badmonkey0001

I sat next to John in our office for a year or so back in the heyday of podcasting. He was quite the character. RIP.

I was thinking of bananas and banana flavoring too. It may have been a better example than strawberries, but most people don't know how much variety bananas have because they've been so commoditized. It's too good of an example because the effect is complete.

https://10best.usatoday.com/food-drink/bananas-arent-good-as...

Tiny peninsula; Six datacenters

The geology of the area seems to make for good cooling and DR sturdiness. One DC is even 500 meters under rock.

https://www.datacentermap.com/gibraltar/gibraltar/

https://www.datacentermap.com/gibraltar/gibraltar/continent8...

Weird/forced scrolling on FF desktop as well.

Pagemaker was a workhorse back in the 90s.

15 years ago... They had just released a remake in 2008 for the Xbox, so the IP was certainly fresh in their minds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlezone_(2008_video_game)

Did they eventually drop the threat or did something else happen?

There are dedicated turnkey vendors these days, so there's no need to get elaborate. All you need is a U of rack or two and enough cash.

Example: https://www.accubeat.com/ntp-ptp-time-servers

It feels to me like everyone is holding their breath to see how the wholesale "AI can replace people" notion pans out. Whether it proves true or not, betting on the wrong result will hit hard so few want to go all in (outside of the companies that produce the tech itself). If there's anything "AI" has been able to ship at scale, it's uncertainty.

Could be just plain alphabetical. There's a selector for which color name list to use/examine on the bottom of the visualization. There's also a selector for which color space model to use.

Cool project!

Now the problem becomes mobile browsers... (hover vs. tap, tiny resolutions, differences in form controls, sometimes crippled features that work fine in a "pc" based browser, fluid layout choices, float issues)

There will always be madness.

[edit] Took me a few to find this link again. Do compatibility charts like this look familiar? http://www.quirksmode.org/m/css.html

What have you needed out of ANSI SQL that is a gap in its Turing Completeness? Totally serious. A great many things can be dismissed as not being Turing Complete, so please provide us with some examples of why this is bad in ANSI SQL.

These words make me close tab for the site I'm looking at right away: "Click to launch site". I came to your website... shouldn't it have launched already? Oh it's not a website - it's a multimedia presentation? Great. That's not what I came to your "website" for. No thanks.

(Though I have to admit, there was a time when I actively looked for those sites. I made some good money going to restaurants and other small businesses around town offering to convert their sites from un-editable flash to a simple, skin-able CMS I had whipped up. They were always skeptical until I said "never pay for changing text or prices on your site again". After that, they were my customer and no longer the customer of the wannabe-techno-hipster that sold them the original contract for site and "updates".)

The phone number and extension is probably what's used to identify where the "sales lead" came from. As for the long-calls, there's probably a minimum connection time before the lead is considered "valid". "aaron" is probably telling everyone 6 minutes keeping in mind that this is a Craig's labor pool and they will probably only really do 2 minutes on average.

Sorry for the belated reply. Yeah, I saw Atommontage and it's quite interesting. Despite the realism of the track marks left and suspension movement, the truck still seems to exhibit some unnatural "floating" feeling. These are the very pitfalls of dealing with lower-res poly collision that I was speaking about. Kind of an uncanny barrier for movement.

I do feel that this author is a bit further along at something ship-able than the Euclideon folks are though.

The more I think about it, the more I realize that of the three pure voxel problems (rendering, animation and collision), rendering is probably the low-hanging fruit - Though I'm not sure if creating a hybrid poly/voxel engine is any harder or easier.

Here's to at least getting a hyper-real Myst someday :)

That and I don't know of anyone (outside of using them as particles) that has successfully created collision models with voxels in real time. The collision calculations of just a few of their scanned rocks and a ground plane would be plenty complex - a whole scene perhaps even a little insane given today's specs.

They might have to resort to polygonal collision models in the same way that polygonal games end up using low-poly collision models (with the same pitfalls such as moonwalking, blocked projectiles or mystery-bouncing).

I don't think you're being too harsh. I agree that newT really doesn't seem like a templating engine - it seems more like a HTML generator. It's a pretty complex hammer to drive a carpet tack. Programmatically constructing DOM from that low of a level is still more trouble than it's worth.

For me, I stick to small chunks I can loop on my own if need be and use a simple tokenizer I wrote (see bpmv.toke() at https://github.com/BrynM/bpmv/blob/master/bpmv.js ). Far simpler and I can have anyone whip up HTML boilerplate to use.

POST can be sniffed and is only slightly less vulnerable than GET. HTTPS at a dedicated address should be a minimum level of security for a login form. Anything else is readily vulnerable to sniffing or spoofing.

A link to your award sir. Well deserved. Enjoy dinner ;)

http://www.citivu.com/dvorak/95awds.html#winsock

Seems to me they're charging for value-add services. From the page you linked:

"Building your app is entirely free until you publish it. You do not need to choose your pricing plan until you get ready to publish your app."

And that seems only to apply if you publish through them.

I contacted Peter and he got back to me. He seems to have settled well with how the cards fell and didn't seem worried about being compensated for things long past.

However, if any of you figure out some grand gesture to show appreciation please count me in. To me, he helped the web get started... An unsung hero. :)

I thought it a good idea. His name is Peter Tattam (I did some google-leg-work to find it). His site is at http://petertattam.com/ .

I found his name via a report at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.40....

If this is the guy, what should we do? Should somebody ask him what he would like?

Thank you for being the one person here that seems to consider point of view without the fanboy-ism. What people are calling "HTML5" and "CSS3" is really getting nebulous. It's almost as if just mentioning something shiny and new somehow makes it part of the spec.

I do think prefixes are better than hacks, but to call a prefixed single-browser feature "CSS3" or "HTML5" kind of blows my mind... no matter how unpopular that view may be here on HN.

"The word heretic ought to be a term of honour..." -Charles Bradlaugh

I'm betting he's probably talking about features like having a queue, embed code popups, tweet from within the video and things like that. Such features are considered "basic" in any decent interactive flash based player.

For your YouTube example, don't look at the player while the video is playing... look at the interface between videos. That's an interactive video player.

I'll bite: The problem with the implementation is plain to see:

-webkit-transform: rotateY(45deg);

That's a proprietary CSS declaration. It's exactly the same kind of "embrace and extend" kind of stuff that entrenched IE6 so long ago and severly splintered web development. Why, oh why, do I have to prefix -moz- or -webkit- onto CSS instructions in a "standards compliant" world?

Web dev is getting badly fractured again. There was a point of stability about two years ago where all of the IE quirks were knowns and the rest of the browsers followed CSS2/HTML4 fairly consistently. There was a blissful period where you knew something might be borked in IE6, but could almost just assume things would render in most other browsers.

Such a time has now ended. I find myself saying "but that should have worked?!?!" at about the same rate I did when IE6 was new 10 years ago. Sadly now I have to have $$ to spend on testing hardware rather than just firing up an old piece of software.

TL;DR, 3D transform in webkit isn't true CSS3... it's a proprietary webkit feature.

His name is "Chet Uber"?!?! He's the ultimate Chet?!?! "Chester Superior"

My uncle Chet is going to raise hell when he finds out there's a Chet claiming to be a better Chet than he.

Speaking of ESRB ratings, how is this going to get on the iOs devices? Aren't the app store rules against the following:

"This is the perfect setup for a quintessential first person shooter game play experience — you pick your targets, aim your shots, time your reloads, dodge the bad guys, and try and make it through to the end of the level with a better score than last time. Beyond basic survival, there are pickups, head shots, and hit streak multipliers to add more options to the gameplay, and there is a broad range of skill levels available from keep-hitting-fire-and-you-should-make-it to almost-impossible." -JC

(off to go look...)

Sure enough, part 15 should prevent this app from ever getting to the public (see http://photos.appleinsider.com/App%20Store%20Review%20Guidel... ). I doubt Apple has the eggs to tell Carmack no. Time to see if Jobs' moral views outweigh his greed. (edit: BTW, I think his greed will win)

Worse still, if you spend those long development cycles Apple may change the platform/APIs/terms out from under you making your long dev cycle moot. The longer your time-to-market, the greater your resource risk that Apple will make you obsolete or deny you entry.

I could have gotten long-winded and torn this marvel of political propaganda apart at many levels, but the author did the bulk of the work for me in a few short sentences...

"Seeing the disaster, Center Rock's president, Brandon Fisher, called the Chileans to offer his drill. Chile accepted. The miners are alive."

Wait! He didn't CHARGE Chile for the use of the drill?!?! Where's the capitalism here again? Sounds more like humanitarianism and generosity to me.