When calculating procuct cost they add on their usual margin and then fudge the cents value to be strange numbers that confuse people. For example:.99,.23,.67,.53.
I know about that. Some people (like my mother-in-law) tend to round down all the time. See $5.99, think $5. See $39.99, think $30. Fun looking at expensive stuff with her (Look that computer only costs $1000. No, it costs $1999.99, so $2000).
Have an interface where you can plug your PDA. I generally write my shopping list on my Palm. Plug it into the cart, and let it tell me where everything is this week, and the price I can expect to pay for my list. I don't have to waste time looking up and down the aisles (I can never remember where anything is there), and I know approximately how much I'll be spending.
However, I don't see this happening. If I'm not browsing to find item X that I want, I won't see item Y that they're trying to push on me. And, as I said in a previous post, we won't see price-adding on them because the rising number will scare alot of customers.
How about a built in scanner so you can see how much something costs or keep track of how much you are spending?
Now there's a useful idea. Thing is, it won't happen. If you are shopping and you keep seeing this number counting up in front of you every time you put something in your basket, you'll subconsciously want to keep that number low. So you'll probably buy less than you would if the cost hits you all at once at the register.
So if you shop with a list (ie you already know what you're going to buy), this will probably be more of an annoyance than convenience. If you are one of the 70% that the article claims buys on-the-fly, it may convince you the first couple of times. After that, you'll probably tune out the sound of the cart. Remember, your cart and everybody else's carts are all trying to get your attention. If there are five people in the aisle, and they pass the sale item at staggering times (or several different items), the computer will just become so much noise rather than a meaningful message.
Sorry...I should have made my comment more clear. It wasn't the lack of filters that I was congratulating, it was the fact that he was actually watching what his children do, instead of relying on a filter to do all the work for him.
You say that kids shouldn't be indoctrinated in one side or the other, but you also say that they should just have Windows on the machine. How about you install multiple OSs and let the kids experience them all. That way they will have their own choice and they will be familiar with multiple environments. They'll know how to adapt to things being in different places, so that next time one of their OSs changes its UI, they'll be able to adapt.
All of this is supervised and watched by my wife and I -- we don't use any parental filters since we've found they just don't work, and it's just better to keep a watchful eye anyway.
Congratulations. I wish more parents saw it that way. Unfortunately, most want to use the computer as a babysitter.
My real motivation to do this is to save money and to teach my children that sometimes the best isn't always the most expensive.
A laudable goal. The problem is that when they want to play the latest and greatest game, which will be only available for Windows and won't work with Wine, they'll think that Linux is a piece of crap, 'cause they can't play it.
I'm wondering if there isn't a way to slowly supplant Linux into the mix
Start with dual-booting the system. Limit the software that's installed in Windows, as long as there's a Linux equivalent. Get your kids in the habit of using the Linux apps, since you won't have the Windows apps. Be sure to have an explanation ready when they ask why they can't have Office, when one of their friends or teachers has said they'll probably need it.
and not sacrifice my children's computer experience
How do you define sacrificing their computer experience? Is it a sacrifice that they can't play games?
My requirements are simple: I would like them to run their CD-ROM based games (which are mostly Director based games from Hasbro)
If the games run in Linux, go for it. You may need to write a few scripts to get the games started, and attach them to desktop icons. The games won't be autorun, but they should be fairly easy to use.
I would still like them to chat with their friends
IRC is available, as well as several instant messengers. There's also the old telephone gathering dust in the corner, and the Big Room with the Blue Roof as well.
also be able to play online Flash and Shockwave based games from Yahoo and Shockwave.
I believe that these are Linux-comatible, but I don't know as I don't actually use them.
I've thought about loading up Mandrake and getting WINE working to see if it'll work out, but I'm not sure that I should waste my time, so I thought I'd ask some readers here if they're run into this situation and if I'm just crazy for thinking that this would be the wise thing to do at the expense of my children's computing experience.
The only way you'll get an accurate feel is to try it out yourself. Just because it's easy for some people doesn't mean it will be easy for you. Dual-boot with Mandrake and try it out.
Sure, they can try to pick up the site. But because the contract wasn't signed, they have no way to get the articles database without spidering through the entire site, and they can't get the users database period.
This isn't completely a re-post. The other article is the candidate release. Next, Slashdot will start posting for betas and alphas of software and standards.
You might be able to eat a crop of GM wheat that unintentionally sterilizes non-GM wheat crops
Would you mind explaining how the GM wheat will sterilize non-GM wheat? Unless they're cross-bred (in which case the offspring will be GM), how can GM-anything have any effect on the non-GM counterpart?
Re:Servers should disable themselves...
on
Due Diligence?
·
· Score: 2
Not necessarily. Maybe the HTTP source is being blocked. Maybe there's been a routing failure. Maybe the HTTP source is just offline. Your server is still vulnerable.
Re:Servers should disable themselves...
on
Due Diligence?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
What happens when the author's website becomes obsolete? Security may be up-to-date, but you now have a bad webpage. Will the server shut itself down, or let you run with a possible compromised server? Also, consider the effect if the timing is set in the source. The first of every (month|year|week) will show an enormous load on the update server. What happens when the software can't talk to the update server? Assume everything's fine? When someone hacks the update server with a new, trojaned form, suddenly everybody will have it. Check the server's logs, you now have a list of compromised hosts.
I find the fact it's still [technically] law amusing but the thing that gets me chuckling is that there was a time when people beating rugs on their front lawns was such a problem they had to pass that law to make them stop... funny world.
Well, if they weren't using cats to do it, it wouldn't be a problem.
Yeah, maybe they should rename it to "The Fastest Chip Ever or Until Someone Else Makes Something Faster", but it just doesn't roll of the tongue the same way.
Re:Why was it not under the GPL to begin with?
on
MAME To Become GPL?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Is there any reason that everything must be GPL'd?
<RANT>
Why is it that every time a project announces that it is changing it licensing to be GPL, somebody has to ask why it wasn't before? Why does it matter? Really? Who cares why it changed, why it wasn't GPL before, or even that it is GPL now?
</RANT>
Yes, you can do client validation. This will reduce bandwidth when someone misses a field in filling the form, or puts letters in the phone number, or whatever. However, this should not be the only validation. Instead, the client should be used for initial validation, but the server should validate again before acting on the data.
Not necessarily. Take, for example, the Mozilla Project. Anyone is able to submit a patch, but it won't get into the codebase until it has been reviewed twice (three times during a release period). Any major open-source project should have something similar (although I admit that I don't know much about any other project's procedures).
No. This is the result of people "self-medicating". When a doctor prescribes medication for 6 weeks, if you feel better after 4 weeks, there are still bacteria in your system. The next two weeks work on killing them. If you don't kill all of them, the stronger ones that survived will evolve to be immune to the medication (gross oversimplification). When they spread to someone else, who also doesn't finish the course of meds, they will become more medication-resistant. And this is the reason we have drug-resistant bacteria.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL Thanks for my new sig :)
Damn. Here in Canada, they can't even make their carts work properly.
Have an interface where you can plug your PDA. I generally write my shopping list on my Palm. Plug it into the cart, and let it tell me where everything is this week, and the price I can expect to pay for my list. I don't have to waste time looking up and down the aisles (I can never remember where anything is there), and I know approximately how much I'll be spending.
However, I don't see this happening. If I'm not browsing to find item X that I want, I won't see item Y that they're trying to push on me. And, as I said in a previous post, we won't see price-adding on them because the rising number will scare alot of customers.
So if you shop with a list (ie you already know what you're going to buy), this will probably be more of an annoyance than convenience. If you are one of the 70% that the article claims buys on-the-fly, it may convince you the first couple of times. After that, you'll probably tune out the sound of the cart. Remember, your cart and everybody else's carts are all trying to get your attention. If there are five people in the aisle, and they pass the sale item at staggering times (or several different items), the computer will just become so much noise rather than a meaningful message.
Sorry...I should have made my comment more clear. It wasn't the lack of filters that I was congratulating, it was the fact that he was actually watching what his children do, instead of relying on a filter to do all the work for him.
You say that kids shouldn't be indoctrinated in one side or the other, but you also say that they should just have Windows on the machine. How about you install multiple OSs and let the kids experience them all. That way they will have their own choice and they will be familiar with multiple environments. They'll know how to adapt to things being in different places, so that next time one of their OSs changes its UI, they'll be able to adapt.
Oops...because the contract wasn't signed, they can't force the owner to give them the database, so they can't get it without spidering.
Sure, they can try to pick up the site. But because the contract wasn't signed, they have no way to get the articles database without spidering through the entire site, and they can't get the users database period.
This isn't completely a re-post. The other article is the candidate release. Next, Slashdot will start posting for betas and alphas of software and standards.
If it's sterile, how does it cross-pollinate? Isn't the purpose of sterility to prevent this at all?
Not necessarily. Maybe the HTTP source is being blocked. Maybe there's been a routing failure. Maybe the HTTP source is just offline. Your server is still vulnerable.
Other than that, it's a good idea...
(If you don't get it, watch some Monty Python).
Yeah, maybe they should rename it to "The Fastest Chip Ever or Until Someone Else Makes Something Faster", but it just doesn't roll of the tongue the same way.
<RANT>
Why is it that every time a project announces that it is changing it licensing to be GPL, somebody has to ask why it wasn't before? Why does it matter? Really? Who cares why it changed, why it wasn't GPL before, or even that it is GPL now?
</RANT>
Yes, you can do client validation. This will reduce bandwidth when someone misses a field in filling the form, or puts letters in the phone number, or whatever. However, this should not be the only validation. Instead, the client should be used for initial validation, but the server should validate again before acting on the data.
Not necessarily. Take, for example, the Mozilla Project. Anyone is able to submit a patch, but it won't get into the codebase until it has been reviewed twice (three times during a release period). Any major open-source project should have something similar (although I admit that I don't know much about any other project's procedures).
Great...then some skr1p7 k1dd13 will 0\/\/n j00.
After the bomb, the only survivors will be cockroaches, Spam (the meat, not the mail), and these bacteria. Fun.
No. This is the result of people "self-medicating". When a doctor prescribes medication for 6 weeks, if you feel better after 4 weeks, there are still bacteria in your system. The next two weeks work on killing them. If you don't kill all of them, the stronger ones that survived will evolve to be immune to the medication (gross oversimplification). When they spread to someone else, who also doesn't finish the course of meds, they will become more medication-resistant. And this is the reason we have drug-resistant bacteria.