Because none of the current Intel Macs support multiple hard disks (except externally, but that's a pain esp. for the laptops),
Sounds like the real problem is that a botique platform has significant hardware limitations that adversely impact convenience and utility across the board.
Because English, despite having borrowed many words from Latin, is a Germanic language not a Latin one.
So?
English is allowed to borrow words from as many languages as it likes, but must only pick up grammatical conventions from the German?
It kinda sounds like you're saying "English may have used some Latin grammar for many years, but since English is really a Germanic language, the Latin grammar is bogus and we should all stop taking it seriously."
If so, I don't buy it. English is English, an rich, eclectic, and highly dynamic language; the foundation of which cannot be properly restricted to a single root language, but rather is based on a heady mixture of several root languages, to which have been added new technical vocabularies based on an equally wide range of root languages.
Tell me where that's a rule outside of certain bleeping professors' trying to Latinize English.
My high school lit. class.
Now how about some quid pro quo? Tell me why "certain bleeping professors' trying to Latinize English" is an accurate characterization of the proponents of this rule, and why that characterization (if accurate) invalidates the rule.
And, unfortunately, as much as I believe in the right of everyone to have a voice, Joe Sixpack and Sarah Soccermom are usually morons.
And, also unfortunately, "Joe Sixpack" and "Sarah Soccermom" don't actually exist, but are rather stereotypes for conveniently demonizing real people you can't be bothered to learn about before dismissing their opinions.
I suppose thats what this whole thing comes down to, should people expect help for free software?
To me, it seems more like, "what kind of interaction should people expect from other community members, when they join a software developer/user community?"
Should they expect a community full of jerks saying, "I got mine, chump, now STFU and let me enjoy it", or should they expect a community of cheerful, cooperative, helpful people interested in discussing the ins and outs of the sofware helping newcomers to experience its many benefits?
I don't necessarily expect help with free software, but I do expect that if you've started or joined a community about that software, then you're here to talk about the software in a productive way. Why join a community if you're just going to fly solo anyway while abusing anybody who comes along looking for a collaborative approach?
Whatever happened to naming species after something...I dunno....scientific?
Like, say, the woman who funded the research that discovered this new dinosaur species? Sounds like a pretty scientific naming convention to me. After all, without her interest and support, the thing wouldn't be getting named at all.
And really, who cares? The discoverer gets the credit, the financier gets the name, and the whole world gets the scientific discovery itself. Sounds like win-win, not win-whine, to me.
Uh... So when are we going to see a consumer version of this beast? Ala, the Jeep and the Hummer.
Right about the time the market figures out that consumers want a 6-ton robot pickup truck the same way they want a utility/vanity off-road automobile.
In other words, right about the time we're going to see consumer versions of the five-ton truck and the main battle tank.
If the average temperature of the earth changes by 3 degrees, a billion is not an unreasonable number.
In your opinion.
Looking at the physical global evidence made me re-evalute my stance on Global warming. Yes, I think it is happening, and it's rate is alarming.
You also seem to think this justifies calling anybody who disagrees with you worse than a Nazi. Have you considered the possibility that they might either know more than you, or else have an honest misunderstanding of the situation, and that comparing them to the gold standard of mass murderers and bigots is totally inappropriate?
I think the US,and other countries, should start to models about where the new farmalnds will be, what areas will be gone with a 1 foot, 10 foot and 15 foot rise in the oceans. Look at where the people are giong to go and start planning for it.
You also seem to think that anybody who doesn't plan for it is worse than a Nazi. How's your own planning going? Are you fully prepared, or should we be disturbed by your Nazi tendencies?
Shipping lane will change, it is possible to loss global currents. Plan for it.
And if we don't, we're worse than Nazis. I get it. Anybody who disagrees with you is supremely evil and wrong. Does this kind of arrogance and hatred usually work out for you?
And yet I note that this is your first contribution to the debate, and you come across as substantially less well-spoken, well-reasoned, and well-informed than the parent.
Were I forced to choose between his position and yours, I'd have to choose his, on account of him being quite obviously the lesser of two asshats.
Now, did you have a useful refutation to make, or are you just flailing?
First, the Holocaust actually happened. Its antecedents, workings, and results have been documented, studied, and well-understood for some time.
On the other hand, "hundreds of millions to billions of people are famished or killed over [global warming]" is a hypothetical future scenario, that has not happened yet and may--may--not happen at all. Not only that, but its antecedents and workings are not yet well-understood, nor have they yet been well-documented or thoroughly understood. And its results, in some hypothetical future, can only be guessed at, even by experts--they're just making educated guesses.
So at the moment, you're accusing anybody who dissents from the mainstream on climate change worse than a Nazi, even though Nazis actually did perpetrate the holocaust, and we presently have no real evidence that global warming will play out the way you expect nor have the impact on human survival that you expect.
And this is why Nazi comparisons always kill a debate. Because they always seem to be accompanied by exactly this sort of unthinking, heinous disregard for common sense, and blind hatred of dissenters.
(Personally, I suspect you are a big hypocrite: Enthusiastically admiring how Galileo stuck it to the mainstream scientists of his time, while equally enthusiastically denouncing any scientist who questions the mainstream on global warming today.)
If the managers ARE receptive to criticism, then the system will work spectacularly.
Assuming the employees in general are spectacularly competent to manage operations, spectacularly aware of the high-level complexities of running a profitable call center, and spectacularly inclined to look at the big picture, rather than merely their own little corner of disgruntlement.
Not that the employees won't have some good and insightful suggestions, mind you. I just suspect that the awsome and asshat will cancel each other out to a degree that precludes "spectacular" results.
Sometimes the proper management response to criticism is "you don't understand what's really going on here. I'd explain it to you, but you'd probably learn it better over time, through direct experience as you do your job and see more of how the company operates".
Seriously, though, that's exactly what makes "depends" the better answer: It drives the questioner's thoughts in the direction of actually figuring out the details.
Which is why I step through the top results until I find a good one.
I just don't keep stepping through results until I've found several good ones. I'm not googling to do real research; I'm googling to satisfy idle curiosity.
Coming soon to an old-media outlet near you: frivolous lawsuits by the proprietors of worthless webpages, claiming that search engine ranking systems are unfairly discriminating against them.
Also, now is the time to begin needlessly worrying that you're missing all the really useful websites buried somewhere around page 13.
Actually, there's been a plan floating around for years, to use the same methodology to collect particles from the surface of Europa: drop an impactor on the surface, fly the orbiter through the plume, collect particles. Analyze some on the fly, bring others back home for more detailed study.
It looks like the impactor/collector mode is becoming popular among the space-oriented smarty men, probably because it works and is cost-effective.
Think about it.
You don't have to design the impactor for precision guidance and soft landings. You don't have to load it down with robotic collectors and onboard labs. And you obviously don't have to include any lunar launch and earth return capability. This constitutes a significant reduction in weight and complexity, with its attendant reduction in cost and increase in success chances.
The orbiter/collector, meanwhile, can be optimized for its discrete tasks: collecting, analyzing, and (possibly) returning samples. It also doesn't need to be designed for soft landings and lunar launch capability. It can be designed specifically for zero-g operation, rather than multi-environment operation (zero-g in space, 1/6th g on the lunar surface). Again, this leads to weight and complexity savings, further increasing the chances of success and reducing cost.
This approach--multiple, specialized stages, each optimized for a set of discrete tasks--was chosen for the Apollo project, where it was implemented very successfully to deliver several groundbreaking missions at an acceptable cost and within the weight and engineering budgets imposed by the state of the art at that time.
I'm not at all surprised to see it being considered here. It's a proven approach with many benefits and few drawbacks.
Slashdot Mirror
It's data, not footwear.
It would smell like dirty sockets.
Because none of the current Intel Macs support multiple hard disks (except externally, but that's a pain esp. for the laptops),
Sounds like the real problem is that a botique platform has significant hardware limitations that adversely impact convenience and utility across the board.
Because English, despite having borrowed many words from Latin, is a Germanic language not a Latin one.
So?
English is allowed to borrow words from as many languages as it likes, but must only pick up grammatical conventions from the German?
It kinda sounds like you're saying "English may have used some Latin grammar for many years, but since English is really a Germanic language, the Latin grammar is bogus and we should all stop taking it seriously."
If so, I don't buy it. English is English, an rich, eclectic, and highly dynamic language; the foundation of which cannot be properly restricted to a single root language, but rather is based on a heady mixture of several root languages, to which have been added new technical vocabularies based on an equally wide range of root languages.
Tell me where that's a rule outside of certain bleeping professors' trying to Latinize English.
My high school lit. class.
Now how about some quid pro quo? Tell me why "certain bleeping professors' trying to Latinize English" is an accurate characterization of the proponents of this rule, and why that characterization (if accurate) invalidates the rule.
They flex, presumably.
generalizing and making off-color quips is divisive and insulting. I don't do either. Neither should you. Please stop.
And, unfortunately, as much as I believe in the right of everyone to have a voice, Joe Sixpack and Sarah Soccermom are usually morons.
And, also unfortunately, "Joe Sixpack" and "Sarah Soccermom" don't actually exist, but are rather stereotypes for conveniently demonizing real people you can't be bothered to learn about before dismissing their opinions.
I suppose thats what this whole thing comes down to, should people expect help for free software?
To me, it seems more like, "what kind of interaction should people expect from other community members, when they join a software developer/user community?"
Should they expect a community full of jerks saying, "I got mine, chump, now STFU and let me enjoy it", or should they expect a community of cheerful, cooperative, helpful people interested in discussing the ins and outs of the sofware helping newcomers to experience its many benefits?
I don't necessarily expect help with free software, but I do expect that if you've started or joined a community about that software, then you're here to talk about the software in a productive way. Why join a community if you're just going to fly solo anyway while abusing anybody who comes along looking for a collaborative approach?
I don't think "simulating nukes or finding prime numbers" is wasteful either, so for me it's a win-win situation. Go NASA!
Whatever happened to naming species after something...I dunno....scientific?
Like, say, the woman who funded the research that discovered this new dinosaur species? Sounds like a pretty scientific naming convention to me. After all, without her interest and support, the thing wouldn't be getting named at all.
And really, who cares? The discoverer gets the credit, the financier gets the name, and the whole world gets the scientific discovery itself. Sounds like win-win, not win-whine, to me.
Uh... So when are we going to see a consumer version of this beast? Ala, the Jeep and the Hummer.
Right about the time the market figures out that consumers want a 6-ton robot pickup truck the same way they want a utility/vanity off-road automobile.
In other words, right about the time we're going to see consumer versions of the five-ton truck and the main battle tank.
If the average temperature of the earth changes by 3 degrees, a billion is not an unreasonable number.
In your opinion.
Looking at the physical global evidence made me re-evalute my stance on Global warming. Yes, I think it is happening, and it's rate is alarming.
You also seem to think this justifies calling anybody who disagrees with you worse than a Nazi. Have you considered the possibility that they might either know more than you, or else have an honest misunderstanding of the situation, and that comparing them to the gold standard of mass murderers and bigots is totally inappropriate?
I think the US,and other countries, should start to models about where the new farmalnds will be, what areas will be gone with a 1 foot, 10 foot and 15 foot rise in the oceans. Look at where the people are giong to go and start planning for it.
You also seem to think that anybody who doesn't plan for it is worse than a Nazi. How's your own planning going? Are you fully prepared, or should we be disturbed by your Nazi tendencies?
Shipping lane will change, it is possible to loss global currents. Plan for it.
And if we don't, we're worse than Nazis. I get it. Anybody who disagrees with you is supremely evil and wrong. Does this kind of arrogance and hatred usually work out for you?
And yet I note that this is your first contribution to the debate, and you come across as substantially less well-spoken, well-reasoned, and well-informed than the parent.
Were I forced to choose between his position and yours, I'd have to choose his, on account of him being quite obviously the lesser of two asshats.
Now, did you have a useful refutation to make, or are you just flailing?
First, the Holocaust actually happened. Its antecedents, workings, and results have been documented, studied, and well-understood for some time.
On the other hand, "hundreds of millions to billions of people are famished or killed over [global warming]" is a hypothetical future scenario, that has not happened yet and may--may--not happen at all. Not only that, but its antecedents and workings are not yet well-understood, nor have they yet been well-documented or thoroughly understood. And its results, in some hypothetical future, can only be guessed at, even by experts--they're just making educated guesses.
So at the moment, you're accusing anybody who dissents from the mainstream on climate change worse than a Nazi, even though Nazis actually did perpetrate the holocaust, and we presently have no real evidence that global warming will play out the way you expect nor have the impact on human survival that you expect.
And this is why Nazi comparisons always kill a debate. Because they always seem to be accompanied by exactly this sort of unthinking, heinous disregard for common sense, and blind hatred of dissenters.
(Personally, I suspect you are a big hypocrite: Enthusiastically admiring how Galileo stuck it to the mainstream scientists of his time, while equally enthusiastically denouncing any scientist who questions the mainstream on global warming today.)
If the managers ARE receptive to criticism, then the system will work spectacularly.
Assuming the employees in general are spectacularly competent to manage operations, spectacularly aware of the high-level complexities of running a profitable call center, and spectacularly inclined to look at the big picture, rather than merely their own little corner of disgruntlement.
Not that the employees won't have some good and insightful suggestions, mind you. I just suspect that the awsome and asshat will cancel each other out to a degree that precludes "spectacular" results.
Sometimes the proper management response to criticism is "you don't understand what's really going on here. I'd explain it to you, but you'd probably learn it better over time, through direct experience as you do your job and see more of how the company operates".
Stranger still, notepad.exe is my favorite text editor by a large margin.
vi comes in a distant second.
MS Word ranks ahead of the OpenOffice text editor, but that's about it.
Of course this is all just personal opinion.
YMMV. HTH. HAND. ETC. ETC. ETC.
Heh.
Seriously, though, that's exactly what makes "depends" the better answer: It drives the questioner's thoughts in the direction of actually figuring out the details.
Enh. I didn't need a "better picture", but thanks anyways.
I generally translate freely and without pedantry between "pages", "windows" and "screens" when thinking of computer-based content.
Yeah, but do you always check out all 100?
Which is why I step through the top results until I find a good one.
I just don't keep stepping through results until I've found several good ones. I'm not googling to do real research; I'm googling to satisfy idle curiosity.
If I were doing real research, I'd use Wikipedia.
Well, by "step through" I don't necessarily mean "follow the link and study the site". In practice, a fair amount of blurb-scanning is undertaken.
But the basic process is always "start at the top and work my way down, until I find a satisfactory result".
Rarely takes more than one page, almost never takes more than two.
Heh.
Clearly your puny human brain is unable to comprehend the freakishly bizarre user experience that is Slashdot's main attraction for me.
Apparently not.
Coming soon to an old-media outlet near you: frivolous lawsuits by the proprietors of worthless webpages, claiming that search engine ranking systems are unfairly discriminating against them.
Also, now is the time to begin needlessly worrying that you're missing all the really useful websites buried somewhere around page 13.
Personally, I start at the top of a set of Google results, and step through each link until I hit one that meets my needs.
In other news, nobody likes to grovel through page after page of marginally-relevant crap.
Actually, there's been a plan floating around for years, to use the same methodology to collect particles from the surface of Europa: drop an impactor on the surface, fly the orbiter through the plume, collect particles. Analyze some on the fly, bring others back home for more detailed study.
It looks like the impactor/collector mode is becoming popular among the space-oriented smarty men, probably because it works and is cost-effective.
Think about it.
You don't have to design the impactor for precision guidance and soft landings. You don't have to load it down with robotic collectors and onboard labs. And you obviously don't have to include any lunar launch and earth return capability. This constitutes a significant reduction in weight and complexity, with its attendant reduction in cost and increase in success chances.
The orbiter/collector, meanwhile, can be optimized for its discrete tasks: collecting, analyzing, and (possibly) returning samples. It also doesn't need to be designed for soft landings and lunar launch capability. It can be designed specifically for zero-g operation, rather than multi-environment operation (zero-g in space, 1/6th g on the lunar surface). Again, this leads to weight and complexity savings, further increasing the chances of success and reducing cost.
This approach--multiple, specialized stages, each optimized for a set of discrete tasks--was chosen for the Apollo project, where it was implemented very successfully to deliver several groundbreaking missions at an acceptable cost and within the weight and engineering budgets imposed by the state of the art at that time.
I'm not at all surprised to see it being considered here. It's a proven approach with many benefits and few drawbacks.