I agree with you and go one step further...if all they cared about was the space why not go with Abiword [abiword.com]?
I'll make a guess: they didn't select Abiword, because it's probably still instable and bug-ridden. I try Abiword from time to time, and it usually crashes when trying to open even the simplest Word document, or while I try to edit a formula, or while I try to do something even slightly exotic (read: anything that isn't just plain text without formatting). In my view, anyone who praises Abiword, hasn't used it very much.
In one, the cyclist is at the mercy of the car drivers. In the other, he/she is protected from the traffic. Tell me that for you that's an insignificant difference, and I'll point you to the nearest fool.
The copyrights are NOT owned by the authors (the researchers, who did the experiments, compiled the results, came up with theories, ideas, formulas and supporting material, wrote the whole damn thing), but by the journal. Who gets all the revenue, too. The researchers get jack. And their work, since copyrighted, cannot be distributed to the humanity as a whole, even though that was the intention of the scientists.
Not that I'm surprised, at all, but I think this came straight from the Chinese Communist Party's list of wet dreams. What better way to control even the last remnants of political dissent, on the last place where it can still be (somewhat) freely expressed (the Internet)?
Well done Microsoft. You truly suck up majesticly.
I have a similar tale: some 13-14 years ago I was working for this small system integrator. We had a frame-relay connection to the 'net. Then one day we didn't. People were upset and the burden of fixing the problem fell on engineering (me and my colleague). After mucking around our Cirsco router we concluded that there's something wrong downstream, and called the provider. After navigating the famous support maze, we finally were told that a lightning has knocked off one of their major nodes. To "And when were you going to inform us about this?" we got an angry answer "But sir, this has been on our website for hours!"
I don't understand you, or the original title of this submission: no more? Canceled? Disappear?
It's an open source project - anyone can, at any time, now or in the future, work on it, by him/herself or in a group. Opensource is more than just a fancy term. It's like the adamantium armor of +1000 protection.
All ribbons did was take the menus and turn them into tabs, then the items buried under the menus are now out in the open once you select the tab.
That's a notorious lie and people should really stop parroting it! No, a lot of commands are not now available, at least not through the ribbons. And worst is, you can't even add them to the ribbons, even if you know they exist (and they do, because you can find them when you try to add buttons to the button bar, which however the new Office discourages you from using).
So please, just fucking stop repeating this mantra that you can access all the commands through the ribbon - any even slightly advanced user of Word or Excel knows that's bullshit on a popsicle stick.
Hope yours are better designed than the ones in the places I've lived. In the UK the cycle lanes appear to be designed by car drivers for car drivers, and many cyclists believe they're much safer on the road than the cycle path. In Spain half of the cycle lanes I've been on have surfaces so smooth that it's not really safe to go faster than walking pace in the dry, and when it's raining just forget it.
I don't think I'm getting through to you: I said segregated cycling facilities, not "cycle lanes".
What the US needs is segregated cycling facilities, like the ones we have here in Finland, or in Sweden, Denmark, Holland etc.
They cost money to build and maintain, so financially poor countries such as the US and Canada can't afford them. Yeah I am sarcastic, but man, it's the 21st century; not having segregated cycling facilities in a 1st world country should be embarrassing!
Science is made by meatbags. Scientists are meatbags that don't hope to earn much money or fame (save for the very few that get a Nobel prize). No, our motivation is the science and the great things it can do for humankind. Specifically, my research is related to technology that can potentially be used on spacecraft/deep space probes. But if I knew it will only be used so that a rich banker can go to LEO, fuck it, I can go back to a job in industry and make about twice the money I make now. I can easily imagine that manned exploration of the Moon and Mars would similarly invigorate and inspire tens of thousands of US scientists, not to mention the other people involved, and the american public in general. The american nation could again have a big, common dream that transcends their short existence.
The Moon is very important because we can learn how to survive there, and then use that experience ans science to build a base on Mars. Yes, the Moon is in many ways harsher than Mars, but as far as things we can learn, it is still very useful, and the proximity of Earth is very useful in case of unexpected problems. Besides, if Constellation is out, Mars is out, too. It's *not* on.
Finally, I'd like to emphasize the need for manned exploration of Mars and other remote objects, as radio-delay makes robotic probes severely crippled to the point of being useless, compared to humans. A human can find ways to dislodge a stuck wheel, for one thing.
You think a family is analogous to a nation of hundreds of millions? Canceling a space program that could bring mankind to the moon, mars and beyond would produce a shitload of useful science and technology, it would inspire the whole nation, energize it and contribute to pulling it out from the doldrums. Your comparison of such a program with a set of golf clubs tells a lot about your contempt for science and space exploration.
If I made more money, I'd probably have a set of new golf clubs on my wish list for this spring. As it is, I don't have an unlimited budget, and there are other priorities which are higher, such as food, healthcare, and DirecTV. I mention that last one intentionally, by the way.
You see I could do without DirecTV and save myself enough to get a new set of golf clubs every year. Thing is my wife an daughter really like the programming. They don't begrudge me my greens fees or my high power rocket purchases. Each of us gets something from the family budget, though perhaps not all we want. We simply don't have the unlimited funds for that.
It's interesting what happens when you must have a balanced budget - certain choices have to be made.
You fail at comparisons, if you think a family is analogous to a nation of hundreds of millions. It isn't. Canceling a space program that could bring mankind to the moon, mars and beyond would produce a shitload of useful science and technology, it would inspire the whole nation, energize it and contribute to pulling it out from the doldrums. Your comparison of such a program with a set of golf clubs tells a lot about your contempt for science and space exploration.
I am a strong believer that whoever purchases from Steam is a damn fool. You're completely dependant on Steam's whims and existence. Sorry dude, I prefer to own the stuff I paid for.
The Tesla model S sedan will retail for $50,000+ which means that less than 20% (and that is being very generous) of Americans will be able to afford this car. Tesla is a niche and it will always be niche. The best that they (and the taxpayers) could hope for is for them to be bought by one of the major auto manufacturers. Why should the taxpayers be financing car production by boutique manufacturers for wealthy people? If the government subsidizes heavily so that average people can buy this particular car then you have to explain why the government should be in the business of picking winners and losers in the market for private automobiles. If Tesla is such a good investment then why cant they raise $450 million from the private equity market instead of from taxpayers; 99% of whom will never sit behind the wheel of a Tesla?
I have a general comment: Porche makes and always has made sport cars. They've been steadily increasing profits, year after year. They steadily also increased their holdings of VolksWagen Group (to somewhat over 35%) until they merged. So, even if you "only" make luxury cars, you can make profits that are in the same order of magnitude, or even better than, the traditional manufacturers. In fact, Porsche was arguably more solvent than some US car manufacturers have ever been.
I am of the opinion that in the future, the 20th and most of the 19th centuries are going to appear to surviving generations as something of a "dark age". Since publishers started using woodchips to provide the requisite fibre to make paper in about the 1820s, residual acids in the paper have had a destructive effect on the paper. While some quality publications still appear on rag or otherwise stabilised or buffered paper, much has simply disintegrated.
The trouble is, although printers must be aware of the problem, they don't seem to be doing anything about it. I have many texts from the 1980s which are in very poor shape, which is bad enough. But what has disappointed me more is that a number of books I have bought *new* in the last year are already showing signs of serious foxing.
Foxing? I am not sure that means what you think it means: foxing is not caused by paper acidity. It is caused by traces of iron, courtesy of the printing mechanism or the ink itself. These traces make it possible to certain fungi to grow in the paper.
What you see on your more recent books, which are printed on acid-containing paper, is not foxing.
I saw in nice big lettering that they were DRM free. It's kind of like how Oroweat advertises on some of their bread products that they have no high fructose corn syrup
That's a very appropriate analogy, as in both are bad, but somehow everybody pretends that they're somehow "not a big issue". (I'd add aspartame and trans-fats to that list.)
Since I discovered that I can "sample" most games and movies on 'torrent, I've downloaded quite a few of them. However, relatively recently I learned about gog.com, and over the 1.5 years since I signed up, I bought 3 of the games (all DRM-free) available there. This is surprising even to me, as games and movies are a luxury for me, at the moment (wife doesn't have a job, so I'm a sugar daddy, even though I'm just a grad student/researcher). Yet gog.com makes it all really convenient: easy to purchase and download, great titles at very affordable prices, already packaged to run on Windows 2000/XP, and I will always have those titles in my online collection, so I can download them on any computer I like. All in all, I think companies that follow their example can make a decent buck.
Second: saving on space exploration isn't going to do a heck of a lot to the huge US debt. In fact, the Apollo program had a lot of positive influence on the US economy, in the decades that followed. But it was benefit for everybody, not for any given politician or company.
You don't need manned space flight to do any of those things. In-fact manned space flight is a terrible way to do those things. We're already doing awesome things and producing great science using robots. Why on earth would you want to do it with humans?
You need humans if you want to do any of those, except maybe building a base on the Moon. Why, you say? Communication lag and inflexibility. If you instruct your robot to go 2 meters forward, and then wait 40 minutes at least, just to check if it got stuck or everything is fine, you're not going to do much science in a year. A human could do in a day what the two robots on Mars did in all these years. And the lag becomes even more problematic with Europa. Plus, in Europa the robot will probably not have the luxury of waiting for a new command every two to three hours, because it will be diving in the ocean (hopefully this is a submarine robot), because we can't estimate the currents and turbulency existing there.
Communication lag and inflexibility. That's why humans can do much, much more (like many orders of magnitude more) than any currently imaginable robot. Communication lag and inflexibility.
Who gives a flying fuck about privatized LEO launches of some tycoon (apart of the tycoons themselves)? Private companies will not undertake the large-scale, visionary projects like sending people to Mars, building permanent bases on Mars and Moon, reaching Europa and exploring her oceans. Private companies only produce as little science as they possibly can get away with, putting much more emphasis on patenting the crap out of the little they do produce, and then keep it for themselves.
In other words: FAIL!
When Obama said he'll cancel Constellation, he crushed the dreams and hopes of MY generation. Those who grew up in the 50s and 60s in the US and Europe had the ride of their lives, if they had even the slightest affinity for science. That was science that inspired millions, and from the sci-fi movies of the 70's, I'd say people were probably less dumb on average than they are today ("Andromeda Strain", for one example. Compare that to the blockbuster space-operas some call "Sci-fi"). Nowadays scientists are only prodded to make cheaper electronic components and larger plasma screens.
After all, they're only obeying orders, and so they bear absolutely no personal or corporate responsibility for the consequences of their actions. That's how it works, isn't it? Right?
That's right son, just obey the orders. And get that vagonload of Jews to the gas chambers.
You know Microsoft's strategy of embrace, extend, extinguish? Microsoft is embracing China's censorship and lack of social liberties. Let's hope they get to the "extinguish" phase, quick!
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you and go one step further...if all they cared about was the space why not go with Abiword [abiword.com]?
I'll make a guess: they didn't select Abiword, because it's probably still instable and bug-ridden. I try Abiword from time to time, and it usually crashes when trying to open even the simplest Word document, or while I try to edit a formula, or while I try to do something even slightly exotic (read: anything that isn't just plain text without formatting). In my view, anyone who praises Abiword, hasn't used it very much.
In one, the cyclist is at the mercy of the car drivers. In the other, he/she is protected from the traffic. Tell me that for you that's an insignificant difference, and I'll point you to the nearest fool.
The copyrights are NOT owned by the authors (the researchers, who did the experiments, compiled the results, came up with theories, ideas, formulas and supporting material, wrote the whole damn thing), but by the journal. Who gets all the revenue, too. The researchers get jack. And their work, since copyrighted, cannot be distributed to the humanity as a whole, even though that was the intention of the scientists.
Not that I'm surprised, at all, but I think this came straight from the Chinese Communist Party's list of wet dreams. What better way to control even the last remnants of political dissent, on the last place where it can still be (somewhat) freely expressed (the Internet)?
Well done Microsoft. You truly suck up majesticly.
I have a similar tale: some 13-14 years ago I was working for this small system integrator. We had a frame-relay connection to the 'net. Then one day we didn't. People were upset and the burden of fixing the problem fell on engineering (me and my colleague). After mucking around our Cirsco router we concluded that there's something wrong downstream, and called the provider. After navigating the famous support maze, we finally were told that a lightning has knocked off one of their major nodes. To "And when were you going to inform us about this?" we got an angry answer "But sir, this has been on our website for hours!"
So if that were true, then what's all the butthurt over MySQL about?
Good question!
I don't understand you, or the original title of this submission: no more? Canceled? Disappear?
It's an open source project - anyone can, at any time, now or in the future, work on it, by him/herself or in a group. Opensource is more than just a fancy term. It's like the adamantium armor of +1000 protection.
All ribbons did was take the menus and turn them into tabs, then the items buried under the menus are now out in the open once you select the tab.
That's a notorious lie and people should really stop parroting it! No, a lot of commands are not now available, at least not through the ribbons. And worst is, you can't even add them to the ribbons, even if you know they exist (and they do, because you can find them when you try to add buttons to the button bar, which however the new Office discourages you from using).
So please, just fucking stop repeating this mantra that you can access all the commands through the ribbon - any even slightly advanced user of Word or Excel knows that's bullshit on a popsicle stick.
Hope yours are better designed than the ones in the places I've lived. In the UK the cycle lanes appear to be designed by car drivers for car drivers, and many cyclists believe they're much safer on the road than the cycle path. In Spain half of the cycle lanes I've been on have surfaces so smooth that it's not really safe to go faster than walking pace in the dry, and when it's raining just forget it.
I don't think I'm getting through to you: I said segregated cycling facilities, not "cycle lanes".
What the US needs is segregated cycling facilities, like the ones we have here in Finland, or in Sweden, Denmark, Holland etc.
They cost money to build and maintain, so financially poor countries such as the US and Canada can't afford them. Yeah I am sarcastic, but man, it's the 21st century; not having segregated cycling facilities in a 1st world country should be embarrassing!
However, since it loads a visible portion quickly, people believe it is wayy faster than FF.
Since one can see the text and other features of the page faster with Chrome, for all intents and purposes it is faster.
I am a huge fan of HoMM. Could you please tell me which is your HoMM website?
Science is made by meatbags. Scientists are meatbags that don't hope to earn much money or fame (save for the very few that get a Nobel prize). No, our motivation is the science and the great things it can do for humankind. Specifically, my research is related to technology that can potentially be used on spacecraft/deep space probes. But if I knew it will only be used so that a rich banker can go to LEO, fuck it, I can go back to a job in industry and make about twice the money I make now. I can easily imagine that manned exploration of the Moon and Mars would similarly invigorate and inspire tens of thousands of US scientists, not to mention the other people involved, and the american public in general. The american nation could again have a big, common dream that transcends their short existence.
The Moon is very important because we can learn how to survive there, and then use that experience ans science to build a base on Mars. Yes, the Moon is in many ways harsher than Mars, but as far as things we can learn, it is still very useful, and the proximity of Earth is very useful in case of unexpected problems. Besides, if Constellation is out, Mars is out, too. It's *not* on.
Finally, I'd like to emphasize the need for manned exploration of Mars and other remote objects, as radio-delay makes robotic probes severely crippled to the point of being useless, compared to humans. A human can find ways to dislodge a stuck wheel, for one thing.
You think a family is analogous to a nation of hundreds of millions? Canceling a space program that could bring mankind to the moon, mars and beyond would produce a shitload of useful science and technology, it would inspire the whole nation, energize it and contribute to pulling it out from the doldrums. Your comparison of such a program with a set of golf clubs tells a lot about your contempt for science and space exploration.
If I made more money, I'd probably have a set of new golf clubs on my wish list for this spring. As it is, I don't have an unlimited budget, and there are other priorities which are higher, such as food, healthcare, and DirecTV. I mention that last one intentionally, by the way.
You see I could do without DirecTV and save myself enough to get a new set of golf clubs every year. Thing is my wife an daughter really like the programming. They don't begrudge me my greens fees or my high power rocket purchases. Each of us gets something from the family budget, though perhaps not all we want. We simply don't have the unlimited funds for that.
It's interesting what happens when you must have a balanced budget - certain choices have to be made.
You fail at comparisons, if you think a family is analogous to a nation of hundreds of millions. It isn't. Canceling a space program that could bring mankind to the moon, mars and beyond would produce a shitload of useful science and technology, it would inspire the whole nation, energize it and contribute to pulling it out from the doldrums. Your comparison of such a program with a set of golf clubs tells a lot about your contempt for science and space exploration.
I am a strong believer that whoever purchases from Steam is a damn fool. You're completely dependant on Steam's whims and existence. Sorry dude, I prefer to own the stuff I paid for.
The Tesla model S sedan will retail for $50,000+ which means that less than 20% (and that is being very generous) of Americans will be able to afford this car. Tesla is a niche and it will always be niche. The best that they (and the taxpayers) could hope for is for them to be bought by one of the major auto manufacturers. Why should the taxpayers be financing car production by boutique manufacturers for wealthy people? If the government subsidizes heavily so that average people can buy this particular car then you have to explain why the government should be in the business of picking winners and losers in the market for private automobiles. If Tesla is such a good investment then why cant they raise $450 million from the private equity market instead of from taxpayers; 99% of whom will never sit behind the wheel of a Tesla?
I have a general comment: Porche makes and always has made sport cars. They've been steadily increasing profits, year after year. They steadily also increased their holdings of VolksWagen Group (to somewhat over 35%) until they merged. So, even if you "only" make luxury cars, you can make profits that are in the same order of magnitude, or even better than, the traditional manufacturers. In fact, Porsche was arguably more solvent than some US car manufacturers have ever been.
I am of the opinion that in the future, the 20th and most of the 19th centuries are going to appear to surviving generations as something of a "dark age". Since publishers started using woodchips to provide the requisite fibre to make paper in about the 1820s, residual acids in the paper have had a destructive effect on the paper. While some quality publications still appear on rag or otherwise stabilised or buffered paper, much has simply disintegrated.
The trouble is, although printers must be aware of the problem, they don't seem to be doing anything about it. I have many texts from the 1980s which are in very poor shape, which is bad enough. But what has disappointed me more is that a number of books I have bought *new* in the last year are already showing signs of serious foxing.
Foxing? I am not sure that means what you think it means: foxing is not caused by paper acidity. It is caused by traces of iron, courtesy of the printing mechanism or the ink itself. These traces make it possible to certain fungi to grow in the paper.
What you see on your more recent books, which are printed on acid-containing paper, is not foxing.
I saw in nice big lettering that they were DRM free. It's kind of like how Oroweat advertises on some of their bread products that they have no high fructose corn syrup
That's a very appropriate analogy, as in both are bad, but somehow everybody pretends that they're somehow "not a big issue".
(I'd add aspartame and trans-fats to that list.)
Since I discovered that I can "sample" most games and movies on 'torrent, I've downloaded quite a few of them. However, relatively recently I learned about gog.com, and over the 1.5 years since I signed up, I bought 3 of the games (all DRM-free) available there. This is surprising even to me, as games and movies are a luxury for me, at the moment (wife doesn't have a job, so I'm a sugar daddy, even though I'm just a grad student/researcher). Yet gog.com makes it all really convenient: easy to purchase and download, great titles at very affordable prices, already packaged to run on Windows 2000/XP, and I will always have those titles in my online collection, so I can download them on any computer I like. All in all, I think companies that follow their example can make a decent buck.
First of all, smartypants, my country is Finland.
Second: saving on space exploration isn't going to do a heck of a lot to the huge US debt. In fact, the Apollo program had a lot of positive influence on the US economy, in the decades that followed. But it was benefit for everybody, not for any given politician or company.
You don't need manned space flight to do any of those things. In-fact manned space flight is a terrible way to do those things. We're already doing awesome things and producing great science using robots. Why on earth would you want to do it with humans?
You need humans if you want to do any of those, except maybe building a base on the Moon. Why, you say? Communication lag and inflexibility. If you instruct your robot to go 2 meters forward, and then wait 40 minutes at least, just to check if it got stuck or everything is fine, you're not going to do much science in a year. A human could do in a day what the two robots on Mars did in all these years. And the lag becomes even more problematic with Europa. Plus, in Europa the robot will probably not have the luxury of waiting for a new command every two to three hours, because it will be diving in the ocean (hopefully this is a submarine robot), because we can't estimate the currents and turbulency existing there.
Communication lag and inflexibility. That's why humans can do much, much more (like many orders of magnitude more) than any currently imaginable robot. Communication lag and inflexibility.
Who gives a flying fuck about privatized LEO launches of some tycoon (apart of the tycoons themselves)? Private companies will not undertake the large-scale, visionary projects like sending people to Mars, building permanent bases on Mars and Moon, reaching Europa and exploring her oceans. Private companies only produce as little science as they possibly can get away with, putting much more emphasis on patenting the crap out of the little they do produce, and then keep it for themselves.
In other words: FAIL!
When Obama said he'll cancel Constellation, he crushed the dreams and hopes of MY generation. Those who grew up in the 50s and 60s in the US and Europe had the ride of their lives, if they had even the slightest affinity for science. That was science that inspired millions, and from the sci-fi movies of the 70's, I'd say people were probably less dumb on average than they are today ("Andromeda Strain", for one example. Compare that to the blockbuster space-operas some call "Sci-fi"). Nowadays scientists are only prodded to make cheaper electronic components and larger plasma screens.
After all, they're only obeying orders, and so they bear absolutely no personal or corporate responsibility for the consequences of their actions. That's how it works, isn't it? Right?
That's right son, just obey the orders. And get that vagonload of Jews to the gas chambers.
You know Microsoft's strategy of embrace, extend, extinguish? Microsoft is embracing China's censorship and lack of social liberties. Let's hope they get to the "extinguish" phase, quick!