That's the most obvious, best, first step. It won't get done, though; so don't hold your breath about getting reform. The question seems to be only "which massive bureacratic centralized method of ruining education will we choose?"
I'm also skeptical of the idea that phones will put an end to independent gaming devices. For one thing, there has yet to be a phone that is at all adequate for running games on; I know there are games for the iPhone, but the vast majority are hugely hampered by the interface. In gaming, the control interface (buttons, joysticks) are as important as the display. Gamers don't WANT their device any smaller than a DS or PSP; some want it larger.
In addition, I might let my eight year old son have a DS, but no way in hell is he getting a cellphone.
I think it might be possible that some future iteration of the DS, PSP, or other console incorporates some VOIP into it's internet link; or perhaps even include full cellular technology. But at that point, is the cell phone replacing the gaming device, or the gaming device replacing the cellphone?
Right. Of course these machines are vulnerable to Van Eck phreaking. Pretty much everything with a CRT and a lot of LCDs are vulnerable. That's barely more of a true security flaw than the fact that the machines are vulnerable to hiding a camera in the poling booth.
I often don't WANT my cellphone anywhere near me. No, turning it off isn't sufficient; I don't want the bastard anywhere on my person. I rarely feel the same way about my watch.
While I don't know that the OP is correct about the energy cost of production exceeding the lifetime energy production of a panel, that IS something that needs to be taken into the equation. The same thing applies for all 'green' technology... if it is MORE expensive/harmful to produce than similar non-green technology, it might be a net loss. One example might be the move from incandescents to fluorescents... while flourescents are much cheaper to operate, they're more expensive to produce and more polluting when used up. They still might be a net gain, but the math needs to be done, the overall effects measured.
Store air in a vertical tank. If the air has an average pressure P, it will naturally (due to gravity) form a pressure gradient. The air at the bottom will be slightly higher then P, the air at the top will be slightly less.
Now attach it to another tank, with an inlet leading from the bottom of the first tank to the top of the second. The new tank will pressure equalize, but the top will be equal to the bottom P from the first tank; the bottom P will be even higher. Disconnect, and then repeat with more tanks, each time using the peak pressure of the first tank to feed into the point of minimum pressure in the second tank. With enough increments, an arbitrarily high pressure can be achieved. Of course, this isn't really practical; it requires too many small steps to obtain useful pressures.
The unwashed masses would buy products made of dead baby carcasses.
I've always hated that term. People who refer to "the unwashed masses" always implicitly mean there exists the "enlighted minority", who is very superior, and always agrees with the person making the claim.
Why not just call them "peasants"? It's what you mean.
You're mistaken in thinking that the buildup of smoke residue on the device is particularly toxic. You have no particular evidence that is true; handling nicotine/tar in solid form is obviously very different than inhaling it in atomized form. Your asbestos parallel is apt; in most circumstances, asbestos is perfectly harmless.
It seems like you need to emotionally distance yourself from the issue and view it more dispassionately.
While I don't doubt that there are organizations that are thrilled to exaggerate the panic from Swine Flu, I doubt the vaccine makers are a significant driving force. I think the pushers are the various government and national health agencies... trying to inflate their own importance, justify their existence, and increase their budgets.
I believe that anyone that actually needs the data AND is potentially capable of using it correctly can access it. Raw data without context is not very useful. In other words, all of the assumptions, conclusions and adjustments is what makes raw data into useful data. I'm sure a lot of people THINK they can use and interpret the data better. But then there are a lot of inquisitive idiots out there. And many with an agenda. But many fewer scientists with the ability to do the needed research.
Define "capable of using it correctly". Any organization or bureaucracy will define it as "support our own agenda". You honestly think that making data freely available is a bad thing? That's thoroughly nuts, and I'm surprised that anybody on slashdot is promoting such a view.
If that actually worked, MS will be denied the patent, and nobody else can patent it. If it doesn't work, MS will be granted the patent. Either way, it's a smart thing for MS to do.
One is far worse than the other. Obviously, adding another task to an already resident part of the operating system that is intended for such use is far better than adding a completely new program, that runs continuously as a new process... both for performance and security. This problem is compounded when you have several pieces of software each with their own unique persistent updater.
Is it possible to nominate the parent for dumbest comment of the day ?
I wonder if you can compute the time necessary for pass-phrases? For example, if your passphrase is composed of a grammatically correct English sentence, but is ten words long... it would take forever by a dumb password cracker routine, but if they're smart and armed with a dictionary, maybe not. I suppose you should introduce deliberate misspellings.
I got a "bug report" that our Oracle Forms app would give an undefined error message after you "type in a first name, push tab twice, and click save 17 times." I didn't debug it, but I did offer a workaround.
Was the workaround something like "Don't click save more than 16 times?"
You can hide the awesomebar by tweaking settings and add-ons... first thing I do on any Firefox installation. However, the code is still out there, taking up space, and I have a hunch it's still causing a performance hit. My understanding is that it spawns a database query every keystroke in the address bar, sometimes multiple queries if there are lots of matches. I sometimes get stalls when I type into the location bar, and I wonder if the cause is that it's still making the queries, just hiding the results.
The awesomebar should always have been an optional add-on. That's how ALL the bloat-features should be handled. I still prefer Firefox more than any other browser, but my amount of proselytizing has sure decreased.
It was obviously a puppet. Just as obviously, it exists. Just as most CGI obviously doesn't. Neither effect can really be mistaken for the actual object they're representing, but at least the puppet is tangible, striking better emotional cues amongst the other actors and the audience.
Crap, I made a number of syntax errors in that post, because I revised it partway through. Sorry, everybody. Let me try again:
-----
You mean, digital will be able to introduce the flaws and errors that were part of the tape process?
Sometimes flaws improve art, like in the case of a film grain or desaturation improving a particular photo... but you need to be sure that you're not just recreating a flaw because you're USED to it.
In the attached article, if people couldn't distinguish between an MP3 and FLAC, it was because the MP3 was good enough no flaws could be detected. That's fine; people can't distinguish good compression from the real thing. However, if they COULD distinguish an MP3, but preferred to the flac, it was because they found the error pleasing... just like you and tapes.
You mean, digital will be able to introduce the flaws and errors that were part of the tape process?
Sometimes flaws improve art, like in the case of a film grain or desaturation can improving a particular photo. But you need to be sure that you're not just recreating a flaw because you're USED to it.
In the attached article, if people could distinguish between an MP3 and FLAC, it was because the MP3 was good enough no flaws could be detected. That's fine; people can't distinguish good compression from the real thing. However, if they COULD distinguish an MP3, but preferred to the flac, it was because they found the error pleasing... just like you and tapes.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the most obvious, best, first step. It won't get done, though; so don't hold your breath about getting reform. The question seems to be only "which massive bureacratic centralized method of ruining education will we choose?"
That's how it becomes a rumor. Prior to that, it may have been just one slashdotter's wild fantasy.
I'm also skeptical of the idea that phones will put an end to independent gaming devices. For one thing, there has yet to be a phone that is at all adequate for running games on; I know there are games for the iPhone, but the vast majority are hugely hampered by the interface. In gaming, the control interface (buttons, joysticks) are as important as the display. Gamers don't WANT their device any smaller than a DS or PSP; some want it larger.
In addition, I might let my eight year old son have a DS, but no way in hell is he getting a cellphone.
I think it might be possible that some future iteration of the DS, PSP, or other console incorporates some VOIP into it's internet link; or perhaps even include full cellular technology. But at that point, is the cell phone replacing the gaming device, or the gaming device replacing the cellphone?
Yeah, I know. I was just wondering if something like this would be moderated as a troll or as funny.
Right. Of course these machines are vulnerable to Van Eck phreaking. Pretty much everything with a CRT and a lot of LCDs are vulnerable. That's barely more of a true security flaw than the fact that the machines are vulnerable to hiding a camera in the poling booth.
This really calls for a Douglas Adams reference.
I often don't WANT my cellphone anywhere near me. No, turning it off isn't sufficient; I don't want the bastard anywhere on my person. I rarely feel the same way about my watch.
While I don't know that the OP is correct about the energy cost of production exceeding the lifetime energy production of a panel, that IS something that needs to be taken into the equation. The same thing applies for all 'green' technology... if it is MORE expensive/harmful to produce than similar non-green technology, it might be a net loss. One example might be the move from incandescents to fluorescents... while flourescents are much cheaper to operate, they're more expensive to produce and more polluting when used up. They still might be a net gain, but the math needs to be done, the overall effects measured.
Store air in a vertical tank. If the air has an average pressure P, it will naturally (due to gravity) form a pressure gradient. The air at the bottom will be slightly higher then P, the air at the top will be slightly less.
Now attach it to another tank, with an inlet leading from the bottom of the first tank to the top of the second. The new tank will pressure equalize, but the top will be equal to the bottom P from the first tank; the bottom P will be even higher. Disconnect, and then repeat with more tanks, each time using the peak pressure of the first tank to feed into the point of minimum pressure in the second tank. With enough increments, an arbitrarily high pressure can be achieved. Of course, this isn't really practical; it requires too many small steps to obtain useful pressures.
The unwashed masses would buy products made of dead baby carcasses.
I've always hated that term. People who refer to "the unwashed masses" always implicitly mean there exists the "enlighted minority", who is very superior, and always agrees with the person making the claim.
Why not just call them "peasants"? It's what you mean.
You're mistaken in thinking that the buildup of smoke residue on the device is particularly toxic. You have no particular evidence that is true; handling nicotine/tar in solid form is obviously very different than inhaling it in atomized form. Your asbestos parallel is apt; in most circumstances, asbestos is perfectly harmless.
It seems like you need to emotionally distance yourself from the issue and view it more dispassionately.
While I don't doubt that there are organizations that are thrilled to exaggerate the panic from Swine Flu, I doubt the vaccine makers are a significant driving force. I think the pushers are the various government and national health agencies... trying to inflate their own importance, justify their existence, and increase their budgets.
I believe that anyone that actually needs the data AND is potentially capable of using it correctly can access it. Raw data without context is not very useful. In other words, all of the assumptions, conclusions and adjustments is what makes raw data into useful data. I'm sure a lot of people THINK they can use and interpret the data better. But then there are a lot of inquisitive idiots out there. And many with an agenda. But many fewer scientists with the ability to do the needed research.
Define "capable of using it correctly". Any organization or bureaucracy will define it as "support our own agenda". You honestly think that making data freely available is a bad thing? That's thoroughly nuts, and I'm surprised that anybody on slashdot is promoting such a view.
If that actually worked, MS will be denied the patent, and nobody else can patent it. If it doesn't work, MS will be granted the patent. Either way, it's a smart thing for MS to do.
One is far worse than the other. Obviously, adding another task to an already resident part of the operating system that is intended for such use is far better than adding a completely new program, that runs continuously as a new process... both for performance and security. This problem is compounded when you have several pieces of software each with their own unique persistent updater.
Is it possible to nominate the parent for dumbest comment of the day ?
Possible, but he has some notable competition.
Awarding Obama the prize wasn't so much about Obama as it was about the international community giving George W. Bush the finger.
In other words, the international community has the maturity of a high school kid.
I wonder if you can compute the time necessary for pass-phrases? For example, if your passphrase is composed of a grammatically correct English sentence, but is ten words long... it would take forever by a dumb password cracker routine, but if they're smart and armed with a dictionary, maybe not. I suppose you should introduce deliberate misspellings.
Perhaps they will strike a deal with Microsoft to get back at Firefox.
Thereby boosting Firefox's market share.
But caps are more standardized. Many forums don't handle italics. There's nothing wrong with the OCCASIONAL capitalized word for emphasis.
I got a "bug report" that our Oracle Forms app would give an undefined error message after you "type in a first name, push tab twice, and click save 17 times." I didn't debug it, but I did offer a workaround.
Was the workaround something like "Don't click save more than 16 times?"
You can hide the awesomebar by tweaking settings and add-ons... first thing I do on any Firefox installation. However, the code is still out there, taking up space, and I have a hunch it's still causing a performance hit. My understanding is that it spawns a database query every keystroke in the address bar, sometimes multiple queries if there are lots of matches. I sometimes get stalls when I type into the location bar, and I wonder if the cause is that it's still making the queries, just hiding the results.
The awesomebar should always have been an optional add-on. That's how ALL the bloat-features should be handled. I still prefer Firefox more than any other browser, but my amount of proselytizing has sure decreased.
The Mainstream media LOVED Bush. They don't seem to like Obama as much.
That was the first laugh-out-loud comment I've read on Slashdot today. The fact that you seem serious makes it funnier.
You don't think a puppet is a real thing?
It was obviously a puppet. Just as obviously, it exists. Just as most CGI obviously doesn't. Neither effect can really be mistaken for the actual object they're representing, but at least the puppet is tangible, striking better emotional cues amongst the other actors and the audience.
Crap, I made a number of syntax errors in that post, because I revised it partway through. Sorry, everybody. Let me try again: ----- You mean, digital will be able to introduce the flaws and errors that were part of the tape process? Sometimes flaws improve art, like in the case of a film grain or desaturation improving a particular photo... but you need to be sure that you're not just recreating a flaw because you're USED to it. In the attached article, if people couldn't distinguish between an MP3 and FLAC, it was because the MP3 was good enough no flaws could be detected. That's fine; people can't distinguish good compression from the real thing. However, if they COULD distinguish an MP3, but preferred to the flac, it was because they found the error pleasing... just like you and tapes.
You mean, digital will be able to introduce the flaws and errors that were part of the tape process?
Sometimes flaws improve art, like in the case of a film grain or desaturation can improving a particular photo. But you need to be sure that you're not just recreating a flaw because you're USED to it.
In the attached article, if people could distinguish between an MP3 and FLAC, it was because the MP3 was good enough no flaws could be detected. That's fine; people can't distinguish good compression from the real thing. However, if they COULD distinguish an MP3, but preferred to the flac, it was because they found the error pleasing... just like you and tapes.