Damn. I screwed up. Mod me down, please. I know i've read it somewhere, but google sure has become useless for finding information I once found before.
I paid like $9 for my adapter, and I haven't looked back. It worked flawlessly and instantly as soon as I hooked it to my PC. I forget the brand unfortunately.
Speaking of controllers, I highly recommend the Logitech 2.4Ghz wireless Playstation controllers for just about every type of game*. With a set of NiMH rechargables, they last practically forever (I've had the controllers for months and I've had to recharge the batteries twice).
Logitech also makes a PC version of the controllers, but they have the same amount of buttons (in slightly different places), so if you have a PS*, you may as well get the PS version plus adapter.
* The only ones I'd switch back to the stock PS2 controllers for would be fighting games which require precise d-pad control.
Has anyone else noticed the.gov namespace being used for stranger and stranger things? Some politicians have even been using.gov for their campaign messages and such (used to be www.flattax.gov, but that's 403'd).
Doesn't it seem like this should be like.. microsoft-antitrust.gov.ca.us or something?
I dunno, when I compare a game with FSAA on vs off, I'm most impressed with the "on" version. They look way, way better. It's getting to the point that relatively inexpensive hardware can do it without letting the framerate drop to unacceptable levels (for me, 40FPS is the line).
The big plus in newer cards, from my point of view, is that you can now turn on full-scene anti-aliasing (FSAA) and still be able to play games. That wasn't the case a few years back.
FSAA can make scenes *beautiful*. Image quality is improving at the same time as framerate (not necessarily in the same platform though..)
er, I should have elaborated a bit more. The cost per message is not just the mind-time, but the time spent negotiating TCP stuffs, then SMTP stuffs, and then delivering the message, etc etc. It's a lot of work for zero gain (except for the anti-virus software authors, potentially).
The bounces from the anti-virus software programs is pretty damned close to spam. Close enough that it gets their name out there, but not close enough that they'd actually be pinned about it except by the most self-righteous of the anti-spammers.
First, there's a cost per message that you're not including. Every message I get I have to consider and read, or delete. I'm getting tons of virus bounces, even though I've never sent a virus - the virus uses forged headers. So, for me, someone who has no way to contract a virus, my "work"load has gone up noticably, and the price I pay went from $0 to $X where X is a positive number.
Second, the autoresponder is not a necessary part of the virus removal. The savings is already there by blocking the virus from infecting the user's computer. The bounce is just an extra thing the anti-virus people put in to try to advertise their product.
It's *pretty damn close* to being spam.
Re:Let's make this a press release!
on
Back To SCO
·
· Score: 1
We need facts, not opinions. Otherwise, that seems like a really great idea. I don't think it costs much to have a press release run, like $100?
The artists pay for the lawyers (perhaps not directly). The settlement will probably go straight to pay the lawyers bills, but it probably will not cover the bills entirely. So, the artists lose, again.
Spill juice on it, and then try to dry it out quickly by turning on the wall heater (similar to a space heater) in your apartment and lean the keyboard up against it. Make sure not to check on it periodically. In about 5 minutes it should be pretty well melted and half of the keys useless.
At least I found a cheap replacement on eBay... heh.
For a statistical figure to be presented we'd have to know what exactly it is referring to. In this case, is it the Shuttle itself? If so, then yeah, the Challenger wouldn't count because that was a problem with the boosters (I believe?).
Also, is the only factor for success (in the statistical report) getting the people home alive? I wonder if any missions had to be scrubbed while in the air (er, heh, above the air) before all or the major tasks were completed.
We don't have an equal frame of reference to agree on a percentage of success, I think. I don't know if media reports have that, either.
Was driving up through Oregon back home after a vacation - overhead, saw a sign that told us the average transit time to (or maybe across?) the I-405 (from I-5). That was very cool! I'd love to see those sorts of signs in more places.
Makes you wonder if the UK government IT departments are making illegal backups (after all, things like Word come with some sounds and movie-tutorials don't they?) or if they're running naked/protectionless.
Not that I agree with you, but let me ask you this - do we know, for a fact, that every one of the successful shuttle missions has been operated within the specifications, in every way? If not, can we use those to signify statistical successes?
Now, regarding specifications. If the engineers knew it was operating outside of spec, they must have had a test for it. The test probably involved equipment of some sort - equipment that probably could have aborted the launch. However, because people are involved here, someone somewhere decided to overlook the warnings and push the launch forward. That someone was (is?) a part of the entire "shuttle system".
What you're describing with the asteroid hitting the earth is a freak accident - it's not even related to the shuttle system, therefore it could not be considered as a part of the shuttle's statistics, of course. In the Challenger's case, every single thing that failed was a part of the shuttle system (from funding to the hardware/mechanics,etc) - it wasn't that an outside force caused it to fail.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn. I screwed up. Mod me down, please. I know i've read it somewhere, but google sure has become useless for finding information I once found before.
Here we go, found a link about this.
rec.autos.saturn thread about topping off the gas tank
Leela: Wow, I never realised the first astronauts were so fat!
Fry: That's not an astronaut, it's a TV comedian. And he was just using space travel as a metaphor for beating his wife.
Try doing something like http://www.homestarrunner.com/ with HTML and we'll talk. I mean, if your IQ is low enough to appreciate it (whatever).
I paid like $9 for my adapter, and I haven't looked back. It worked flawlessly and instantly as soon as I hooked it to my PC. I forget the brand unfortunately.
Speaking of controllers, I highly recommend the Logitech 2.4Ghz wireless Playstation controllers for just about every type of game*. With a set of NiMH rechargables, they last practically forever (I've had the controllers for months and I've had to recharge the batteries twice).
Logitech also makes a PC version of the controllers, but they have the same amount of buttons (in slightly different places), so if you have a PS*, you may as well get the PS version plus adapter.
* The only ones I'd switch back to the stock PS2 controllers for would be fighting games which require precise d-pad control.
Has anyone else noticed the .gov namespace being used for stranger and stranger things? Some politicians have even been using .gov for their campaign messages and such (used to be www.flattax.gov, but that's 403'd).
Doesn't it seem like this should be like.. microsoft-antitrust.gov.ca.us or something?
I dunno, when I compare a game with FSAA on vs off, I'm most impressed with the "on" version. They look way, way better. It's getting to the point that relatively inexpensive hardware can do it without letting the framerate drop to unacceptable levels (for me, 40FPS is the line).
The big plus in newer cards, from my point of view, is that you can now turn on full-scene anti-aliasing (FSAA) and still be able to play games. That wasn't the case a few years back.
FSAA can make scenes *beautiful*. Image quality is improving at the same time as framerate (not necessarily in the same platform though..)
er, I should have elaborated a bit more. The cost per message is not just the mind-time, but the time spent negotiating TCP stuffs, then SMTP stuffs, and then delivering the message, etc etc. It's a lot of work for zero gain (except for the anti-virus software authors, potentially).
The bounces from the anti-virus software programs is pretty damned close to spam. Close enough that it gets their name out there, but not close enough that they'd actually be pinned about it except by the most self-righteous of the anti-spammers.
There's some flaws in the logic.
First, there's a cost per message that you're not including. Every message I get I have to consider and read, or delete. I'm getting tons of virus bounces, even though I've never sent a virus - the virus uses forged headers. So, for me, someone who has no way to contract a virus, my "work"load has gone up noticably, and the price I pay went from $0 to $X where X is a positive number.
Second, the autoresponder is not a necessary part of the virus removal. The savings is already there by blocking the virus from infecting the user's computer. The bounce is just an extra thing the anti-virus people put in to try to advertise their product.
It's *pretty damn close* to being spam.
We need facts, not opinions. Otherwise, that seems like a really great idea. I don't think it costs much to have a press release run, like $100?
Worse yet, some of the surveys are bankrolled by the job sites, in the hopes that your inferior feelings will translate to trying to find a new job.
The artists pay for the lawyers (perhaps not directly). The settlement will probably go straight to pay the lawyers bills, but it probably will not cover the bills entirely. So, the artists lose, again.
They're very different goals, but that doesn't mean they're incompatible goals.
IIRC, Apple only makes like 33 cents or so a song anyways, after paying RIAA-etc.
How the _what_? Speak up man! Your AC rambling makes no sense.
No doubt. Google is removing links to non-corporate sites in favor of corporate sites. Sorry, but that's just not cool. We need an alternative.
If ext2 is so reliable, why does it, by default, insist that I must fsck after X days or Y mounts?
Make a superior version from the freely available codebase and refuse to release the modifcations back to the Community.
Inspire competition, the community creates a superior program to the corporation, etc etc. This cycle has been going on for a very, very long time.
Some of us are OK with sharing, even if it means someone else might make money off of it.
Do like I did...
Spill juice on it, and then try to dry it out quickly by turning on the wall heater (similar to a space heater) in your apartment and lean the keyboard up against it. Make sure not to check on it periodically. In about 5 minutes it should be pretty well melted and half of the keys useless.
At least I found a cheap replacement on eBay... heh.
For a statistical figure to be presented we'd have to know what exactly it is referring to. In this case, is it the Shuttle itself? If so, then yeah, the Challenger wouldn't count because that was a problem with the boosters (I believe?).
Also, is the only factor for success (in the statistical report) getting the people home alive? I wonder if any missions had to be scrubbed while in the air (er, heh, above the air) before all or the major tasks were completed.
We don't have an equal frame of reference to agree on a percentage of success, I think. I don't know if media reports have that, either.
Was driving up through Oregon back home after a vacation - overhead, saw a sign that told us the average transit time to (or maybe across?) the I-405 (from I-5). That was very cool! I'd love to see those sorts of signs in more places.
Makes you wonder if the UK government IT departments are making illegal backups (after all, things like Word come with some sounds and movie-tutorials don't they?) or if they're running naked/protectionless.
Not that I agree with you, but let me ask you this - do we know, for a fact, that every one of the successful shuttle missions has been operated within the specifications, in every way? If not, can we use those to signify statistical successes?
Now, regarding specifications. If the engineers knew it was operating outside of spec, they must have had a test for it. The test probably involved equipment of some sort - equipment that probably could have aborted the launch. However, because people are involved here, someone somewhere decided to overlook the warnings and push the launch forward. That someone was (is?) a part of the entire "shuttle system".
What you're describing with the asteroid hitting the earth is a freak accident - it's not even related to the shuttle system, therefore it could not be considered as a part of the shuttle's statistics, of course. In the Challenger's case, every single thing that failed was a part of the shuttle system (from funding to the hardware/mechanics,etc) - it wasn't that an outside force caused it to fail.