computers now. So being that Intel is taking part in this, either the hardware will be implemented in the next CPU revision, or on a bridge chip someplace on the motherboard.
Whoa there. You wouldn't steel a car, would you???
Germans are essentially stupid when it comes to totalitarianism in any form. After all, this is the country that hat to start and lose _two_ world wars in order to find out that they are may not be the master-race.
Beim dritten Mal ist ein Charme!
Billions of people go top some kind of church or another. So
And at least a few of them genuinely believe in the magical thinking, while most are just there from social peer pressure. But it's still a dire problem.
Damn, lots of Stasi victims are still of working age even. You'd hope the Germans had developed more antibodies against this crap.