Anything that comes with a real service level agreement, like a T1 will, is going to cost an arm and a leg. As opposed to broadband, where it's cheap and you take what you can get.
I'm OK with that, but I hate how much of the marketing speaks otherwise. I feel like if a company uses the word "unlimited" at any time, in any part of their promotions, and they give you anything less than that, there should be extremely strict consequences.
I'd love to see fios come to town, but I'm kind of rural right now.
Regarding Celsius/centigrade, while the name change happened a few years after the change in definition, I don't think you can consider them to be separate scales. Some people still say "centigrade" and when they do so you have to assume that they're just using the wrong name, rather than start converting.
Plus, Kelvin is itself based on the triple-point of water so we can't say that Celsius is based on water and centigrade isn't. They're really just synonyms.
Gonna have to concur, even though one more anecdote isn't that much more evidence, but just by chance I know quite a few people who work at Apple stores, and of course they and their families have plenty of Apple gear. None are interested in the Air. I have a MacBook Pro myself, looked at getting the Air, but didn't. The MBP's are plenty thin, and they have this strange legacy thing called an ethernet port...
How can there be an advantage of forcing people to wait for security patches? If someone has it downloaded, let them install it right away, rather than artificially increase the length of time they remain vulnerable. And if you come to the (patching) party late, you get what you get. The early patchers won't have anything to worry about.
Especially with free software...the source code's already available, so security through obscurity (or obsfucation) is kind of moot.
In fact, some have said that the term "Judeo-Christian" came into popular use in the West as a way of painting communists as having different (or completely lacking) moral values.
In any case, the term only works one way...Christians, due to the history of their church, believe they have some sort of link to Judaism. I doubt most practicing Jews would agree with that. All in all I think that if you are going to paint with a broad enough stroke to include two pretty different traditions, you may as well lump the rest of them together as well...any modern civilization is going to have "do not kill" written down somewhere.
But I get what the GPP is trying to say. I think that the "monarch" would be more the model of the stock corporation...I tend to see the IP shenanigans as an offshoot of a larger corporatism.
Heh, I gave up trying to match print colors to my screen...most of my work is spot color, so I just trust my PMS book. If I really need to I can calibrate the printer somewhat and use that to judge.
Even if my screen was well-calibrated, the Pantone colors are still nowhere near the swatches in software (although TBH I only use Illustrator, others may be better, but based on the physics involved, I'd have to see it to believe it).
It's kind of ironic that the ideal setup for a graphic designer is a great screen which is then calibrated to look as flat and muddy as a piece of paper...
It probably was, but that design's at least 60 years old now. That hasn't stopped everyone from trying to patent every dumb variation on it that you can think of.
Most doctors' offices I've been to have only been those tablets for a couple of years at most.
They're mainly using them to fill out charts that are multiple-choice or yes/no. Why? Because computers are well-suited to this task, and most medical forms were laid out this way to begin with, to save the doctor or nurse some time.
In most cases XPTE does not preserve strokes but convert them to type.
I fail to see how killing OOXML will send people back to the 90s when, as of 2008, there aren't any implementations of it. Scientists and engineers will be quite happy to continue using TeX whether or not OOXML lives or dies.
Obviously nothing's ever for sure, especially not with your computers. But if your browser isn't running with elevated privileges, then you don't need to worry about malware coming in through it the way people with WinXP + IE6 do, save for any specific & isolated exploits. So I would argue that linux is more secure (if by linux we mean "your average linux distro") because your average distro is going to install software from a trusted repo, not have a default install that leaves you running your browser as root every day, and will also give you the tools to control your network interface. And even if you don't use those tools, the fact that 9/10 of the linux users out there do use them does in fact make you a little safer. It gets better...the myriad differences in distros, software packaging, and choice of software means that any "linux" exploit is not going to affect all linux users, unless it's at the kernel level, and even then, there's plenty of variation in people's kernels. Safety in numbers, I guess.
Don't confuse OSX with the other MacOSs that came before it. Remember nVIR? I completely agree with you about the numerous compatibility shims that Microsoft always ships Windows with. But that doesn't mean MacOS was always secure, or stable. Granted, it wasn't the house of cards that old versions of Windows shipped as, but OSX was a huge improvement in many ways, so I don't think the last 20 years really count for much, unless you're wondering, "how come in 20 years our OSes have gotten smarter, but the users seem to be getting...well...not?"
I'm sure people care more about the contents of their/bin folder (or whatever passes for that in OS X) than the graduation pictures of their kids and their tax returns.
I'm guessing you're being sarcastic here, but even so...consider that they might not know the difference at all. It sounds crazy but I don't know many people that really separate their data from the programs that open them. I call it "icon fever":D
I think one of the big problems that we still have is that users don't don't differentiate between programs and data. Or app settings, or functions of the OS, or anything else. It's all just a big mushy, magical, computerish blob. Recently I tried very hard to explain to someone that the Windows error reporting for some random app crash had nothing to do with them somehow destroying their network driver a week later. Maybe I'm just terrible at explaining, but as simple as I could make it ("like I keep saying, it's not related, at all"), the guy kept bringing it up, like it was the magical key to everything.
(Un)common sense says: your data is the only thing in there that can't be replaced. Keep it organized & backed up, don't lose sleep over the rest. And don't feel bad when the computer breaks, because no one's ever built one that didn't.
I just hope someday people will figure out doing their weekly defrag or whatever isn't making their computer better, it's just time wasted that should be spent backing up the things you value. But it's easy and makes them feel good...it scares me when I see how superstitious people can be with these things. So while messing with people's data is much worse than changing their homepage, they really don't see a difference. All you get as the designated help desk person or unfortunate family tech is a grunt to say "it's not working".
Like you hinted at...time machine makes it almost fun(!) to keep backups, but still, many don't bother. And they get what they get, I guess.
The word democracy can refer to more than a direct vote. Having representatives does not mean you can't call it a democracy.
BTW, the United States is a country, not a county.
It's definitely hip to be anti-intellectual these days. I don't know why. I do know that if you can tie it in with some sort of classless, egalitarian ideal then it can look positive to some. Especially if you disparage any sort of deep learning as "ivory tower".
Something that scares me is how convenient it makes things for government. They don't even have to cover their tracks when they do something wrong. They don't even have to call someone a dissident. If you criticize the government or blow the whistle on something your peers will call you something much more destructive..."boring".
As a Vista user, this is a win for me as it puts pressure for the first time on Microsoft to really make their OS perform with a minimum of penalties both in terms of cost and performance, lest they be replaced by cheaper, as nearly functional equivalents.
Don't forget: first they'll do everything in their power to keep the desktop from becoming a commodity, regardless of the demand. Cheaper equivalents can't be allowed to have the same functionality. It makes plenty of business sense for MS, and it's the way they've done things for a long time now. I'd say it's a big reason for their continued success (in spite of the fact that Windows' initial draw was that it was cheap and ran on cheap hardware).
Business & govt users have MS's great backwards compatibility to lean on. MS doesn't have to compete hard in these markets, they just need to make sure everyone's crappy legacy apps stay running into 2065, even if it means putting app-specific shims into the OS.
And the home user? Maybe they don't need this sort of complexity in their OS...especially if it will cost them 400 bucks. But they'll need it as long as lots of web pages are IE-only, as long as their "open" document formats are just proprietary data structures in sheep's clothing, and most games are DirectX-only, etc, etc. C'mon...they tried to create a proprietary/incompatible Java VM (and an IDE designed to help confuse it with VB). I'm not an MS-hater, but clearly they will try everything to keep from having to compete in a market where the software is as interchangeable as the hardware. This is the market that a Linux desktop promises.
Maybe in 1995 it was still useful to have a common platform so that software companies could reach a large audience without doing lots of porting. I'd argue that those days are over, or should be. There are better compilers, better languages, and more systematic approaches to coding.
I'd love for my next project to tank in the area of tens of thousands of sales:D Then again, hers probably required a much larger investment in equipment, so that she could sound slightly better than Wing.
Right, or any decent form of encryption. But that wouldn't solve the problem of the registrars giving you away.
But my question is, since secrets and the internet don't mix, how has anyone engaging in this avoided being found out? Surely somebody would have blown the whistle by now. So maybe the snoops are the main problem after all.
That doesn't change anything. Microsoft is still a monopoly. The law says you get treated differently when you are a monopoly. Leveraging your monopoly into another market is completely forbidden. Maybe that seems unfair for something that is as trivial as a browser (although, as others have said, it wasn't as trivial 10 years ago). Maybe that leverage is made possible by customers' inaction in the face of other choices. It doesn't matter. Monopolies have different rules to follow. Which meant bundling IE was in violation of the law.
And it's a smart law, when you consider the stagnation that a monopoly created in the desktop/OS market.
They have our pop culture, aka the one they manufacture for us. You still have a choice, saying otherwise is silly. There's plenty of musicians, writers, filmmakers, what-have-you out there that would ride backwards on a unicycle for you if it meant you'd check out a copy of their work. Maybe our governments have us by the balls, maybe our bosses do, but Vivendi sure don't. How I read your post is: you wanted to see FMJ, and you did that, but you didn't want to pay, so you didn't. If you feel passionate about something (like how about people who can't entertain you for free should starve) then you should be prepared to back it up with sacrifices on your own part, lest you confuse a sense of entitlement (perhaps ironically, the same sort that Disney might feel toward its aging IP) with real moral outrage.
Slashdot Mirror
Anything that comes with a real service level agreement, like a T1 will, is going to cost an arm and a leg. As opposed to broadband, where it's cheap and you take what you can get.
I'm OK with that, but I hate how much of the marketing speaks otherwise. I feel like if a company uses the word "unlimited" at any time, in any part of their promotions, and they give you anything less than that, there should be extremely strict consequences.
I'd love to see fios come to town, but I'm kind of rural right now.
Regarding Celsius/centigrade, while the name change happened a few years after the change in definition, I don't think you can consider them to be separate scales. Some people still say "centigrade" and when they do so you have to assume that they're just using the wrong name, rather than start converting.
Plus, Kelvin is itself based on the triple-point of water so we can't say that Celsius is based on water and centigrade isn't. They're really just synonyms.
Gonna have to concur, even though one more anecdote isn't that much more evidence, but just by chance I know quite a few people who work at Apple stores, and of course they and their families have plenty of Apple gear. None are interested in the Air. I have a MacBook Pro myself, looked at getting the Air, but didn't. The MBP's are plenty thin, and they have this strange legacy thing called an ethernet port...
The other part is that, not all Windows updates actually require reboots. There's actually a few that don't :)
How can there be an advantage of forcing people to wait for security patches? If someone has it downloaded, let them install it right away, rather than artificially increase the length of time they remain vulnerable. And if you come to the (patching) party late, you get what you get. The early patchers won't have anything to worry about.
Especially with free software...the source code's already available, so security through obscurity (or obsfucation) is kind of moot.
In fact, some have said that the term "Judeo-Christian" came into popular use in the West as a way of painting communists as having different (or completely lacking) moral values.
In any case, the term only works one way...Christians, due to the history of their church, believe they have some sort of link to Judaism. I doubt most practicing Jews would agree with that. All in all I think that if you are going to paint with a broad enough stroke to include two pretty different traditions, you may as well lump the rest of them together as well...any modern civilization is going to have "do not kill" written down somewhere.
But I get what the GPP is trying to say. I think that the "monarch" would be more the model of the stock corporation...I tend to see the IP shenanigans as an offshoot of a larger corporatism.
Heh, I gave up trying to match print colors to my screen...most of my work is spot color, so I just trust my PMS book. If I really need to I can calibrate the printer somewhat and use that to judge.
Even if my screen was well-calibrated, the Pantone colors are still nowhere near the swatches in software (although TBH I only use Illustrator, others may be better, but based on the physics involved, I'd have to see it to believe it).
It's kind of ironic that the ideal setup for a graphic designer is a great screen which is then calibrated to look as flat and muddy as a piece of paper...
It probably was, but that design's at least 60 years old now. That hasn't stopped everyone from trying to patent every dumb variation on it that you can think of.
(Yeah, I know you were joking, sorry.)
Most doctors' offices I've been to have only been those tablets for a couple of years at most.
They're mainly using them to fill out charts that are multiple-choice or yes/no. Why? Because computers are well-suited to this task, and most medical forms were laid out this way to begin with, to save the doctor or nurse some time.
In most cases XPTE does not preserve strokes but convert them to type.
I fail to see how killing OOXML will send people back to the 90s when, as of 2008, there aren't any implementations of it. Scientists and engineers will be quite happy to continue using TeX whether or not OOXML lives or dies.
Am I really the only person who views his screen in the stereotypical darkened basement? Oh well.
I feel the opposite...I am a professional designer but I like the gloss on laptop screens. Without it, the blacks are too washed out.
Nah. Consider that they wrote the underpinnings of Active Directory over 15 years ago. Legacy code is like crack to Microsoft.
Obviously nothing's ever for sure, especially not with your computers. But if your browser isn't running with elevated privileges, then you don't need to worry about malware coming in through it the way people with WinXP + IE6 do, save for any specific & isolated exploits. So I would argue that linux is more secure (if by linux we mean "your average linux distro") because your average distro is going to install software from a trusted repo, not have a default install that leaves you running your browser as root every day, and will also give you the tools to control your network interface. And even if you don't use those tools, the fact that 9/10 of the linux users out there do use them does in fact make you a little safer. It gets better...the myriad differences in distros, software packaging, and choice of software means that any "linux" exploit is not going to affect all linux users, unless it's at the kernel level, and even then, there's plenty of variation in people's kernels. Safety in numbers, I guess.
Don't confuse OSX with the other MacOSs that came before it. Remember nVIR? I completely agree with you about the numerous compatibility shims that Microsoft always ships Windows with. But that doesn't mean MacOS was always secure, or stable. Granted, it wasn't the house of cards that old versions of Windows shipped as, but OSX was a huge improvement in many ways, so I don't think the last 20 years really count for much, unless you're wondering, "how come in 20 years our OSes have gotten smarter, but the users seem to be getting...well...not?"
I'm sure people care more about the contents of their /bin folder (or whatever passes for that in OS X) than the graduation pictures of their kids and their tax returns.
:D
I'm guessing you're being sarcastic here, but even so...consider that they might not know the difference at all. It sounds crazy but I don't know many people that really separate their data from the programs that open them. I call it "icon fever"
I think one of the big problems that we still have is that users don't don't differentiate between programs and data. Or app settings, or functions of the OS, or anything else. It's all just a big mushy, magical, computerish blob. Recently I tried very hard to explain to someone that the Windows error reporting for some random app crash had nothing to do with them somehow destroying their network driver a week later. Maybe I'm just terrible at explaining, but as simple as I could make it ("like I keep saying, it's not related, at all"), the guy kept bringing it up, like it was the magical key to everything.
(Un)common sense says: your data is the only thing in there that can't be replaced. Keep it organized & backed up, don't lose sleep over the rest. And don't feel bad when the computer breaks, because no one's ever built one that didn't.
I just hope someday people will figure out doing their weekly defrag or whatever isn't making their computer better, it's just time wasted that should be spent backing up the things you value. But it's easy and makes them feel good...it scares me when I see how superstitious people can be with these things. So while messing with people's data is much worse than changing their homepage, they really don't see a difference. All you get as the designated help desk person or unfortunate family tech is a grunt to say "it's not working".
Like you hinted at...time machine makes it almost fun(!) to keep backups, but still, many don't bother. And they get what they get, I guess.
The word democracy can refer to more than a direct vote. Having representatives does not mean you can't call it a democracy. BTW, the United States is a country, not a county.
It's definitely hip to be anti-intellectual these days. I don't know why. I do know that if you can tie it in with some sort of classless, egalitarian ideal then it can look positive to some. Especially if you disparage any sort of deep learning as "ivory tower".
Something that scares me is how convenient it makes things for government. They don't even have to cover their tracks when they do something wrong. They don't even have to call someone a dissident. If you criticize the government or blow the whistle on something your peers will call you something much more destructive..."boring".
You're right of course, I missed that important difference.
As a Vista user, this is a win for me as it puts pressure for the first time on Microsoft to really make their OS perform with a minimum of penalties both in terms of cost and performance, lest they be replaced by cheaper, as nearly functional equivalents.
Don't forget: first they'll do everything in their power to keep the desktop from becoming a commodity, regardless of the demand. Cheaper equivalents can't be allowed to have the same functionality. It makes plenty of business sense for MS, and it's the way they've done things for a long time now. I'd say it's a big reason for their continued success (in spite of the fact that Windows' initial draw was that it was cheap and ran on cheap hardware).
Business & govt users have MS's great backwards compatibility to lean on. MS doesn't have to compete hard in these markets, they just need to make sure everyone's crappy legacy apps stay running into 2065, even if it means putting app-specific shims into the OS.
And the home user? Maybe they don't need this sort of complexity in their OS...especially if it will cost them 400 bucks. But they'll need it as long as lots of web pages are IE-only, as long as their "open" document formats are just proprietary data structures in sheep's clothing, and most games are DirectX-only, etc, etc. C'mon...they tried to create a proprietary/incompatible Java VM (and an IDE designed to help confuse it with VB). I'm not an MS-hater, but clearly they will try everything to keep from having to compete in a market where the software is as interchangeable as the hardware. This is the market that a Linux desktop promises.
Maybe in 1995 it was still useful to have a common platform so that software companies could reach a large audience without doing lots of porting. I'd argue that those days are over, or should be. There are better compilers, better languages, and more systematic approaches to coding.
I'd love for my next project to tank in the area of tens of thousands of sales :D Then again, hers probably required a much larger investment in equipment, so that she could sound slightly better than Wing.
Right, or any decent form of encryption. But that wouldn't solve the problem of the registrars giving you away.
But my question is, since secrets and the internet don't mix, how has anyone engaging in this avoided being found out? Surely somebody would have blown the whistle by now. So maybe the snoops are the main problem after all.
Always?
I can definitely see a time when spending $300-$400 on an OS is geeky, as opposed to using a free or low-cost linux distro.
That doesn't change anything. Microsoft is still a monopoly. The law says you get treated differently when you are a monopoly. Leveraging your monopoly into another market is completely forbidden. Maybe that seems unfair for something that is as trivial as a browser (although, as others have said, it wasn't as trivial 10 years ago). Maybe that leverage is made possible by customers' inaction in the face of other choices. It doesn't matter. Monopolies have different rules to follow. Which meant bundling IE was in violation of the law.
And it's a smart law, when you consider the stagnation that a monopoly created in the desktop/OS market.
They have our pop culture, aka the one they manufacture for us. You still have a choice, saying otherwise is silly. There's plenty of musicians, writers, filmmakers, what-have-you out there that would ride backwards on a unicycle for you if it meant you'd check out a copy of their work. Maybe our governments have us by the balls, maybe our bosses do, but Vivendi sure don't. How I read your post is: you wanted to see FMJ, and you did that, but you didn't want to pay, so you didn't. If you feel passionate about something (like how about people who can't entertain you for free should starve) then you should be prepared to back it up with sacrifices on your own part, lest you confuse a sense of entitlement (perhaps ironically, the same sort that Disney might feel toward its aging IP) with real moral outrage.