So, cam-guided, as in cam-guided or CAM-guided? PLEASE, editors, do your jobs.
Watch your mouth sonny, "jobs" is a four letter word, just as bad as "work".
The fucking editor cunts aren't here to be pissed on with that sort of shit.
Everybody knows that tau is actually a variable which depends on velocity of one observer relative to another. Poul Anderson even wrote a nice SciFi book called Tau Zero.
Who are these pansies that use a boot loader at all? I enter in the machine code by hand, that's the only way to be sure.
Youngsters today just don't appreciate how toggling in absolute addresses and machine instructions via front panel switches could build character. It especially expanded one's vocabulary of expletives and expressiveness in screaming them. The PDP-8 only had 12-bit words which saved a lot of toggling, so after a little practice it could be booted to having multiple teletype[*] terminals active in less than 10 minutes. Confession: the last minute or two were reading in from magnetic tape, whose drivers were loaded from a hard-coded[**] circuit board in an act of heinous cheating.
Mind you, that's still faster than booting and logging into my dual core XP laptop at work, which is burdened by an awful lot of corporate cruft (policy enforcement, antivirus, spyware and antispyware, security & encryption craplets, etc.) which must be loaded before the desktop is responsive.
[*] Teletype meant a typewriter sort of thing with fewer mechanical hammers than a real typewriter, but which still needed a roll of ink tape and a larger roll of paper for typing on. Any color ink you wanted, since the ink tapes were usually re-inked a few times by soaking them in suitable muck.
[**] Hard-coded in this context meant a mess of thousands of wires sticking out from the board which were selectively snipped with a pliers to make a suitable array of binaries.
Is it possible that unused PCIE cards waste that much power? On Linux I drain my laptop's batter in under 2 hours, sometimes 1.5. On Win7 it used to take 3+ hours with brightness at 100% (because I was outdoors).
DISCLAIMER: Author of this post is currently using Linux because of superior performance and availability of tools not available on Windows platform.
Probably depends strongly on the laptop and the drivers available for its hardware.
On my 7½-year-old laptop (Sony VAIO VGN-A117S[*]) with original battery, the battery typically lasts slightly less than 2 hours, but even with intensive use it lasts more than 1½ hours. It runs Lubuntu 10.04 and it's years since any version of Windows dirtied its disk, so I can't do a direct comparison right now. As far as I recall, it lasted about 2½ hours on Windows XP when it was new (early 2004), and somewhat less when running Warty or Breezy. With subsequent Linux kernels the battery life became almost the same as it had been with Windows, and Windows was ditched completely with Dapper. Considering the age of the battery, I expect most of the shortened life since 2004 is simply age-related degradation of the battery.
[*] This is actually a beautiful laptop, made when Sony had not yet slid into the abyss of evil. Its 17" 1920x1200 LCD was the main reason I bought it, and the main reason it's still in service. It also runs quite nicely with Lubuntu, despite being limited in RAM. We upgraded the disk a month ago (the original was still working, but 80GB seems small nowadays), while the rest of the hardware is original and working perfectly - still no dead/hot/wonky pixels in the display.
All those conversations about "prior art" that we love to throw around here? Whooosh....all gone. Prior art only matters in "first to invent" instead of first to file.
Get a clue. Prior art is relevant to "first to file" as well as "first to invent". You cannot invent something which already exists, so prior art is an absolute obstacle in either case. The difference between first to file and first to invent is that it's much easier to determine who was first to file. For first to invent, it's necessary to examine the evidence of invention (lab notebooks, internal emails, notes of discussions, etc.).
I like the program and hope to see it expanded. I think the US should have these continually flying sorties all over the world. So if a bad guy shows up in Europe, the US can easily take him out with a Tomahawk missile or two.
I'd prefer if they started by doing this in Manhattan.
I heard there are some non-patriots actually inside the Beltway in D.C.
For $100k they could have got an internal security person for a year, or possibly a decent external consultant. Either way, hacking in would be made a bit harder in the future (but not impossible). As it is, they've set themselves up as a future victim for the next round of extortion.
And not forgetting the arithmetic error in Windows Calculator, which first affected the calculator in Windows 1.0 (November 1985) and persisted until Windows 98 (June 1998): almost 13 years. The version for Windows 3.x was not actually fixed until 2004 as a download from Microsoft, about 14 years after Windows 3.0 was released.
The existence of exactly the same bug in OS/2's built-in Windows subsystem (definitely OS/2 2.0, 2.1, 3.0; I never used 4.0) was evidence that IBM was using exactly the same code for Win-OS/2 as Microsoft used for Windows. Here's an example calculation for anyone who has a Windows 3.x or similar ancient version still running:
3.11-3.1=
The buggy calculator gives 0.0 as the answer. The existence of this bug was widely known, but ignored by Microsoft for years.
I can't imagine Microsoft deliberately walking into that.
It may not be deliberate, but a side-effect of other dysfunctions. Ever noticed the way Dilbert's PHB is kind of Ballmer-shaped, except with more hair.
Now we blame everything on Apple..... and sometimes google.
Not everything, just the moderate amount of evil that isn't actually Microsoft's fault. Most of it can be fairly blamed on Apple, but this one kind of falls through the cracks. It's evil, but can't really be blamed on Microsoft or Apple or Adobe or Oracle (the usual gang of malefactors), Google haters are utterly stumped, and it's not even patent or DRM style evil.
Just spoof the user-agent string...
Oh, wait. Sorry. Enjoy the walled garden!
You can leave a garden (so-called by the owners) as easily as enter it. Since iPad users are prevented from leaving, it could as easily be referred to as a jail by its inmates.
Those who would pay for confinement inside a walled jail must really fear the outside world...
Of course Office 2010 has in document support for equations in Word. And I'm pretty sure 2007 did too.
I haven't tried Office 2010 yet. However, I can assure you that Office 2007 does NOT support in-line equations in text. All equations are inserted as OLE objects, as you can see if you unpack the docx or pptx to XML and look at it[*]. You can put an equation object into the middle of a paragraph, but it remains an OLE object which is not a part of the document (in the sense that search & replace in the document would find something in the equation). If you want a symbol in the text (e.g. a character with superscript and subscript) to have the same appearance as a corresponding symbol in an equation, you have to insert that symbol as an equation object.
[*] Interestingly, or depressingly, the XML generated by Powerpoint is utterly different from that generated by Word for insertion of an equation in Office 2007. This is for how the equation object is referred to, not just for its positioning etc.
In my corner of our (large) corporation, we are required to use MS Office for documentation and presentations. The target audience for user documents are engineers and physicists. This leads to much frustrated screaming - not all of it silent - by the authors of those documents, who all have at least MSc and almost half have a PhD. In truth, we'd all rather use LaTeX, but that's not considered to be group-editable by cretins located around the world. The corporate requirement for group-editing is bogus in our case anyway, as nobody else ever touches our documents, so LaTeX to PDF should be adequate. Actually, judging from the Word documents I receive daily there are damn few of the >10^5 employees who can either structure a Word document logically, or format it consistently.
Powerpoint presentations for sales also include equations; otherwise the customers would ask for the equations and physics underlying the devices we make. All our sales and marketing people have to be able to handle equations and physical models to the level they are presented (or at least to come over as understanding them, even if any query is deflected with "I better check that with R&D, and get back to you"). Most of the sales & marketing people have technical degrees, often at MSc level. Equations in Powerpoint are slightly less problematic than in Word, as the issues of inserting objects all over a slide are less consequential. There is still a strong need for consistency in naming and presentation of variables, of course - and the screaming starts again...
It really galls me that OpenOffice made the same stupid design mistake as Microsoft Office. And the error still persists despite many requests for in-line equations in the text in the style of LaTeX. They can keep their lousy math editor "feature"; just let me use LaTeX style math formatting.
If you recall, MS Word (before 1995) was "one of them" - on par with WP and Lotus [Excel] and AmiPro. But then MS did something that created a lot of value to the user - they created an office suite. Now you could insert Excel into Word (and everything into everything, as long as they are OLE-enabled.)
Well, that created positive value in a way. But they decided to use OLE for embedding all sorts of things which should have been part of the document itself. Example: equations. Why are these embedded as OLE objects? It's impossible to do a global search across equations for a particular expression. It's impossible to do a search and replace if you need to rename a subscripted variable in both text and equations. Oh, it's also a challenge to even refer to variables in equations within the document text in a way that matches the appearance of the variable in the equation (subscript+superscript? caret above letter?), unless you embed it as a one-character equation. And on and on...
Relying on OLE instead of providing an in-document support for equations added a lot of negative value. It's why some of us use LaTeX for any scientific or mathematical authoring, and why support for in-line LaTeX equations was one of the most sought-after modifications to OpenOffice. I predict it will be a common request for LibreOffice also (why did OpenOffice have to re-invent another square wheel instead of adopting LaTeX form for equations).
Slashdot Mirror
So, cam-guided, as in cam-guided or CAM-guided? PLEASE, editors, do your jobs.
Watch your mouth sonny, "jobs" is a four letter word, just as bad as "work".
The fucking editor cunts aren't here to be pissed on with that sort of shit.
Everybody knows that tau is actually a variable which depends on velocity of one observer relative to another. Poul Anderson even wrote a nice SciFi book called Tau Zero.
And as geeks we understand that the English language isn't governed by a committee of Swiss engineers.
Unfortunately, they're English engineers...
Indeed, only about 25PB are stored every year from the LHC.
No. They store all of it, but mostly in /dev/null
Who are these pansies that use a boot loader at all? I enter in the machine code by hand, that's the only way to be sure.
Youngsters today just don't appreciate how toggling in absolute addresses and machine instructions via front panel switches could build character. It especially expanded one's vocabulary of expletives and expressiveness in screaming them. The PDP-8 only had 12-bit words which saved a lot of toggling, so after a little practice it could be booted to having multiple teletype[*] terminals active in less than 10 minutes. Confession: the last minute or two were reading in from magnetic tape, whose drivers were loaded from a hard-coded[**] circuit board in an act of heinous cheating.
Mind you, that's still faster than booting and logging into my dual core XP laptop at work, which is burdened by an awful lot of corporate cruft (policy enforcement, antivirus, spyware and antispyware, security & encryption craplets, etc.) which must be loaded before the desktop is responsive.
[*] Teletype meant a typewriter sort of thing with fewer mechanical hammers than a real typewriter, but which still needed a roll of ink tape and a larger roll of paper for typing on. Any color ink you wanted, since the ink tapes were usually re-inked a few times by soaking them in suitable muck.
[**] Hard-coded in this context meant a mess of thousands of wires sticking out from the board which were selectively snipped with a pliers to make a suitable array of binaries.
Is it possible that unused PCIE cards waste that much power? On Linux I drain my laptop's batter in under 2 hours, sometimes 1.5. On Win7 it used to take 3+ hours with brightness at 100% (because I was outdoors).
DISCLAIMER: Author of this post is currently using Linux because of superior performance and availability of tools not available on Windows platform.
Probably depends strongly on the laptop and the drivers available for its hardware.
On my 7½-year-old laptop (Sony VAIO VGN-A117S[*]) with original battery, the battery typically lasts slightly less than 2 hours, but even with intensive use it lasts more than 1½ hours. It runs Lubuntu 10.04 and it's years since any version of Windows dirtied its disk, so I can't do a direct comparison right now. As far as I recall, it lasted about 2½ hours on Windows XP when it was new (early 2004), and somewhat less when running Warty or Breezy. With subsequent Linux kernels the battery life became almost the same as it had been with Windows, and Windows was ditched completely with Dapper. Considering the age of the battery, I expect most of the shortened life since 2004 is simply age-related degradation of the battery.
[*] This is actually a beautiful laptop, made when Sony had not yet slid into the abyss of evil. Its 17" 1920x1200 LCD was the main reason I bought it, and the main reason it's still in service. It also runs quite nicely with Lubuntu, despite being limited in RAM. We upgraded the disk a month ago (the original was still working, but 80GB seems small nowadays), while the rest of the hardware is original and working perfectly - still no dead/hot/wonky pixels in the display.
Hiding behind "you're doing it wrong; the software is right, change your habits" may work sometimes
It works for SAP. To our present horror and eternal damnation.
All those conversations about "prior art" that we love to throw around here? Whooosh....all gone. Prior art only matters in "first to invent" instead of first to file.
Get a clue. Prior art is relevant to "first to file" as well as "first to invent". You cannot invent something which already exists, so prior art is an absolute obstacle in either case. The difference between first to file and first to invent is that it's much easier to determine who was first to file. For first to invent, it's necessary to examine the evidence of invention (lab notebooks, internal emails, notes of discussions, etc.).
I like the program and hope to see it expanded. I think the US should have these continually flying sorties all over the world. So if a bad guy shows up in Europe, the US can easily take him out with a Tomahawk missile or two.
I'd prefer if they started by doing this in Manhattan.
I heard there are some non-patriots actually inside the Beltway in D.C.
Or can we burn down a record company to make all their holdings public domain?
I am intrigued by your suggestion and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Imagine how difficult it would be to reverse the vote, if they had "accidentally" voted themselves a pay increase or immunity from expense audits...
Depressingly, your reading of the affair is possibly correct.
For $100k they could have got an internal security person for a year, or possibly a decent external consultant. Either way, hacking in would be made a bit harder in the future (but not impossible). As it is, they've set themselves up as a future victim for the next round of extortion.
We call that cider in the UK and it comes from the West Country.
That do be scrumpy, laddie!
Think of Facebook as a sort of Turing test.
If you're active on Facebook, you just failed the test.
Certainly not unprecedented:
17-year-old issues in NTLM not many people know about (now fixed)
http://www.ampliasecurity.com/research/OCHOA-2010-0209.txt
http://www.ampliasecurity.com/research/NTLMWeakNonce-bh2010-usa-ampliasecurity.pdf
And not forgetting the arithmetic error in Windows Calculator, which first affected the calculator in Windows 1.0 (November 1985) and persisted until Windows 98 (June 1998): almost 13 years. The version for Windows 3.x was not actually fixed until 2004 as a download from Microsoft, about 14 years after Windows 3.0 was released.
The existence of exactly the same bug in OS/2's built-in Windows subsystem (definitely OS/2 2.0, 2.1, 3.0; I never used 4.0) was evidence that IBM was using exactly the same code for Win-OS/2 as Microsoft used for Windows. Here's an example calculation for anyone who has a Windows 3.x or similar ancient version still running:
3.11-3.1=
The buggy calculator gives 0.0 as the answer. The existence of this bug was widely known, but ignored by Microsoft for years.
I can't imagine Microsoft deliberately walking into that.
It may not be deliberate, but a side-effect of other dysfunctions. Ever noticed the way Dilbert's PHB is kind of Ballmer-shaped, except with more hair.
No conspiracy. Skype 5.x just blows.
Is that good or bad? Or deliberately ambiguous?
It sounds like the opposite of "Skype 5.x just sucks", so now I'm confused.
Now we blame everything on Apple..... and sometimes google.
Not everything, just the moderate amount of evil that isn't actually Microsoft's fault. Most of it can be fairly blamed on Apple, but this one kind of falls through the cracks. It's evil, but can't really be blamed on Microsoft or Apple or Adobe or Oracle (the usual gang of malefactors), Google haters are utterly stumped, and it's not even patent or DRM style evil.
You spend 35 hours per week watching movies? That's not healthy.
It's OK - he only watches HD porn, so it's healthy and quite exhausting.
Just spoof the user-agent string...
Oh, wait. Sorry. Enjoy the walled garden!
You can leave a garden (so-called by the owners) as easily as enter it. Since iPad users are prevented from leaving, it could as easily be referred to as a jail by its inmates.
Those who would pay for confinement inside a walled jail must really fear the outside world...
Of course Office 2010 has in document support for equations in Word. And I'm pretty sure 2007 did too.
I haven't tried Office 2010 yet. However, I can assure you that Office 2007 does NOT support in-line equations in text. All equations are inserted as OLE objects, as you can see if you unpack the docx or pptx to XML and look at it[*]. You can put an equation object into the middle of a paragraph, but it remains an OLE object which is not a part of the document (in the sense that search & replace in the document would find something in the equation). If you want a symbol in the text (e.g. a character with superscript and subscript) to have the same appearance as a corresponding symbol in an equation, you have to insert that symbol as an equation object.
[*] Interestingly, or depressingly, the XML generated by Powerpoint is utterly different from that generated by Word for insertion of an equation in Office 2007. This is for how the equation object is referred to, not just for its positioning etc.
In my corner of our (large) corporation, we are required to use MS Office for documentation and presentations. The target audience for user documents are engineers and physicists. This leads to much frustrated screaming - not all of it silent - by the authors of those documents, who all have at least MSc and almost half have a PhD. In truth, we'd all rather use LaTeX, but that's not considered to be group-editable by cretins located around the world. The corporate requirement for group-editing is bogus in our case anyway, as nobody else ever touches our documents, so LaTeX to PDF should be adequate. Actually, judging from the Word documents I receive daily there are damn few of the >10^5 employees who can either structure a Word document logically, or format it consistently.
Powerpoint presentations for sales also include equations; otherwise the customers would ask for the equations and physics underlying the devices we make. All our sales and marketing people have to be able to handle equations and physical models to the level they are presented (or at least to come over as understanding them, even if any query is deflected with "I better check that with R&D, and get back to you"). Most of the sales & marketing people have technical degrees, often at MSc level. Equations in Powerpoint are slightly less problematic than in Word, as the issues of inserting objects all over a slide are less consequential. There is still a strong need for consistency in naming and presentation of variables, of course - and the screaming starts again...
It really galls me that OpenOffice made the same stupid design mistake as Microsoft Office. And the error still persists despite many requests for in-line equations in the text in the style of LaTeX. They can keep their lousy math editor "feature"; just let me use LaTeX style math formatting.
If you recall, MS Word (before 1995) was "one of them" - on par with WP and Lotus [Excel] and AmiPro. But then MS did something that created a lot of value to the user - they created an office suite. Now you could insert Excel into Word (and everything into everything, as long as they are OLE-enabled.)
Well, that created positive value in a way. But they decided to use OLE for embedding all sorts of things which should have been part of the document itself. Example: equations. Why are these embedded as OLE objects? It's impossible to do a global search across equations for a particular expression. It's impossible to do a search and replace if you need to rename a subscripted variable in both text and equations. Oh, it's also a challenge to even refer to variables in equations within the document text in a way that matches the appearance of the variable in the equation (subscript+superscript? caret above letter?), unless you embed it as a one-character equation. And on and on...
Relying on OLE instead of providing an in-document support for equations added a lot of negative value. It's why some of us use LaTeX for any scientific or mathematical authoring, and why support for in-line LaTeX equations was one of the most sought-after modifications to OpenOffice. I predict it will be a common request for LibreOffice also (why did OpenOffice have to re-invent another square wheel instead of adopting LaTeX form for equations).
This regularly happens to Virgin in Australia.
Passengers getting fucked by Virgin?
Is this some sort of "in Soviet Russia" joke?
That's nothing.
According to the BBC, there is now another virgin notifying "customers" who got infected.