That might be true, but why doesn't the "well rounded education" argument ever come up when math and hard science classes are in jeopardy?
There's no shortage of people willing to defend the liberal arts because a well rounded education is so necessary to being a good person, but they're strangely silent when attendence in technical courses is dropping.
"The level of signal redundancy (using Viterbi encoding) combined with the forward error correction (FEC) mechanisms introduced in the signal, practically reduce the risk of interference to none."
I'm sorry, but that's just misleading.
In any channel transmitting digital data, you have a certain bit error rate (BER). Using error correction techniques, you can improve the performance of the channel such that the BER is equivalent to that of a channel with much less noise, or much higher transmit power, or much higher antenna gain. Error correction provides gains that you can measure in decibels, just like an increase in transmit power would.
But a dB loss is a dB loss, it doesn't matter if it's due to weather, interference, etc. If interference causes a dB loss over and above what the channel was designed for, you lose more bits than expected, and quality degrades.
"Covering a large rural are is impractical as you'd need many watts of power transmitted at the user's end, and only a limited number of users could be handled."
Huh? How big of an area are you talking about? Cell phones don't transmit with many watts of power, and they still work in rural areas.
The UHF TV stations are within 100MHz of commonly used cell phone frequency ranges, so the propagation, antenna length, and power requirements would be very similar.
Being that the user would be based at home, and not limited by the size of a mobile phone and battery, there would be more than enough power.
I'm not advocating that we get rid of laws against drunk driving, but using a "society pays the cost of medical bills" is a bad reason for making people do anything. In a free county, what everyone else wants to subsidize shouldn't adversely affect my freedom.
If I owed you a thousand dollars, and instead of paying you, I gave it to a charity for children with cancer, would I still owe you the money? Yes. My decision to support some other charitable cause is in no way relevant to my obligations toward you.
Likewise, if society decides to support people who can't pay their medical bills, fine. Where I get upset is when additional restrictions are placed on law abiding citizens, for no other reason than, "your behavior is statistically likely to raise the cost of government's largess," whether it actually does or not. It's like getting convicted of a crime before its been committed.
This is not a problem from drunk driving, this is a problem of socialism.
And think what you may about society bearing costs for unfortunate people, but this perfectly illustrates a point: as soon as someone else is footing the bill for your actions, it gives them a reason to start telling you what you can and can't do.
I for one, would rather take full responsibility for my behavior and be free to make my own choices than to accept ridiculous limitations so that someone else will take care of me when if do something stupid.
For one, I don't expect to be the one doing something stupid. Secondly, safety nets for stupid behavior only promote recklessness.
I don't know if it's gotten any better, but my experience with older versions of MySQL is that the query analyzer was so bad for all but the simplest queries that no amount of tweaking would help. For some queries I'd swear that MySQL was actively trying to do the wrong thing. It ended up being faster to do two separate simple queries in the Perl script. And this is pain-in-the-ass type of thing that benchmarks never show.
I've never had that problem with PostgreSQL. I don't mind tweaking, when tweaking works.
"I am all for lowering the limit even below 0.08, not because I want more "gubermint" in by business, but because it's just safer for everyone."
It would be "just safer for everyone" to require that you don't drive for a week after drinking alcohol, and to wear a helmet whenever you do, and yet it's not a law.
Doing things in the name of safety while ignoring the cost is a bad way to do anything.
There seem to be a lot more options for "virtualization" lately than VMWare, but never having needed to use multiple OS's at one time, I'm clueless as to the details of how these all work. Are they taking advantage of some new functionality on Intel/AMD chips?
"Dollars have a value because the supply is limited."
The supply of Confederate dollars is much more limited, but they are essentially worthless.
The only thing that gives anything value is what someone else is willing to do in exchange for it. People accept dollars in exchange for other things in many places, so it has value as a currency. Why do they do that? Only because everybody else does.
Let's go to the desert island model that's always so helpful. Two people on a desert island, one has water, the other has dollars. What's the inherent value of a dollar there? Nothing. There's no way the guy with the water is going to give it up unwillingly in exchange for dollars.
Now the guy with the water sees a rescue ship on the horizon, and offers the water for $100,000. Why? Because his perceived value of the dollar just went up, because he knows he will be going back to a place where everyone else accepts the dollar.
It seems odd that the value of currency is based completely on emotional things like "willingness," but really that's the way it works.
1:1 And ye, the programmers said, "Let there be text" and there was text. 1:2 And the programmers looked at the text, and saw that it was good. 1:3 On the third day, the programmers said, "Let there be pictures, too, text is boring," and there were pictures too. 1:4 And the programmers looked unto the pictures, and saw that they were good, but pixelated and difficult to animate.
1:5 So then the programmers said, "Let there be anti-aliasing and matrix transformations and hardware support for rendering like the Amiga has," and lo, all of these things came to be on the fourth day. 1:6 And the programmers looked unto all of their creations and gave OpenGL dominion over all hardware accelerated graphics, and on the fifth day they rested.
2:1 But lo, the serpent Microsoft saw OpenGL and said unto him, "You are good, but you could be greater, if you only would listen to me." 2:2 And the serpent took one of OpenGL's ribs and copied OpenGL, and made DirectX. 2:3 And when the programmers looked at what had become of OpenGL, they were angry, and tossed the serpent and DirectX out of the Garden.
While I agree completely with your point, the accidental gun death figure you use is wrong. In 2004, there were 649 deaths in the U.S. due to gun accident.
Traffic deaths in the U.S. dwarf the terrorist kill numbers, just like in the UK.
"The moral of the story for all you geeks is: expect women to like you; do not be afraid to challenge them; if you aren't decisive, then fake it; expect them to yield to your boldness; and learn how to dance, because few things are more indicative of a man's confidence than his willingness to make a fool of himself on the dance floor."
Screw that, I'm going to have an operation and become a businesswoman.
There is nothing stopping these people from pooling their resources and making their own insurance company.
That's the American way.
Many years ago military officers had trouble getting various types of car and home insurance because they were deemed more "at risk" than other occupations. They formed USAA, which to this day has some of the lowest insurance rates going.
Slashdot Mirror
And I download it all the time just for the hell of it. Plus I like watching the green light blink on my router.
Great. While we're at it, let's also drop the "core" classes in English, diversity, and art history that engineers have to take.
That might be true, but why doesn't the "well rounded education" argument ever come up when math and hard science classes are in jeopardy?
There's no shortage of people willing to defend the liberal arts because a well rounded education is so necessary to being a good person, but they're strangely silent when attendence in technical courses is dropping.
"Scrap the FCC. Use frequency hopping spread-spectrum devices to avoid interference."
You do realize that this would have a snowball's chance in hell of actually working, right?
If there are no restrictions on who can transmit what, whoever transmits the strongest signal wins. It's not going to be you.
"The level of signal redundancy (using Viterbi encoding) combined with the forward error correction (FEC) mechanisms introduced in the signal, practically reduce the risk of interference to none."
I'm sorry, but that's just misleading.
In any channel transmitting digital data, you have a certain bit error rate (BER). Using error correction techniques, you can improve the performance of the channel such that the BER is equivalent to that of a channel with much less noise, or much higher transmit power, or much higher antenna gain. Error correction provides gains that you can measure in decibels, just like an increase in transmit power would.
But a dB loss is a dB loss, it doesn't matter if it's due to weather, interference, etc. If interference causes a dB loss over and above what the channel was designed for, you lose more bits than expected, and quality degrades.
"Covering a large rural are is impractical as you'd need many watts of power transmitted at the user's end, and only a limited number of users could be handled."
Huh? How big of an area are you talking about? Cell phones don't transmit with many watts of power, and they still work in rural areas.
The UHF TV stations are within 100MHz of commonly used cell phone frequency ranges, so the propagation, antenna length, and power requirements would be very similar.
Being that the user would be based at home, and not limited by the size of a mobile phone and battery, there would be more than enough power.
There's no financial incentive to do that as opposed to just living off of the interest of the $1,000,000.
Your salary needs to be more than $60,000 after taxes in order for you to break even.
I'm not advocating that we get rid of laws against drunk driving, but using a "society pays the cost of medical bills" is a bad reason for making people do anything. In a free county, what everyone else wants to subsidize shouldn't adversely affect my freedom.
If I owed you a thousand dollars, and instead of paying you, I gave it to a charity for children with cancer, would I still owe you the money? Yes. My decision to support some other charitable cause is in no way relevant to my obligations toward you.
Likewise, if society decides to support people who can't pay their medical bills, fine. Where I get upset is when additional restrictions are placed on law abiding citizens, for no other reason than, "your behavior is statistically likely to raise the cost of government's largess," whether it actually does or not. It's like getting convicted of a crime before its been committed.
That's not freedom.
"Society bears a substantial cost from it."
This is not a problem from drunk driving, this is a problem of socialism.
And think what you may about society bearing costs for unfortunate people, but this perfectly illustrates a point: as soon as someone else is footing the bill for your actions, it gives them a reason to start telling you what you can and can't do.
I for one, would rather take full responsibility for my behavior and be free to make my own choices than to accept ridiculous limitations so that someone else will take care of me when if do something stupid.
For one, I don't expect to be the one doing something stupid. Secondly, safety nets for stupid behavior only promote recklessness.
I have no doubt you have your reasons for needing that, but it seems odd to me that 32 bits would be enough where 31 bits wouldn't cut it.
Is it a problem of running out of numbers or something else?
"Of course, you had to tweak it for all queries"
I don't know if it's gotten any better, but my experience with older versions of MySQL is that the query analyzer was so bad for all but the simplest queries that no amount of tweaking would help. For some queries I'd swear that MySQL was actively trying to do the wrong thing. It ended up being faster to do two separate simple queries in the Perl script. And this is pain-in-the-ass type of thing that benchmarks never show.
I've never had that problem with PostgreSQL. I don't mind tweaking, when tweaking works.
That's scary. I have a FAPP server at home.
Can we all just switch to Postgres now?
Cheap web hosting, I'm looking at you...
Ahhh, thanks. That and Intel's software developer docs helped out a lot.
Most of the web sites just show the little block diagram with a layer of virtualization between "hardware" and "The OS".
"I am all for lowering the limit even below 0.08, not because I want more "gubermint" in by business, but because it's just safer for everyone."
It would be "just safer for everyone" to require that you don't drive for a week after drinking alcohol, and to wear a helmet whenever you do, and yet it's not a law.
Doing things in the name of safety while ignoring the cost is a bad way to do anything.
"Brainf**k"
Thank you for editing out that nasty word, or reading that might have fucked up people's brains.
This joke brought to you from Larry Wall, courtesy of Bluesman Slashdot Posting, INC.
There seem to be a lot more options for "virtualization" lately than VMWare, but never having needed to use multiple OS's at one time, I'm clueless as to the details of how these all work. Are they taking advantage of some new functionality on Intel/AMD chips?
Is there some sort of overview for this stuff?
Who wants to start this? I'm selling options for indie band A at 35 cents a song.
Finally, before the trolls come out, by "value" I'm not talking about artistic value, love, sentimental value, the value of a human life, etc.
"Dollars have a value because the supply is limited."
The supply of Confederate dollars is much more limited, but they are essentially worthless.
The only thing that gives anything value is what someone else is willing to do in exchange for it. People accept dollars in exchange for other things in many places, so it has value as a currency. Why do they do that? Only because everybody else does.
Let's go to the desert island model that's always so helpful. Two people on a desert island, one has water, the other has dollars. What's the inherent value of a dollar there? Nothing. There's no way the guy with the water is going to give it up unwillingly in exchange for dollars.
Now the guy with the water sees a rescue ship on the horizon, and offers the water for $100,000. Why? Because his perceived value of the dollar just went up, because he knows he will be going back to a place where everyone else accepts the dollar.
It seems odd that the value of currency is based completely on emotional things like "willingness," but really that's the way it works.
1:1 And ye, the programmers said, "Let there be text" and there was text. 1:2 And the programmers looked at the text, and saw that it was good. 1:3 On the third day, the programmers said, "Let there be pictures, too, text is boring," and there were pictures too. 1:4 And the programmers looked unto the pictures, and saw that they were good, but pixelated and difficult to animate.
1:5 So then the programmers said, "Let there be anti-aliasing and matrix transformations and hardware support for rendering like the Amiga has," and lo, all of these things came to be on the fourth day. 1:6 And the programmers looked unto all of their creations and gave OpenGL dominion over all hardware accelerated graphics, and on the fifth day they rested.
2:1 But lo, the serpent Microsoft saw OpenGL and said unto him, "You are good, but you could be greater, if you only would listen to me." 2:2 And the serpent took one of OpenGL's ribs and copied OpenGL, and made DirectX. 2:3 And when the programmers looked at what had become of OpenGL, they were angry, and tossed the serpent and DirectX out of the Garden.
The BRAND NEW HTML 5!
Almost as good as TeX!
While I agree completely with your point, the accidental gun death figure you use is wrong. In 2004, there were 649 deaths in the U.S. due to gun accident.
Traffic deaths in the U.S. dwarf the terrorist kill numbers, just like in the UK.
"The moral of the story for all you geeks is: expect women to like you; do not be afraid to challenge them; if you aren't decisive, then fake it; expect them to yield to your boldness; and learn how to dance, because few things are more indicative of a man's confidence than his willingness to make a fool of himself on the dance floor."
Screw that, I'm going to have an operation and become a businesswoman.
There is nothing stopping these people from pooling their resources and making their own insurance company.
That's the American way.
Many years ago military officers had trouble getting various types of car and home insurance because they were deemed more "at risk" than other occupations. They formed USAA, which to this day has some of the lowest insurance rates going.