1ed AD&D gamer here from long ago. Never picked up anything more recent than the old Unearthed Arcana book and its peers. I keep hearing that combat in 4ed is very long. Can you explain why that is? I mean, it seems simple enough to me. Round 1, figure out order, declare action, resolve. Repeat until combat concludes. What changed from this pattern?
I think it's still indicative of the problem GP mentions. The more code you are trying to pull in, the larger the footprint during the build process. You don't see a 'Hello world' program requiring a 3GB+ build footprint do you? No, because it's not doing enough to warrant that. Likewise, Firefox apparently *is* trying to do a lot. More than it used to at any rate.
I actually remember an ad that would air AGES ago about not driving while distracted. That's right, just opposed to allowing yourself to be distracted. It was a radio ad and in it, it described a young woman who ended up rear ending someone because they were too busy fiddling with the radio knob. Another one where someone dropped their cassette in the floorboard and reached down to fish it up again.
I see no practical difference between having a conversation with someone sitting next to me in the passenger seat vs having an earpiece in and having a conversation over my phone or even through one of those cab-audible bluetooth arrangements. And there may be some who oppose having any conversation in the car whatsoever but then that brings up parent's point about bored drivers. Bored drivers are dangerous drivers too. The fact is, driving is dangerous. Quit nannying me and let's just teach the concept of personal responsibility.
TLDR - No. None of the factors discussed in the article or this thread are taken to be in absolute control of the outcome. But the sum total of the factors indicates a probability favoring actions that in alignment with historical activity.
Welcome to the slippery slope. None of the arguments here are stipulating that it is absolutely 100% impossible that someone from a culture or background which does not express or emphasize skill A will ever be capable of skill A. Rather it is presumed that, as with almost any of life's outcomes, there is a degree of probability involved. This probability can either be increased or decreased based on a number of factors well outside of the subject's control including, but not limited to, culture or background of parents, environmental factors, genetics, etc. The question in the original post and article was whether the statistical difference between representation of blacks and latinos in Silicon Valley's leadership positions and representation in the populace as a whole can be attributed to social exclusivity or if other factors are involved. In this thread, the point is raised that PCs and their access is easily available, presumably to make the point that cultural factors can be eliminated or significantly minimized. The counterpoint to this is that cultural factors extend beyond mere accessibility and to the emphasis or lack thereof, thus indicating that this factor cannot be significantly minimized. You mention the parent can buy the PC. I point out that, again, probability indicates a predilection against this purchase based on potential historical factors among the culture. In short, I am not indicating that breaking the cycle is impossible. I am simply indicating that the probability is that the cycle continues as it always has.
But if the culture the parent was raised in did not emphasize computing (and/or the culture the parent is currently part of) then they will not provide this for their kids.
Yes but if you already have a Windows Server using Active Directory, why buy into a platform that you can coerce to work with your AD install as opposed to a platform that was built to work with your AD install? And I say this as a Mac junkie and also an IT guy who would LOVE to migrate his clients to Mac. But as you say, it's not simple. Not to mention that many small businesses have "that one app" that you really need and that only runs on Windows. Always seems to be the case. There's just no business sense in it for the most part.
I get that you may despise people who are sticklers about the rules, but consider what a typical IT staffer is going to be faced with. The typical "random device" user is going to say "Hey, Mr. IT guy, I want to hook my up to email. Any problems?"
Let's say I say, "Not really. Point it here and you're good." Let's even suppose further that I say "By the way, we don't support your . If it goes haywire, it's like this conversation never happened."
I'm still going to hear about it when something happens. It is still going to eat bandwidth in my day as I am rolling out a patch which also happens to sever the connection to s because they are incompatible with this patch. I am still going to have to reply to his email, even to say 'Nope.' Even to hit delete.
That's just personal inconvenience. On top of that and frankly of far more concern are the possible problems that may crop up because that device is connected to company resources. If it happens that some bizarre interaction between and a company server causes downtime or data loss, it's not the end user that's likely to get grilled, it's going to be the IT guy who let him connect his unapproved to the company network in the first place.
I suppose it's silly of me to comment on this, but really, what is wrong with posting this? Okay, so 4.7 is available. Why does that invalidate someone else's effort to fork the 3.x branch? I think you're getting hung up on version-itis, the idea that a larger version number is inherently better, or in a less confrontational manner of putting it, that the changes in a higher version number inherently represent progress. Major version number changes are not necessarily better. Instead, think of it is significantly different. Yes, the point is to improve the system, but sometimes people disagree with the direction a project is taken on a subsequent major revision. Frankly, when people bitch about it, they are often told "if you dislike it so much, stick with the old version, it still works." Well, this guy took it to heart and is continuing development. As it happens, I think that's pretty freaking awesome.
It's not for general use, rather it's primarily a development tool. As has been shown time and time again, the earlier you catch bugs, the lower the cost required to fix them. Now, with faster than light browsing, you can see the bugs on your website before you've even coded it. As a result, you simply don't code the bug in the first place and save a lot of time rewriting poor CSS and markup.
Why do we always assume "they" advance more quickly than we do or started earlier or are any more civilized. Sad as it may seem, we may be the most civilized/advanced species in the universe.
My understanding (disclaimer: I do not have a 4S, I'm solely relying on reviews) is that Siri handles natural speech much better than the speech recognition found on Android devices. By natural, I mean regular conversational tone and flow, as opposed to the more robotic method where you must. pause. on. each. word. in order to give the translator the chance to note word breaks and parse the sentence structure. So it's not that Siri does it and Android doesn't. It's that Siri seems to do it better, working for the user instead of the user working for the computer.
The report only shows how many machines were running each browser or OS on the infected machines. They don't report how many machines in total had those browsers or OSes. So it may be that 100% of the Win98, Win2k and Win2003 installations were infected but they represent such a small subset of the total userbase that the percentages in the pie charts are also relatively small.
Additionally, the browser report doesn't break out different versions of IE and Firefox. The fact is a lot of people are still using IE7 and maybe even IE6. IE8 is an improvement and IE9 even more so. Likewise, I still see a number of FF3 users and FF4 users. I would lump FF5 through FF7 together because, really, wth not. Practically the same anyway. But FF5+ represents an increase in safety over FF4.
I would have liked to have seen relative infection rates within each browser and OS version. That is, it's nice to know the percentage of infections that involved Windows XP, but I would also like to know what % of Windows XP users became infected. Even then you aren't controlling for varying levels of user experience and ability to avoid infection, or anti-malware installations, but I suppose there are limits to all data collection.
Do you seriously think this article is going to have a significant effect on Netflix at all? Positive or negative? I imagine most people have already made up their minds about Netflix and those that haven't might want to know that Netflix is actually doing something to make their product more enticing. If the post was entirely one long "SQUEE" of jubilation over the wonder that is the Netflix experience, extolling the corporate virtues and bashing anyone who opposed them, then maybe you would have a point. As it is, this is a potential coup for a major company attempting to shift how we view video programming further toward an online streaming experience, which is to say 'News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters'.
I don't know that you would have the problem you're referring to, being unable to distinguish from every instance of having parked your car in the parking lot. If you had perfect recall, surely you would begin to record EVERY detail of every instance and then when attempting to recall today's specific instance, I imagine your brain's capability for pattern recognition would sort through the most relevant results to pull up the correct one. We do that all the time really. There are any number of things which we repeat daily but with minute differences in each case, and we manage to filter out the least relevant results in order to be able to focus on what's most important to the matter at hand. Sometimes, yes, it fails, and we end up chasing a dead end. But the human brain seems a remarkably potent tool for filtering out the noise to reach the signal in many cases.
No. Netflix has a lot of name recognition. Moreover, they've already sent clear signals they were ready to make streaming their major source of operations going forward. So they want to use the already present name recognition for the operations they intend to move forward with. As for the pain to the consumers, DVD rentals were dropping in big markets and were only growing marginally in outlying areas (flyover country). The big markets are where you're more likely to have a higher concentration of high bandwidth customers willing to make use of streaming. And the flyover areas are less likely to have that bandwidth, and so probably weren't making as much use of the streaming to begin with.
So I imagine what they were seeing momentum wise was a silo effect for most customers, where they used either DVD or streaming but not always both. Yes, there was clearly an uproar for those users who used both streaming and DVD, but while the loss of 4% of their user base was significant, it clearly wasn't a death blow. And now if the DVD business starts to dry up as high speed access is made available in more areas and as more content is available for streaming, it won't suck the life out of their brand because it's off in another company altogether.
Ah, I see. I figured anyone capable of creating something this sophisticated would have been able to target more platforms due to the relative accessibility of PC parts. But perhaps I'm overestimating just how accessible parts are from outside China.
Slashdot Mirror
1ed AD&D gamer here from long ago. Never picked up anything more recent than the old Unearthed Arcana book and its peers. I keep hearing that combat in 4ed is very long. Can you explain why that is? I mean, it seems simple enough to me. Round 1, figure out order, declare action, resolve. Repeat until combat concludes. What changed from this pattern?
God .. er.. Old Glory Insurance help us if the robots quit thinking the way we want them to.
This is why most anti-terrorist strategies read as if their first, blacked-out paragraph begins with "Imagine a spherical terrorist in vacuum".
Seems like an effective method of dispatching terrorists. But how do we coax them INTO the vacuum?
I think it's still indicative of the problem GP mentions. The more code you are trying to pull in, the larger the footprint during the build process. You don't see a 'Hello world' program requiring a 3GB+ build footprint do you? No, because it's not doing enough to warrant that. Likewise, Firefox apparently *is* trying to do a lot. More than it used to at any rate.
I actually remember an ad that would air AGES ago about not driving while distracted. That's right, just opposed to allowing yourself to be distracted. It was a radio ad and in it, it described a young woman who ended up rear ending someone because they were too busy fiddling with the radio knob. Another one where someone dropped their cassette in the floorboard and reached down to fish it up again.
I see no practical difference between having a conversation with someone sitting next to me in the passenger seat vs having an earpiece in and having a conversation over my phone or even through one of those cab-audible bluetooth arrangements. And there may be some who oppose having any conversation in the car whatsoever but then that brings up parent's point about bored drivers. Bored drivers are dangerous drivers too. The fact is, driving is dangerous. Quit nannying me and let's just teach the concept of personal responsibility.
But what damn fool race would be idiotic enough to actually attempt to construct an entity from a DNA sequence received via radio signals from space?
Actually we're liable to find out there are some cowardly aliens hanging out on the moon.
TLDR - No. None of the factors discussed in the article or this thread are taken to be in absolute control of the outcome. But the sum total of the factors indicates a probability favoring actions that in alignment with historical activity.
Welcome to the slippery slope. None of the arguments here are stipulating that it is absolutely 100% impossible that someone from a culture or background which does not express or emphasize skill A will ever be capable of skill A. Rather it is presumed that, as with almost any of life's outcomes, there is a degree of probability involved. This probability can either be increased or decreased based on a number of factors well outside of the subject's control including, but not limited to, culture or background of parents, environmental factors, genetics, etc. The question in the original post and article was whether the statistical difference between representation of blacks and latinos in Silicon Valley's leadership positions and representation in the populace as a whole can be attributed to social exclusivity or if other factors are involved. In this thread, the point is raised that PCs and their access is easily available, presumably to make the point that cultural factors can be eliminated or significantly minimized. The counterpoint to this is that cultural factors extend beyond mere accessibility and to the emphasis or lack thereof, thus indicating that this factor cannot be significantly minimized. You mention the parent can buy the PC. I point out that, again, probability indicates a predilection against this purchase based on potential historical factors among the culture. In short, I am not indicating that breaking the cycle is impossible. I am simply indicating that the probability is that the cycle continues as it always has.
But if the culture the parent was raised in did not emphasize computing (and/or the culture the parent is currently part of) then they will not provide this for their kids.
Yes but if you already have a Windows Server using Active Directory, why buy into a platform that you can coerce to work with your AD install as opposed to a platform that was built to work with your AD install? And I say this as a Mac junkie and also an IT guy who would LOVE to migrate his clients to Mac. But as you say, it's not simple. Not to mention that many small businesses have "that one app" that you really need and that only runs on Windows. Always seems to be the case. There's just no business sense in it for the most part.
Sounds like your CU could have used some inch thick bulletproof glass dividing the thieves from the teller and back offices.
I expected books on Perl.
I get that you may despise people who are sticklers about the rules, but consider what a typical IT staffer is going to be faced with. The typical "random device" user is going to say "Hey, Mr. IT guy, I want to hook my up to email. Any problems?"
Let's say I say, "Not really. Point it here and you're good." Let's even suppose further that I say "By the way, we don't support your . If it goes haywire, it's like this conversation never happened."
I'm still going to hear about it when something happens. It is still going to eat bandwidth in my day as I am rolling out a patch which also happens to sever the connection to s because they are incompatible with this patch. I am still going to have to reply to his email, even to say 'Nope.' Even to hit delete.
That's just personal inconvenience. On top of that and frankly of far more concern are the possible problems that may crop up because that device is connected to company resources. If it happens that some bizarre interaction between and a company server causes downtime or data loss, it's not the end user that's likely to get grilled, it's going to be the IT guy who let him connect his unapproved to the company network in the first place.
I suppose it's silly of me to comment on this, but really, what is wrong with posting this? Okay, so 4.7 is available. Why does that invalidate someone else's effort to fork the 3.x branch? I think you're getting hung up on version-itis, the idea that a larger version number is inherently better, or in a less confrontational manner of putting it, that the changes in a higher version number inherently represent progress. Major version number changes are not necessarily better. Instead, think of it is significantly different. Yes, the point is to improve the system, but sometimes people disagree with the direction a project is taken on a subsequent major revision. Frankly, when people bitch about it, they are often told "if you dislike it so much, stick with the old version, it still works." Well, this guy took it to heart and is continuing development. As it happens, I think that's pretty freaking awesome.
Damn, why don't I have mod points right now?
It's not for general use, rather it's primarily a development tool. As has been shown time and time again, the earlier you catch bugs, the lower the cost required to fix them. Now, with faster than light browsing, you can see the bugs on your website before you've even coded it. As a result, you simply don't code the bug in the first place and save a lot of time rewriting poor CSS and markup.
Why do we always assume "they" advance more quickly than we do or started earlier or are any more civilized. Sad as it may seem, we may be the most civilized/advanced species in the universe.
My understanding (disclaimer: I do not have a 4S, I'm solely relying on reviews) is that Siri handles natural speech much better than the speech recognition found on Android devices. By natural, I mean regular conversational tone and flow, as opposed to the more robotic method where you must. pause. on. each. word. in order to give the translator the chance to note word breaks and parse the sentence structure. So it's not that Siri does it and Android doesn't. It's that Siri seems to do it better, working for the user instead of the user working for the computer.
"Open the refrigerator doors, HAL."
"I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave."
I just double checked and 4.1.1 in the Mac App Store is free. And Xcode includes the simulator. So.... yeah....
The report only shows how many machines were running each browser or OS on the infected machines. They don't report how many machines in total had those browsers or OSes. So it may be that 100% of the Win98, Win2k and Win2003 installations were infected but they represent such a small subset of the total userbase that the percentages in the pie charts are also relatively small.
Additionally, the browser report doesn't break out different versions of IE and Firefox. The fact is a lot of people are still using IE7 and maybe even IE6. IE8 is an improvement and IE9 even more so. Likewise, I still see a number of FF3 users and FF4 users. I would lump FF5 through FF7 together because, really, wth not. Practically the same anyway. But FF5+ represents an increase in safety over FF4.
I would have liked to have seen relative infection rates within each browser and OS version. That is, it's nice to know the percentage of infections that involved Windows XP, but I would also like to know what % of Windows XP users became infected. Even then you aren't controlling for varying levels of user experience and ability to avoid infection, or anti-malware installations, but I suppose there are limits to all data collection.
Do you seriously think this article is going to have a significant effect on Netflix at all? Positive or negative? I imagine most people have already made up their minds about Netflix and those that haven't might want to know that Netflix is actually doing something to make their product more enticing. If the post was entirely one long "SQUEE" of jubilation over the wonder that is the Netflix experience, extolling the corporate virtues and bashing anyone who opposed them, then maybe you would have a point. As it is, this is a potential coup for a major company attempting to shift how we view video programming further toward an online streaming experience, which is to say 'News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters'.
I don't know that you would have the problem you're referring to, being unable to distinguish from every instance of having parked your car in the parking lot. If you had perfect recall, surely you would begin to record EVERY detail of every instance and then when attempting to recall today's specific instance, I imagine your brain's capability for pattern recognition would sort through the most relevant results to pull up the correct one. We do that all the time really. There are any number of things which we repeat daily but with minute differences in each case, and we manage to filter out the least relevant results in order to be able to focus on what's most important to the matter at hand. Sometimes, yes, it fails, and we end up chasing a dead end. But the human brain seems a remarkably potent tool for filtering out the noise to reach the signal in many cases.
No. Netflix has a lot of name recognition. Moreover, they've already sent clear signals they were ready to make streaming their major source of operations going forward. So they want to use the already present name recognition for the operations they intend to move forward with. As for the pain to the consumers, DVD rentals were dropping in big markets and were only growing marginally in outlying areas (flyover country). The big markets are where you're more likely to have a higher concentration of high bandwidth customers willing to make use of streaming. And the flyover areas are less likely to have that bandwidth, and so probably weren't making as much use of the streaming to begin with.
So I imagine what they were seeing momentum wise was a silo effect for most customers, where they used either DVD or streaming but not always both. Yes, there was clearly an uproar for those users who used both streaming and DVD, but while the loss of 4% of their user base was significant, it clearly wasn't a death blow. And now if the DVD business starts to dry up as high speed access is made available in more areas and as more content is available for streaming, it won't suck the life out of their brand because it's off in another company altogether.
I wrote about it on my blog, if you're interested.
Ah, I see. I figured anyone capable of creating something this sophisticated would have been able to target more platforms due to the relative accessibility of PC parts. But perhaps I'm overestimating just how accessible parts are from outside China.