How are the learning resources for Blender VSE? I've tried several open source editors (openshot: not fit for any serious purpose, shotcut: would be great if not bugged out) and ended up on Resolve for the combination of being free for my purposes and good community resources. I've looked at Blender for 3D before and found the good resources tend to be out of date. Is that still an issue?
edit: I may need to give the OpenShot 3.x a chance. The OpenShot release history [1] makes the claim that they have addressed many of my complaints
I tried Kdenlive, OpenShot, Shotcut, Pitivi and others. It's a personal thing but I just could not get used to their UIs. Well except for Pitivi, but that one is way too buggy.
I even briefly considered using ffmpeg and bash to get the edits I wanted...
Blender has a complicated UI but at least it feels completely consistent and thought-through. And also like it wasn't designed 20 years ago. I just have more confidence using Blender than others because it's so big, respected and known.
My learning process is basically "How do I do this thing I did in Premiere?" and basic Googling/YouTubing. I needed a tutorial video to get started but otherwise if you know NLEs it shouldn't be too hard.
You might want to stay away from very recent major versions for stability, but it is a very capable editor that is also much more robust and performant than openshot.
Were you Chris.sherlock/Aussie Article Writer on Wikipedia? Sounds like pot calling the kettle black re: toxic. You had an interaction ban against her FFS.
>There is plenty of money to be made selling home layouts to police.
The police basically already have this in the form of building records. Unless you live in a really old building or you've made unapproved modifications, they've got an accurate layout if they care to look.
There's nuance, though. You're right in that they can get a general layout of the rooms in the home, but a mapped layout from a device like this gives them a lot more detailed information - where large objects are that potential targets could hide behind, or stash things.
One data point offers a drawing of where the walls are, another paints a picture of where everything the occupant owns is sitting.
There is some nuance, but in real life the SWAT teams will just crash a bearcat through the wall and fly a cheap drone through the hole to scope out the situation if need be. And as for searching, they don't need a scan to know how to upend everything in a house. People aren't robots, once they're inside, they have their own situational awareness.
The real privacy nightmare with this data to me is marketers mining it for what you have or don't have in your home and hyper targeting you that you need to buy a new coffee table or whatever.
Until someone inside shoots it. Much easier to just grab data from yesterday's cleaning. But perhaps I'm overthinking that? I do tend to lean into the idea that SWAT seem to be more of the Leroy Jenkins, times-up-let's-do-this, smash-and-grab types.
> The real privacy nightmare with this data to me...
If I recall, proprietary clients usually shipped with their own bootstrap server. I think it may have even contributed to the legal cases, but it's been a long time.
Whether Kildall actually blew IBM off at that meeting or not, what was definitely the case was that CP/M didn't have a 16-bit version ready to meet IBM's schedule, and that's what ultimately took them out of the running.
If you watch the documentary it’s an interview with the people who were there. There might be some discrepancy but I think the IBM guys were being honest about how it went down. The doc is on the Internet archive and worth a watch.
You get the idea that it wasn’t some brilliant business strategy by Microsoft, the deal for the operating system wasn’t that good for them initially.
Gary had some other plans and so he said well, Dorothy will see you. So we went down the three of us...
Gordon Eubanks
Former Head of Language Division, Digital Research:
IBM showed up with an IBM non-disclosure and Dorothy made what I...a decision which I think it's easy in retrospect to say was dumb.
Jack Sams:
We popped out our letter that said please don't tell anybody we're here, and we don't want to hear anything confidential. And she read it and said and I can't sign this.
Gordon Eubanks:
She did what her job was, she got the lawyer to look at the nondisclosure. The lawyer, Gerry Davis who's still in Monterey threw up on this non-disclosure. It was uncomfortable for IBM, they weren't used to waiting. And it was unfortunate situation - here you are in a tiny Victorian House, its overrun with people, chaotic.
Jack Sams:
So we spent the whole day in Pacific Grove debating with them and with our attorneys and her attorneys and everybody else about whether or not she could even talk to us about talking to us, and we left.
……….
Bill Gates:
Digital research didn't seize that, and we knew it was essential, if somebody didn't do it, the project was going to fall apart.
Steve Ballmer:
We just got carried away and said look, we can't afford to lose the language business. That was the initial thought - we can't afford to have IBM not go forward. This is the most exciting thing that's going to happen in PCs.
Bill Gates:
And we were already out on a limb, because we had licensed them not only Basic, but Fortran, Cobol Assembler er, typing tutor and Venture. And basically every - every product the company had we had committed to do for IBM in a very short time frame.
Basically they were just trying to track down weird noises on the recording. They also went and recorded audio on a similar UPS MD-11 to try to identify the source. According to the NTSB:
"This high pitch ringing sound, primarily noted at approximately 6.35 kHz, occurred at 17:13:05.5 EST, shortly after the aircraft rotated for takeoff, and continued with varying amplitude throughout the remainder of the recording. Additionally, a tone at about 2.1 kHz was present along with the ringing that could not be identified."
Yeah looks like Micheal Douglas was using that name professionally about decade before Michael Keaton started his career so union rules would require an alternate name.
Yep, that’s also why Michael J. Fox isn’t merely Michael Fox. I like to imagine that at some time in the 25th century or so, actors will end up having names that sound like generic pharmaceuticals because all the names will have been used already.
(As an aside, when Michael Douglas first attained prominence in the early 80s, I thought briefly that he was maybe the 70s daytime talk show host, Mike Douglas.)
edit: I may need to give the OpenShot 3.x a chance. The OpenShot release history [1] makes the claim that they have addressed many of my complaints
[1] https://www.openshot.org/blog/
reply