I've listened to everything Glass has ever put on vinyl/cd/the internet, seen him live playing piano, seen his pieces performed live, watched the films he's scored: you name it, I've heard it. And I can say categorically that he doesn't use silence, and in fact seems to hate silence. Maybe in his earliest minimalist phase, maybe then, but otherwise, absolutely not under any circumstance could Philip Glass be said to use silence.
Why do I hear this so often? Why can the customer not be both the person watching and the person advertising? Simply because one pays money and other does not? No, the content is the product. The customer is both the watcher and the advertiser; the content provider is incentivised to provide quality programming to please the watcher, and the please the advertiser. Thus they make money.
Should this be the way it is? I don't think so. I'd pay money for a quality show. They could give new shows away for free to get people interested, to get watchers hooked. And the numbers would be way more solid.
Correct. I don't think most people really understand how recent the latest incarnation of Islam is. Sixty years? Seventy at most? It's not classical Islam, it's a mutant form that clearly ignores (with some very, very fancy hermeneutics and philosophical hand-waving) the clearest of the Qur'an's commandments and prohibitions.
Muslims are not supposed to kill Muslims like Islamists do all the time. Muslims are forbidden from suicide: There is no promise of virgins and paradise, there is in fact the very opposite. Muslims and the people of the book are supposed to live in, if not peace, at least tolerance.
Jews in Palestine, for instance, had a relatively good existence until just after the second world war. Combine the creation of the Israeli state with widespread Nazi propaganda and the tide changes. The "fundamentalists" who really aren't fundamentalists but radicals, co-opt that and use it for their own means. Then they target the British. Then they target the Soviets. Now they're targeting America and, repulsively, their own people. Arabs and Muslims who they declare heretics because they will not abide by the radical re-interpretation of the Qur'an that the Islamists have created.
The history of these groups is muddled and confusing. Their reasons are not clear. But what is clear is that they are not representatives of Islam proper. They are representations of a radical religious and political cause, orthogonal to Mohammed's original intentions.
In Canada, most of the people manning the polls are young. We pay a lot of money for poll staff; the spots go quickly once an election has been called.
Too bad your are conveniently forgetting that REAL corporate customers want someone to sue when things go wrong. This is either a moronic thing to write, or you're trying to write something else and this came out instead. Contrary to popular opinion, companies don't like to sue. Suing is expensive, time-consuming, and puts the issue in the hands of third-party: companies only like to sue when they're virtually assured of winning, or when some other consideration is in play that means they don't even have to win the battle to win the war, if you will
What companies are trying to do is ensure
That they do due diligence to their shareholders
That they have the appropriate support channels available
That they cover their asses
and not necessarily in that order.
No-one, no-one wants to be in the position of having a critical system fail, and be caught holding the "oh I'm going to browse the CentOS forum for an answer" bag. No-one. The smart thing to do is buy a support contract, and when that critical system fails and you can't figure it out right away, you get the support you paid for.
That's why people pay Red Hat money. Not because they want to sue Red Hat when things go wrong. Because they want to fix things when they go wrong.
The deeply insightful articles over the years about the Rise and Fall of Bush? An era that's come to an end, my friend. Once the was much Bush, now you can glance through the magazine without encountering any.
Finally, a multiple desktop application made by Microsoft itself. Now I don't have to put up with half-assed, buggy, slow 3rd-party solutions! I can use a half-assed, buggy, slow 1st party solution!
If you read the article, it refers to event IDs. Which means, of course, that everything (?) that happens on Facebook is assigned an integer and they were running out of integers or at least foresaw that possibility. This is much, much more reasonable than wanting to register more people than exist on the earth right now. But it makes it a lot less newsworthy, and a whole lot more boring.
If the patent system is really as screwed up as all that, will the prior art in this case matter? Because as far as I can tell, patent trolls have existed since nearly the very beginning of the system.
The main point I would make is that the RAID is transparent, that there's no actual setup, no hardware or software to fiddle with. But there's no reason that such a drive couldn't be as modular as a regular array. Just pop open the top, snap in a new module, and let the built-in mechanism go to work.
Even if all those other factors are indeed moot -- in a hypothetical product, mind you -- the convenience alone would be worth it, especially for a home user.
Because you could just buy two 3.5" drives and run them in RAID1 yourself? It only costs money. I think you're missing the point. You have to do that yourself, it takes money, and most importantly it takes up space and electricity.
Put two hard drives in a 3.5" enclosure and have them run a seamless RAID 1. The user doesn't have to be involved in that.
Then if one part of the array fails, sure, you have to replace the array, but you don't lose your data. That's the most important thing. Hard drive costs pale in comparison to the cost of replacing data.
The Steve, 6000 years ago, created signed apps with the rest of the iWorld. However, as he is a vengeful God, he gave this innovation to Microsoft, for the greater glory of Apple, may it live forever.
Someone alert the scientific community that sound from the sun used to travel through the luminiferous aether, but due to recent advances in physics the sun has fallen oddly silent! It's like a giant vacuum is sucking all the sound out of the sun!!!
Come on. Don't bother. Since when has math ever helped anybody? The US, for instance, is terrible at math, yet it's the world's only superpower. Who cares that Lockheed Martin aren't able to convert between metric and imperial? So they made a several billion dollar (that might be wrong, I'm as bad as they are at math) boo-boo.
Bottom line: If you can't do it without the help of Texas Instruments, it's not worth doing.
And weapons. The energisation of space will be accompanied by the militarisation thereof. No question. If there is a critical asset in orbit, something that the USA can simply not afford to lose, it will be protected. Even if this space-based power isn't a feasible weapon in its own right (and I can't really see, from any descriptions I've read online, how it could be), it will be protected. And critical orbital assets will be protected from space. There's no other good way to do it.
This is one of the reasons the US military is interested in space-based power. One of the many, of course. Providing troops with power is a benefit. The militarisation of space, the extension into earth's orbit of US control, is a benefit. It's an exercise for the reader to decide which is a tangential benefit, and which is primary.
My office's experience with OO.o (we use it exclusively on twenty or so workstations) is that it makes spreadsheets, and that it makes documents, and that it makes presentations. And that it does them fine. Most of the people in my office are aware that they're not using MSO, but don't seem to really care. No one is writing applications on top of databases or spreadsheets.
There are lots of things I'd like to make better about the program, of course. But for what we use it for, it's great. The problem is not OO.o. The problem is the paradigm these suites operate under. Why are we working with these old and busted concepts instead of making something new, different, and (especially) collaborative? Office suites are these one-person-at-a-desk things. Nobody actually works like that. Our in-house wiki is both easier to use and more useful than a whole bunch of separate documents. This is a clue that nobody seems to be picking up.
And for non-American nerds, Football is a team sport played between two teams of 11 players. It is the most popular sport in the world. Football is a ball game played on a rectangular grass or artificial turf field, with a goal at each of the short ends. The object of the game is to score by manoeuvring the ball into the opposing goal. In general play, the goalkeeper is the only player allowed to use their hands or arms to propel the ball; the rest of the team usually use their feet to kick the ball into position, occasionally using their torso or head to intercept a ball in mid air. The team that scores the most goals by the end of the match wins.
This is the problem with purists: endless classifications that serve no real purpose except to exclude. Classifications do this automatically -- of course -- and some are valid -- of course! -- but when it comes down to an absurd pissing contest about who can be the most pure on a particular subject, you have to ask if there isn't something wrong.
I see this in music all the time. You get "purists" who believe that it's somehow helpful to have jazz fusion and Indo-jazz fusion and Indo-jazz Bollywood fusion and Indo-jazz Bollywood fusion fuzz-pop. The same with games. Is it a first person shooter? I don't know; is it in the first person, and do you spend a lot of time shooting? The answer to this question seems pretty straight-forward.
Of course now some purist purist is going to come along and tell me why it's important that purists constantly and consciously engage in follicle division, and why there are seven kinds of purists, and this is their genus, et cetera. You know what? We're not 19th century scientists any more. Not everything needs a rigorous classification system.
This is an honest question: how is this work important? I really would like to know. Other than providing some work for skilled technical labourers like myself, what do these things do other than point at the sky?
Slashdot Mirror
I've listened to everything Glass has ever put on vinyl/cd/the internet, seen him live playing piano, seen his pieces performed live, watched the films he's scored: you name it, I've heard it. And I can say categorically that he doesn't use silence, and in fact seems to hate silence. Maybe in his earliest minimalist phase, maybe then, but otherwise, absolutely not under any circumstance could Philip Glass be said to use silence.
Why do I hear this so often? Why can the customer not be both the person watching and the person advertising? Simply because one pays money and other does not? No, the content is the product. The customer is both the watcher and the advertiser; the content provider is incentivised to provide quality programming to please the watcher, and the please the advertiser. Thus they make money.
Should this be the way it is? I don't think so. I'd pay money for a quality show. They could give new shows away for free to get people interested, to get watchers hooked. And the numbers would be way more solid.
Correct. I don't think most people really understand how recent the latest incarnation of Islam is. Sixty years? Seventy at most? It's not classical Islam, it's a mutant form that clearly ignores (with some very, very fancy hermeneutics and philosophical hand-waving) the clearest of the Qur'an's commandments and prohibitions.
Muslims are not supposed to kill Muslims like Islamists do all the time. Muslims are forbidden from suicide: There is no promise of virgins and paradise, there is in fact the very opposite. Muslims and the people of the book are supposed to live in, if not peace, at least tolerance.
Jews in Palestine, for instance, had a relatively good existence until just after the second world war. Combine the creation of the Israeli state with widespread Nazi propaganda and the tide changes. The "fundamentalists" who really aren't fundamentalists but radicals, co-opt that and use it for their own means. Then they target the British. Then they target the Soviets. Now they're targeting America and, repulsively, their own people. Arabs and Muslims who they declare heretics because they will not abide by the radical re-interpretation of the Qur'an that the Islamists have created.
The history of these groups is muddled and confusing. Their reasons are not clear. But what is clear is that they are not representatives of Islam proper. They are representations of a radical religious and political cause, orthogonal to Mohammed's original intentions.
In Canada, most of the people manning the polls are young. We pay a lot of money for poll staff; the spots go quickly once an election has been called.
What companies are trying to do is ensure
- That they do due diligence to their shareholders
- That they have the appropriate support channels available
- That they cover their asses
and not necessarily in that order.No-one, no-one wants to be in the position of having a critical system fail, and be caught holding the "oh I'm going to browse the CentOS forum for an answer" bag. No-one. The smart thing to do is buy a support contract, and when that critical system fails and you can't figure it out right away, you get the support you paid for.
That's why people pay Red Hat money. Not because they want to sue Red Hat when things go wrong. Because they want to fix things when they go wrong.
The deeply insightful articles over the years about the Rise and Fall of Bush? An era that's come to an end, my friend. Once the was much Bush, now you can glance through the magazine without encountering any.
Oh how the might have fallen. Er... shaved.
Finally, a multiple desktop application made by Microsoft itself. Now I don't have to put up with half-assed, buggy, slow 3rd-party solutions! I can use a half-assed, buggy, slow 1st party solution!
If you read the article, it refers to event IDs. Which means, of course, that everything (?) that happens on Facebook is assigned an integer and they were running out of integers or at least foresaw that possibility. This is much, much more reasonable than wanting to register more people than exist on the earth right now. But it makes it a lot less newsworthy, and a whole lot more boring.
If the patent system is really as screwed up as all that, will the prior art in this case matter? Because as far as I can tell, patent trolls have existed since nearly the very beginning of the system.
I don't suppose anyone has considered that they might use said patent to sue trolls out of existence. Which would be neat, and altogether too ironic.
The main point I would make is that the RAID is transparent, that there's no actual setup, no hardware or software to fiddle with. But there's no reason that such a drive couldn't be as modular as a regular array. Just pop open the top, snap in a new module, and let the built-in mechanism go to work.
Even if all those other factors are indeed moot -- in a hypothetical product, mind you -- the convenience alone would be worth it, especially for a home user.
Put two hard drives in a 3.5" enclosure and have them run a seamless RAID 1. The user doesn't have to be involved in that.
Then if one part of the array fails, sure, you have to replace the array, but you don't lose your data. That's the most important thing. Hard drive costs pale in comparison to the cost of replacing data.
The Steve, 6000 years ago, created signed apps with the rest of the iWorld. However, as he is a vengeful God, he gave this innovation to Microsoft, for the greater glory of Apple, may it live forever.
Someone alert the scientific community that sound from the sun used to travel through the luminiferous aether, but due to recent advances in physics the sun has fallen oddly silent! It's like a giant vacuum is sucking all the sound out of the sun!!!
You can also try putting together a coherent version of String Theory. Frankly, if that doesn't help you with your maths, it's a lost cause.
Clearly that's not sarcasm there. Couldn't be. No way.
Come on. Don't bother. Since when has math ever helped anybody? The US, for instance, is terrible at math, yet it's the world's only superpower. Who cares that Lockheed Martin aren't able to convert between metric and imperial? So they made a several billion dollar (that might be wrong, I'm as bad as they are at math) boo-boo.
Bottom line: If you can't do it without the help of Texas Instruments, it's not worth doing.
And weapons. The energisation of space will be accompanied by the militarisation thereof. No question. If there is a critical asset in orbit, something that the USA can simply not afford to lose, it will be protected. Even if this space-based power isn't a feasible weapon in its own right (and I can't really see, from any descriptions I've read online, how it could be), it will be protected. And critical orbital assets will be protected from space. There's no other good way to do it.
This is one of the reasons the US military is interested in space-based power. One of the many, of course. Providing troops with power is a benefit. The militarisation of space, the extension into earth's orbit of US control, is a benefit. It's an exercise for the reader to decide which is a tangential benefit, and which is primary.
My office's experience with OO.o (we use it exclusively on twenty or so workstations) is that it makes spreadsheets, and that it makes documents, and that it makes presentations. And that it does them fine. Most of the people in my office are aware that they're not using MSO, but don't seem to really care. No one is writing applications on top of databases or spreadsheets.
There are lots of things I'd like to make better about the program, of course. But for what we use it for, it's great. The problem is not OO.o. The problem is the paradigm these suites operate under. Why are we working with these old and busted concepts instead of making something new, different, and (especially) collaborative? Office suites are these one-person-at-a-desk things. Nobody actually works like that. Our in-house wiki is both easier to use and more useful than a whole bunch of separate documents. This is a clue that nobody seems to be picking up.
And for non-American nerds, Football is a team sport played between two teams of 11 players. It is the most popular sport in the world. Football is a ball game played on a rectangular grass or artificial turf field, with a goal at each of the short ends. The object of the game is to score by manoeuvring the ball into the opposing goal. In general play, the goalkeeper is the only player allowed to use their hands or arms to propel the ball; the rest of the team usually use their feet to kick the ball into position, occasionally using their torso or head to intercept a ball in mid air. The team that scores the most goals by the end of the match wins.
Thank you, Wikipedia.
You're on Slashdot and you know how to use your tool appropriately?
I smell bullshit!
This is the problem with purists: endless classifications that serve no real purpose except to exclude. Classifications do this automatically -- of course -- and some are valid -- of course! -- but when it comes down to an absurd pissing contest about who can be the most pure on a particular subject, you have to ask if there isn't something wrong.
I see this in music all the time. You get "purists" who believe that it's somehow helpful to have jazz fusion and Indo-jazz fusion and Indo-jazz Bollywood fusion and Indo-jazz Bollywood fusion fuzz-pop. The same with games. Is it a first person shooter? I don't know; is it in the first person, and do you spend a lot of time shooting? The answer to this question seems pretty straight-forward.
Of course now some purist purist is going to come along and tell me why it's important that purists constantly and consciously engage in follicle division, and why there are seven kinds of purists, and this is their genus, et cetera. You know what? We're not 19th century scientists any more. Not everything needs a rigorous classification system.
Apparently that manoeuvre also eliminates apostrophes. Who knew.
This is an honest question: how is this work important? I really would like to know. Other than providing some work for skilled technical labourers like myself, what do these things do other than point at the sky?