130 karma · joined March 5, 2011
Any such path ends at (N,M). Such a path can be represented as a sequence of N+M bits, 0=right, 1=up, where there are exactly M ups. So choosing a path is identical to choosing the positions of the M ups, thus there are (N+M) choose (M) such paths.
EDIT: My first proof was needlessly complicated because it dealt with paths that ended at arbitrary (N,m) but really you can just let the paths go all the way up to (N,M)-- even if the max value in the list is m < M-- and just ignore the last part of the path. It's still a bijection.
It comes with a Musicbrainz plugin which allows you to select an album in your library and search for it on musicbrainz (e.g. by artist name and year or number of tracks-- so you really dont need to have much info) and then you can select a match (there are usually many releases of a given album and it will actually differentiate between them) and then tag your album with the musicbrainz tags.
In fact you don't even need to use quodlibet to get this feature. It has a separate tagging component called "ex falso" which you can run standalone and then use the player of your choice.
But I would strongly recommend Quodlibet for its organizational capabilities as well. For example it uses special internal tags (not id3 but stored in a separate db) that allow you to associate "people" and "performers" to a track so that the track will appear when you search for any of those people.
Also there are sort tags that allow you to customize where stuff shows up, e.g. I can have a track with Artist tag "London Symphony Orchestra", composer tag "Ludwig von Beethoven" (the proper ID3 tags) BUT I give it the artistsort tag "Beethoven" so it shows up under B. Perfect!
See https://code.google.com/p/quodlibet/wiki/AudioTags or more info.
Lastly it has regex search! And you can make "saved searhes" e.g. playlists. And it's lightweight and has an uncluttered (but highly customizable) interface. And it's very easy to write plugins for it.
Criticker's rating system is out of 100 points but for each user it scales ratings into tiers (deciles) 1-10. So for someone like me who watches lots of movies that I sort of know I'm gonna like (thanks to Criticker!), most of my ratings end up in the 70 to 100 range, but I still have 5 tiers in that range. The wide range allows the system to adapt to a user's biased view of the scale. Also plenty of users simply keep their rankings from 0-10.
Criticker gives recommendations in two ways. First it predicts my ranking for a movie. So I can just browse unwatched movies and filter them however I like and then sort by how Criticker expects I will rate them. It is actually scary how predictable I am.
The other method of recommendations is to browse users who have very high correlation to my rankings and see what movies they've ranked highly which I have not seen. This might be the best way to find movies. It also seems to be the key to how the expected ratings I mentioned above are computed.
No doubt one of the things that keeps Criticker running so well is a community of serious film buffs. It makes it easy to find movies I would have never heard of otherwise (foreign, limited release, shorts).
There is a very easy to use command line interace, and also a GUI (which I have not tried).
hey, that's a good good idea. i have always just had mine disabled. thanks!
And throughout all of X, selecting text with the mouse is "copy" and the middle button is "paste." Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V have also always worked in my experience.
If you are referring to window toolkits, they are all compatible in the sense that you can run different ones side-by-side. If you are referring to window managers, you only need one. If you are referring to a consistent look, the two major ones (GTK and Qt) each have themes which render their widgets in the other toolkit (GTK-Qt and QGtkStyle, respectively). I can vouch for GTK-Qt. It works.
Just because the hipster ideal is more "mature and responsible" than related social movements which preceded it, does not make our generation more mature and responsible than those which preceded it.
Calling our generation "sellers" has negative connotations, as if we 're super-conformists or sth.
Are those negative connotations necessarily unwarranted? For example, is everyone starting their own business and doing their own PR really the most effective way for us to organize ourselves?
We understand that you can change society by not being confrontational
Really? I count OWS, WikiLeaks, Anonymous, etc. among the biggest contributions of our generation. Certainly these are confrontational?
We don't have a dominant mass culture, which means we are open to micro-cultures
Agreed. This is what I admire most about our generation.
His vilification of these so-called "shadow jobs" boils down to this vague and indirect reference to an increase in "fatigue". I don't find any substance to this. The point of ATMs and ticket machines and self-service gas is that human labor is usually inefficient. You pay for human labor by the hour. It doesn't matter if the CPU time during that hour is 1 minute. In almost all cases, a human worker will entail wasted VARIABLE costs. On the other hand, if the bank buys too many ATMs, the waste is for the most part a fixed cost.
And notice, the quality of service can sometimes _improve_ with machines! E.g., without ATMs we would still have to be concerned about whether we could make it to the bank on time before it closed to withdraw cash or deposit a check. In all of the cases mentione, the combination of machine and human labor allows the seller to satisfy more customers at less cost. Now, it's possible that we are also sacrificing something. But to be honest, in all of the examples that he mentions, I personally do not feel any sacrifice.
What is plainly true, however, is the rise in such self service. And the question of how this affects us, is interesting. I would speculate that one of these effects is an increase in anti-social behavior.
Now, after thirty years, these problems seem easier. Mostly, this is because the ideas of how to solve these problems have spread and are now a part of the standard set of ideas. Thirty years ago these problems were harder to solve and, in addition, the students were given these problems one after another until they failed one of them, at which point they were given a failing mark.
But the reality is that if the curve looks pretty smooth, the animation will be pretty smooth. By computing the change in derivative at the singular point you can figure out how big the jump is, and then try to minimize it.
Hipmunk: $1092. Kayak: $917.
(Both reservations have one layover in each direction and include tax. Kayak sends me to United.com directly while Hipmunk takes me to Orbitz.)
EDIT: Okay, I tried Hipmunk for an upcoming flight.
Pros: It offers a 30 day window for a flexible date search as opposed just 7 days on Kayak. Pretty interface.
Cons: Far fewer search options. My fare was $150 cheaper on Kayak! (Chicago to Hawaii over New Years).
It's a secure (SSL), anonymous (no cookies), ad-free Google interface. You can make it the default in your search bar in any browser either by hand or through an extension. Note that the results are much more minimal (no links to similar articles, cached versions, etc.), which you may prefer, as I do, or not.
If you two really believe that this stuff is revolutionary, I am embarrassed by how low the bar is for my generation.
Is A/V over XMPP standardized?
Actually, real typesetting is done with LaTeX which is a document markup language. There are WYSIWIG editors (e.g. LyX) but I seen anyone actually using them.