100 minutes is longer than you may think. Compose everything offline and minimize the size of any images. If you limit your online time to simply uploading/sending all your pre-created content and try to limit your online time to 2 minutes each session, you could get away with it.
It's simply a case of getting all your ducks in a row.
Aside from that, there's a chance of bartering with other shipmates for online time.
If your worried about where to plug your *ahem* gadgets, I'd say that's the least of your worries. Perhaps you need to step outside into that room with the big light, get a bit of exercise, read a book, have sex, go for drinks with friends, go on holiday, live a little.
Perhaps ask yourself "Why do I have so many gadgets? What would happen if I got rid of some of them? What is regular sex like?"
Having lived in what is effectively a third world country, South African, for about 15 years, one thing is painfully obvious when compared with life in a first world country. The vast majority of people have little to no access to electricity, let alone the internet!
It's very hard to understand this unless you witness it first hand - it's all to easy to think "but surely everyone needs to be on the internet?"
The reality is for most of humanity, the struggle to put food on the plate and shelter themselves is the main driving force in their daily lives.
I'm therefore suprised at how many people are online, not how few - completely the opposite reaction to the parent.
All of the original movies were dreadful - at least when your past a certain age.
The way I see it, the original movies were for a younger audience, this new movie is simply a nostalgia cash-in - basically, they finally convinced Harrison Ford to do another, which is the key to raking in huge wads of cash from aging nostalgia ridden geeks.
I'm never sure exactly how companies define this, but generally - at least in the UK - a web developer is considered the 'cog' between programmer and graphics.
Having said that, the lines are blurred.
Can't help you with your question, but if one of our programmers left, we'd be completely scuppered for a while - very proprietry inhouse systems!
Yes, they had a "collective" hat - it was damn huge, the poor monkeys were buried under it - a fedora was used for the experiment. Later the monkeys got angry and demanded a bowler hat each and a copy of Umbongo, the premier Linux Distribution.
I expected my media would remain blissfully unaffected even as the wheels of consumerism, constant marketing and legal threats was exploding... By... moving at a rapid pace, I inadvertently went to war by denying them what they wanted and could otherwise find and as a result of course, I won.
I can't recall when I first read Slashdot, but as my nick here is the first online nick I had (subsequently changed, for obvious reasons), I figure it would be around late '98.
The net back then was a very different beast, but what is so great to see is that Slashdot has matured with *cough* some dignity and grace. What makes it good now is what made it good 10 years ago.
I've had my private rants at Slashdot, permanently removing it from my bookmarks on a few occassions - I can never really recall what makes me do this, possibly really bad news days or too many 'repeat' stories, or possibly too much booze. Funny thing is, I always come back.
Perhaps it's because I have good Karma... (or no social life?)
While wikipedia certainly has it's flaws, at it's heart, the core concepts and ideals are sound.
Yes, content can be vandalised, erroneous facts can be added, political motivation can play a part in content, BUT...
Isn't this the very nature of human knowledge?
If anything, Wikipedia simply mirrors how human knowledge is documented and spread, albiet at a MUCH faster pace than old traditional methods.
The beauty here, specifically for knowledge that is still being sought, or liable to change, is that the changes to the entries can be made AS these events happen.
An encyclopedia is often a starting point for research and should never be used as a single source of information. This has always been the case.
The veropedia model is fundamentally flawed, to quote:-
"clean it up, vet it, and save it in a quality stable version that cannot be edited."
Ok, who is going to vet it? Do we trust them? Right, so it can no longer be edited after being vetted, so if there's a mistake, who can fix it?
Effectively, this takes the concept of an online encyclopedia back a step, we've lost the single key concept that makes Wikipedia so special - the ability for ANYONE to edit content.
I doubt we need to worry much about Veropedia however, as Wikipedia is firmly entrenched in the public mindset and indeed the WWW.
Long live Wikipedia, for all it's flaws or perhaps because of them - we are just human, after all...
Perhaps in the West, we often assume that Google is the only player in town worth using. It would be interesting to get the view of someone in South Korea, for instance, as to how useful Google is to them when compared with local/regional alternatives?
It's more than likely that Google is far too orientated around the West, both culturally and in terms of results.
Unfortunately, if you are writing a document which is going to be distributed outside of your organisation, you have to.
As much as it would be great if more organisations were using open office, when there's an 99% monopoly, your shooting yourself in the foot if you don't.
Argue till your blue in the face against me here, but you know it's true.
If you pander to just one operating system, as a supposed computer professional, your simply not up to the job in the first place.
A true, passionate PC user (and by that, I mean Personal Computer User, NOT just windows), you owe it to yourself to be up to speed on as much as possible. You should have at your fingertips either virtual or full iterations of Windows, Linux and MacOS.
The name of this magazine is "PC Magazine", to me, that means "Personal Computer Magazine" - of course, we all know the reality is that it's 90% windows based. (A personal irritation of mine is assuming that a PC is a windows box - akin to calling computer criminals hackers)
That the ex-editor should declare using Linux unthinkable is unthinkable in itself.
Lets hope the new editor has a bit more savvy, not that I care, I don't read computer magazines anymore, now I know why...;)
That article is simply littered with unfounded opinion clumsily held together with a scattering of facts.
If the authour really thinks that nobody but "grandma's" use windows, god, they live in a closeted world.
As for the photosnip link posted, in an attempt to proclaim that the "desktop is dead", have you tried it? For anything other than the afore mentioned "grandma", it's useless. Try throw a 25mb file at it and see how quick you can edit!
It's crap journalism like this which propogates FUD.
There will ALWAYS be a Desktop platform, the difference will be how Data is stored and retrieved and indeed, how we interact with that Desktop.
Slashdot Mirror
100 minutes is longer than you may think.
Compose everything offline and minimize the size of any images.
If you limit your online time to simply uploading/sending all your pre-created content and try to limit your online time to 2 minutes each session, you could get away with it.
It's simply a case of getting all your ducks in a row.
Aside from that, there's a chance of bartering with other shipmates for online time.
If your worried about where to plug your *ahem* gadgets, I'd say that's the least of your worries.
Perhaps you need to step outside into that room with the big light, get a bit of exercise, read a book, have sex, go for drinks with friends, go on holiday, live a little.
Perhaps ask yourself "Why do I have so many gadgets? What would happen if I got rid of some of them? What is regular sex like?"
... in reality, it's incredibly large!
Having lived in what is effectively a third world country, South African, for about 15 years, one thing is painfully obvious when compared with life in a first world country. The vast majority of people have little to no access to electricity, let alone the internet!
It's very hard to understand this unless you witness it first hand - it's all to easy to think "but surely everyone needs to be on the internet?"
The reality is for most of humanity, the struggle to put food on the plate and shelter themselves is the main driving force in their daily lives.
I'm therefore suprised at how many people are online, not how few - completely the opposite reaction to the parent.
Hmm, proof readers day off then?
I'm usually leaning when I have a tower of piss.
Dig a big hole in your yard, throw them in and cover it over again.
It works for big business, so it should work for you too.
All of the original movies were dreadful - at least when your past a certain age.
The way I see it, the original movies were for a younger audience, this new movie is simply a nostalgia cash-in - basically, they finally convinced Harrison Ford to do another, which is the key to raking in huge wads of cash from aging nostalgia ridden geeks.
I'm never sure exactly how companies define this, but generally - at least in the UK - a web developer is considered the 'cog' between programmer and graphics.
Having said that, the lines are blurred.
Can't help you with your question, but if one of our programmers left, we'd be completely scuppered for a while - very proprietry inhouse systems!
I'm sure this story was reported some months back?
;)
Ahh, wait, I forgot - this is slashdot!
... when you have 90% browser market share, I guess thier feeling is "who cares?"
...
It certainly seems that way.
You only need to look at the mess they made of the GUI in ie7 to understand just how far off course the internet explorer team have sailed.
It's a damn pain to develop for.
Then again, so was ie6 - hmm, and ie5 and yeah, even ie4
The problem is, you can't ignore 90% market share - catch 22.
Yes, they had a "collective" hat - it was damn huge, the poor monkeys were buried under it - a fedora was used for the experiment.
Later the monkeys got angry and demanded a bowler hat each and a copy of Umbongo, the premier Linux Distribution.
... Just bury it all, by far the easiest way. If you shrink wrap it, you can always dig it up later if you need it...
I expected my media would remain blissfully unaffected even as the wheels of consumerism, constant marketing and legal threats was exploding ... By ... moving at a rapid pace, I inadvertently went to war by denying them what they wanted and could otherwise find and as a result of course, I won.
"Speaking with thier usual fucked up wankiness Slashdot users rant at Dovorak over an article explaining why the gPhone will never work."
C'mon folks, it's a tradition here at Slashdot, a Dovorak article link gets posted, gets slammed and we get a lot of +5 funnies to read through.
Keep 'um coming Dovorak, one day, you'll be right, until then, we'll be giggling away on our swanky new handsets...
I can't recall when I first read Slashdot, but as my nick here is the first online nick I had (subsequently changed, for obvious reasons), I figure it would be around late '98.
The net back then was a very different beast, but what is so great to see is that Slashdot has matured with *cough* some dignity and grace. What makes it good now is what made it good 10 years ago.
I've had my private rants at Slashdot, permanently removing it from my bookmarks on a few occassions - I can never really recall what makes me do this, possibly really bad news days or too many 'repeat' stories, or possibly too much booze.
Funny thing is, I always come back.
Perhaps it's because I have good Karma... (or no social life?)
While wikipedia certainly has it's flaws, at it's heart, the core concepts and ideals are sound.
Yes, content can be vandalised, erroneous facts can be added, political motivation can play a part in content, BUT...
Isn't this the very nature of human knowledge?
If anything, Wikipedia simply mirrors how human knowledge is documented and spread, albiet at a MUCH faster pace than old traditional methods.
The beauty here, specifically for knowledge that is still being sought, or liable to change, is that the changes to the entries can be made AS these events happen.
An encyclopedia is often a starting point for research and should never be used as a single source of information. This has always been the case.
The veropedia model is fundamentally flawed, to quote:-
"clean it up, vet it, and save it in a quality stable version that cannot be edited."
Ok, who is going to vet it?
Do we trust them?
Right, so it can no longer be edited after being vetted, so if there's a mistake, who can fix it?
Effectively, this takes the concept of an online encyclopedia back a step, we've lost the single key concept that makes Wikipedia so special - the ability for ANYONE to edit content.
I doubt we need to worry much about Veropedia however, as Wikipedia is firmly entrenched in the public mindset and indeed the WWW.
Long live Wikipedia, for all it's flaws or perhaps because of them - we are just human, after all...
Perhaps in the West, we often assume that Google is the only player in town worth using.
It would be interesting to get the view of someone in South Korea, for instance, as to how useful Google is to them when compared with local/regional alternatives?
It's more than likely that Google is far too orientated around the West, both culturally and in terms of results.
Unfortunately, if you are writing a document which is going to be distributed outside of your organisation, you have to.
As much as it would be great if more organisations were using open office, when there's an 99% monopoly, your shooting yourself in the foot if you don't.
Argue till your blue in the face against me here, but you know it's true.
Irritable Ibex?
Interminable Impala?
Ingrate Ibis?
All I can say, he deserves what he got.
;)
If you pander to just one operating system, as a supposed computer professional, your simply not up to the job in the first place.
A true, passionate PC user (and by that, I mean Personal Computer User, NOT just windows), you owe it to yourself to be up to speed on as much as possible. You should have at your fingertips either virtual or full iterations of Windows, Linux and MacOS.
The name of this magazine is "PC Magazine", to me, that means "Personal Computer Magazine" - of course, we all know the reality is that it's 90% windows based. (A personal irritation of mine is assuming that a PC is a windows box - akin to calling computer criminals hackers)
That the ex-editor should declare using Linux unthinkable is unthinkable in itself.
Lets hope the new editor has a bit more savvy, not that I care, I don't read computer magazines anymore, now I know why...
...a noddy badge for this brilliantly inspired and researched news story.
Now please visit my websites:-
http://www.deeplinking.net/
http://www.googlesecrets.com/
http://www.mypopularsite.com/
http://www.googleme.com/
http://www.adwords.com/
Yada Yada...
... up to 11?
I thought it was because of the high level of education in the USA?
"Whooa dude, that Io's like, err, like, err, barfing dude! - hehhehhhehehehhehhe"
"shwoaaah yeah, it's puking man! - kewl! - ehherrheehhheheh"
That article is simply littered with unfounded opinion clumsily held together with a scattering of facts.
If the authour really thinks that nobody but "grandma's" use windows, god, they live in a closeted world.
As for the photosnip link posted, in an attempt to proclaim that the "desktop is dead", have you tried it?
For anything other than the afore mentioned "grandma", it's useless. Try throw a 25mb file at it and see how quick you can edit!
It's crap journalism like this which propogates FUD.
There will ALWAYS be a Desktop platform, the difference will be how Data is stored and retrieved and indeed, how we interact with that Desktop.
It's been voted best by a one magazine with a tiny poll of 3000 readers?
;)
Hardly conclusive evidence, given the fact that 99% of people who have seen Star Wars have never heard of the magazine in the first place
Serenity was excellent, but definately not ground breaking - that's the difference.
... and the final straw had been reached for bushboy, as he confirmed the deletion of one of his longest standing bookmarks, slashdot.org ...
So long, thanks for the good times, time to move on, can you digg it ?