microsoft changed this without warning it seems. this begs the question..."are they insane? why?" words like haphazard, reckless, "on a whim" come to mind. words i'm sure they want people to associate with their server software. what's next? maybe the term "organizational unit" will be changed to "organizational container", and all the distinguished names will have OC= instead of OU= without a warning. Just for kicks and giggles.
luckily, instead of "/console", its "/admin" for example:
mstsc /v:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx /admin
on a side note, why /v, other than the fact that v is the 5th letter on the tail end of the alphabet. if you're going to change /console to /admin, why not change /v to /ip, or /server, /computer, /machine, /name? any one of these would be more fitting.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Recipe: Chanterelle Soup
Ingredients:
Chanterelle mushrooms
white wine
chicken broth
unsalted butter
saffron
black pepper
garlic salt
walnuts
olive oil
Simmer chanterelle mushrooms in chicken broth, saffron, a pinch of black pepper, white wine for at least 20 minutes. Remove the mushrooms, add the butter, and the walnuts (the walnuts should be about half the volume of the soup.) Put it in a blender, and blend until smoothe. Finely chop the chanterelle mushrooms, saute the chanterelle in olive oil, salt, and pepper until crispy.
Put the soup in a bowl, and place the sauteed mushrooms in the center. Garnish with some finely chopped parsley.
It should have the texture and remind you of lobster bisque, but a refined taste of chanterelle mushrooms.
Chanterelle mushrooms
white wine
chicken broth
unsalted butter
saffron
black pepper
garlic salt
walnuts
olive oil
Simmer chanterelle mushrooms in chicken broth, saffron, a pinch of black pepper, white wine for at least 20 minutes. Remove the mushrooms, add the butter, and the walnuts (the walnuts should be about half the volume of the soup.) Put it in a blender, and blend until smoothe. Finely chop the chanterelle mushrooms, saute the chanterelle in olive oil, salt, and pepper until crispy.
Put the soup in a bowl, and place the sauteed mushrooms in the center. Garnish with some finely chopped parsley.
It should have the texture and remind you of lobster bisque, but a refined taste of chanterelle mushrooms.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
What is art?
Art is something that moves you. Changes your mental state. If you have your mind on something, it takes your mind away from where it is currently, and puts you in a different state of mind.
Art is a representation of a novel idea. Something no one has ever done before. A different way of thinking. A thought that inspires a whole new branch of thought for the artist, and the people viewing the piece of artwork.
Art is an expression of yourself that you add to your life to make yourself more complete. Art is something you share to show someone the joy of discovering something new the way you've discovered the love for it.
Art is the experience of discovering a story from its parts. A story you'll never know for sure if someone else knows it exactly the way you know it. Something you want to share but you would rather not after you found something sacred.
Art is the name of the guy with no legs and no arms, hanging on your wall.
Art is a representation of a novel idea. Something no one has ever done before. A different way of thinking. A thought that inspires a whole new branch of thought for the artist, and the people viewing the piece of artwork.
Art is an expression of yourself that you add to your life to make yourself more complete. Art is something you share to show someone the joy of discovering something new the way you've discovered the love for it.
Art is the experience of discovering a story from its parts. A story you'll never know for sure if someone else knows it exactly the way you know it. Something you want to share but you would rather not after you found something sacred.
Art is the name of the guy with no legs and no arms, hanging on your wall.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Speed Writing
Its like speed reading...where you read so quickly that you only catch a few words, and leave out the fillers. That seems like my writing these days. Not just in my blog, but in my text conversations with people. I find myself leaving out a few words, and sometimes parts of the phrases. Maybe if they got my message, they would be able to figure out what i was trying to say, but its really making me double check what I write, and most of the times it is missing a few words. Overall, double checking isn't a bad thing.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Grindhouse: A double feature
A revelation came to me as I was watching Grindhouse: Planet Terror with Eric and Wendy today. Grindhouse (the two movies combined) is a well rounded formula. Well rounded as in it is the ultimate thrill ride of a movie for both men and women.
On one hand, you have Grindhouse: Death Proof, which is actually the ultimate chick movie in disguise. The dialog is much like what I would assume Sex In The City dialog would be. Hot girls talking about relationships, the competition, and the exercise of hotness (flirting) to manipulate people into doing what they want guys to do. With that involved, the girls get into some trouble. This leads to girls being bad, and ultimately kicking some serious ass.
Grindhouse: Planet Terror on the other hand is a movie for guys who like movies with zombies, guns, strippers, and a lot of gore. There is nothing in disguise about this one. So it makes sense why Tarantino made this a double feature, and why it is so well received.
The movies separately on the other hand, doesn't work well if the viewers are both male and female. Grindhouse: Planet Terror is a movie where you have a bunch of guys in the room who can laugh shamelessly at the cheesy gore/violence, and root on for the hot stripper. Grindhouse: Death Proof I would imagine would be movie girls can watch, nod their heads about, and then have a long conversation about their current relationships afterwards with the other girls.
In conclusion, the movie worked well as a double feature in the theaters for a reason, but since the movies are sold separately (and extended about 30 minutes each) they are different beasts entirely at home.
On one hand, you have Grindhouse: Death Proof, which is actually the ultimate chick movie in disguise. The dialog is much like what I would assume Sex In The City dialog would be. Hot girls talking about relationships, the competition, and the exercise of hotness (flirting) to manipulate people into doing what they want guys to do. With that involved, the girls get into some trouble. This leads to girls being bad, and ultimately kicking some serious ass.
Grindhouse: Planet Terror on the other hand is a movie for guys who like movies with zombies, guns, strippers, and a lot of gore. There is nothing in disguise about this one. So it makes sense why Tarantino made this a double feature, and why it is so well received.
The movies separately on the other hand, doesn't work well if the viewers are both male and female. Grindhouse: Planet Terror is a movie where you have a bunch of guys in the room who can laugh shamelessly at the cheesy gore/violence, and root on for the hot stripper. Grindhouse: Death Proof I would imagine would be movie girls can watch, nod their heads about, and then have a long conversation about their current relationships afterwards with the other girls.
In conclusion, the movie worked well as a double feature in the theaters for a reason, but since the movies are sold separately (and extended about 30 minutes each) they are different beasts entirely at home.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
My Top 12 Chuck Norris Facts
1. Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one bird.
2. Chuck Norris once visited the Virgin Islands. They are now The Islands.
3. Chuck Norris counted to infinity - twice.
4. Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.
5. When the Boogeyman goes to sleep every night he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.
6. Chuck Norris can slam revolving doors.
7. Some kids piss their name in the snow. Chuck Norris can piss his name into concrete.
8. Chuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".
9. Chuck Norris once won a game of Connect Four in 3 moves.
10. Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid of the dark, but the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris.
11. Chuck Norris can delete the Recycling Bin.
12. Once a cobra bit Chuck Norris' leg. After five days of excruciating pain, the cobra died.
3. Chuck Norris counted to infinity - twice.
4. Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.
5. When the Boogeyman goes to sleep every night he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.
6. Chuck Norris can slam revolving doors.
7. Some kids piss their name in the snow. Chuck Norris can piss his name into concrete.
8. Chuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".
9. Chuck Norris once won a game of Connect Four in 3 moves.
10. Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid of the dark, but the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris.
11. Chuck Norris can delete the Recycling Bin.
12. Once a cobra bit Chuck Norris' leg. After five days of excruciating pain, the cobra died.
Friday, May 2, 2008
PSP to become DivX Certified
That's all fine and good, but...the big question is, how well can it play (or if at all) resolutions higher than 480 x 272? The whole point is to avoid the hassle of re-encoding anything. I can re-encode all my video to 480 x 272 AVC, but I don't because:
1. Having 2 copies of the video doesn't make sense, takes a lot of space, especially since the second one I'm re-encoding is of a lower resolution.
2. It takes a lot of time. Even if I had a dual 4 core processor (I think its called skulltrail), and I had a multithreaded encoder, I would still probably rather not.
It all boils down to time and convienience. I don't have something that manages all the reencoding for me (even if I did, it would be a lot of extra wasted space and energy). I would not have to wait for something to re-encode if I wanted to take it to go.
Lets hope it can scale down the resolution and not lose frames, somehow.
1. Having 2 copies of the video doesn't make sense, takes a lot of space, especially since the second one I'm re-encoding is of a lower resolution.
2. It takes a lot of time. Even if I had a dual 4 core processor (I think its called skulltrail), and I had a multithreaded encoder, I would still probably rather not.
It all boils down to time and convienience. I don't have something that manages all the reencoding for me (even if I did, it would be a lot of extra wasted space and energy). I would not have to wait for something to re-encode if I wanted to take it to go.
Lets hope it can scale down the resolution and not lose frames, somehow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)