Please describe the tax situation you're imagining. The federal rate, excluding state tax and payroll tax, is 28% for $150k. You're numbers are off by at least 10%. More money is more money and people with that income have it dramatically easier than people with half that income, make no mistake about it but your numbers of wrong.
It's a dramatically easier lifestyle than someone making half that, no question, but the numbers are wrong.
To the extent that they're not sold on the black market.
A really good exploitable bug on very popular platforms is very valuable. The numbers of reported CVEs have been dropping industry wide, not because of better development practices...
I always wonder what it is about businesses that seem unable to do just about anything to turn themselves around versus more successful ones. Simply the guy at the helm? The corporate culture? A too-entrenched bureaucracy? How does a single company make bad decision after bad decision so persistently?
This is a truly fascinating question. I have a theory that a company like Sega can't turn around because
a) they have drank too much of their own koolaid to maybe do something different and
b) they experienced enough success doing things the way that they did that anything less than the same success is considered a failure. Lastly
c) It takes time for success and failure, when your buisness isn't shooting in to space like a rocket, when do you decide that you're failing? Do you give your teams time? Or do you just look at the competition and shut it down?
For example with a, they seemed to be at a juncture where they had to partner on hardware, stop doing hardware, or like triple down on hardware and maybe get some outside investment to do that. They had made money with hardware in the past, simply cutting that off or partnering with a sony (that had a wonderful Nintendo partnership) had to be a very tough decision. Then the question is, if they only do software, is there any chance that they will have the successes that they had had before? I suspect by the time they could legitimately talk about that, the answer was decisively 'no' and Sony and MS had already begun to build some of their own franchises and were really starting to roll. They would have had to be willing to acknowledge that there was going to be a "new normal" and that it was normal for them to make a lot less money.
Some of those questions are hard, I was at IBM in the mid 90s and it was because the people running things weren't involved with the history of things that they were able to make some of those hard choices. It's easy to stand on the side and say what Sega should have done, it's different when you built the genesis and watched it make money.
We had a baby in 2010, cut the cord because we didn't want to contaminate him will all the bullshit. Sports is the only thing we remotely miss..
This is very easy to stop if they want, cut out the reality shit, produce quality content. Make the news news again with a bit less opinion. And by quality content, I'd say figuring out Law and Order and CSI and then making n versions of those shows in different cities probably isn't good enough. No more American Idol type crap. Like real quality entertainment, like dramas and comedies. I'd gladly pay for a news channel and 5 to 10 channels with good quality stuff on it.
That takes money, takes risk and takes some intelligence to try to suss out the good from the bad. Thus I predict it won't happen, not from the current batch of media and distribution companies. They're too fat and lazy and used to just cashing checks.
As a thought experiment, I've been pondering how we need to change our police and how we can with some of this technology. Wearables seem novel and like they could very easily be factored in as evidence in certain crime situations, it seems like it has to be after the fact though. More fundamentally, with cameras and the different recognitions and perhaps a few other sensors, I cannot imagine a case where we wouldn't be able to detect weapons in a crowd in a public space, maybe within the next 15 years.
Say for example you could, with a high degree of confidence, identify the absence of guns in a crowd or report that n people out of this crowd are most likely carrying weapons, you could instruct the police on how to engage them, whether or not they need to have lethal weapons or not. Likewise, maybe even as a service, you could be notified if there were too many weapons in your vicinity or something to that effect. That seems like a very interesting and increasingly possible service. Is concealed carry protected as a privacy? There will be some interesting problems, the militarized police will likely never want to relinquish their weapons, even if they knew there were engaging unarmed people, I have no idea what their excuse will be (other than weapons help them to present an image of power and authority) And I suspect that concealed carry folks will be upset of others around them know about it and react to it. There will be some interesting policy challenges and this stuff seems like it is almost certainly coming down the pipe.
How is semiconductors not a core business for a company that still makes huge profits off mainframes and midranges?? Sure, keep design in house, but you'll lose the flexibility you have. Imagine your research division came up with an amazing new chip design they wanted to work on right away, but were told "Nope, it'll take 6 months to ramp up GlobalFoundries, TSMC, or whatever. Sorry."
Actually, if they can partner with a fabrication company and get the quality they need it will increase their margins. Fabs are expensive and just not worth it until you have massive volumes. Old IBM would buy up a stake (or more likely, keep a stake) their partner and it'll almost certainly be whomever buys their current fabrication ability.
Look at Apple, they don't have a fab... It's odd to me that this issue strikes such a cord, IBM has a checkered history at best in this department. More importantly, the game has shifted from raw cycles and MIPS to performance per watt and while they've done some good stuff in that area a contract fab that can chase the field can probably do better. There was a good block of time, a decade, where IBM owned POWER end to end and it was mediocre compared to the competition. Ideally they can focus more on their designs and make them even better. It's also very clear that they have a new product family they are focusing on, they've made some bold predictions about how big the Watson market will potentially be and if they can really productize that stuff and make it work as good as it worked on Jeopardy without a support staff then I simply don't see why everyone won't have a Watson in 15 years. They are going after that. I'm 14 years removed from IBM but that looks like it's potentially an exciting development.
It's just changing. Answer me this, realistically, what do any PC makes bring to the table any more? Apple brings it all, they are the odd one. HP? Dell? etc..? They take intel parts, they take other 3rdparty parts and integrate them, then they take software from MS and charge a premium on the whole thing. It's a commodity business. It can absolutely be done as well by China and India and other countries. Is there any special skill in assembling those parts? I don't mean this to offend anybody but all of the PC business is going to and should migrate to wherever the labor is the most plentiful and inexpensive. If anything, it seems shocking that all those companies haven't bailed out of that business years ago. Fabing chips in particular seems like a business already designed for that.
The nuclear industry seems a lot like the American automotive industry, and maybe for good reasons. They've had to fight political battles and prove themselves against fossil fuels in and early on people were not concerned with global warming.
I know there are prototype "meltdown proof" reactors but why aren't they the norm? Anything to do with output and cost? Fukushima's best plan now is to freeze the ground for I don't know how many years? It's going to cost half a billion dollars to build the system but it might need to stay in operation for decades... maybe longer? The costs at Chernobyl are still in the billions and it's not making energy any more, that's just to keep the already ruined land from getting worse.. These things are pre-optimized for nearer term profits for the operators and the longer term clean up costs in the rare (but not so rare it never happens) even of a disaster and the longer term waste storage costs just aren't factored in, not on the correct scale at least.
I know we have thorium an there are some compelling options that seem like there could be abundant, affordable energy for ages to come without contributing to global warming but the downsides are staggering and more importantly, we actually experience the downsides, they aren't impossibly rare. I don't think the problems are such that solutions cannot be engineered but it seems like they're more focused on other things than building the best nuclear solutions..
IBM and Intel rocked that model for another decade, if you look at the PS/2 line up, half of them were very nearly obsolete when they were released. Intel had it's SX chips..
What kind of reality distortion field do you think that team had? I don't mean this in an offensive way but the Mac was demonstrated and announced at nearly the same time, (with it's own "SX" style 16bit bus 32bit chip...) People talk about the Apple reality distortion field but I can't imagine what being on the PC Jr. team must have been like when the Mac dropped... "Oh, people don't really care about graphics and stuff..." or "well, this is a business machine, not a toy..." or what on earth did you tell yourself?
That Porsche may have 600 hp, but in the hand of an excellent driver, it would be still a very safe car.
Nothing against the Porsche, but it would never be a "very safe car" regardless of the driver, the better the driver, the less likely you are to find out how "safe" the car is but that doesn't make the car safer.
As I have gotten older, I've become less offended by the Fast and Furious movies, they're just fun movies, that's all. From the news, it sounds like everyone involved had fun and enjoyed each other, that makes it somewhat sad, they didn't seem to take what they were doing too seriously and they were just making fun movies and having a good time. I say this without intending to be an asshole but that car was a chainsaw without a safety guard, it's meant for expert drivers and tracks, this is exactly the outcome that makes that so. Being in some car movies and maybe some celebrity sports car races doesn't make you a professional racing car driver. I'm absolutely certain this wouldn't have been the outcome if they were obeying the traffic laws or in a lot of different (albeit less sexy) vehicles. Also, there are a lot of dead really really good racing drivers, guys who were among the best in the world and at the tops of their games when they made a mistake in a very unforgiving vehicle.
Re:What's good for others apparently is no good fo
on
Break Microsoft Up
·
· Score: 1
Nobody is denying them the ability to push for a unified vision. The market just isn't buying it. This isn't a punishment people are imposing, they think it's the way to let the good assets really fly highly. And it also happens to be an easy way to kill the bad assets.
Does Xbox need to be part of MS to succeed? If so why? If not, could it really dominate Nintendo and Sony on its own?
How about bing? If they lived and died by their own revenues, would they get more hungry?
The idea a lot of people have is that MS simply does too much, not that they don't have a unified vision but they have that vision, a giant legacy and a lot of cruft.
HBase and Hadoop is a very interesting option for certain kinds of data. It becomes more and more interesting as you add more and more machines too...
I have no idea how the data is structured or how it is queried and worked with but HBase may be a very interesting option. Once you dork around with the configs a bit and get it booted up, it's insanely easy to scale it.
This, the P1 and the new Porsche 918 use electrics because of the insane torque... They are upfront about it, a Ferrari is about performance, not green.
Since you mentioned it, what are the good calculator apps for smartphones? THey all seem to focus on a smaller subset of things, I'd like an HP48 or Ti89 replacement. Either that, or why not Mathematica or Maple or Derive on the iPhone?
We live in Colorado (300+ days of blue sky and sun shine) and were greeted with a similar story. To cover our normal usage, we'd need a $26,000 system and with all the rebates and what have you, we'd still need to shell out $12,000. 6 to 8 years to pay for itself.
It's not crazy crazy expensive, I think it's in the range of something a homeowner can purchase. Maybe get an equity line of credit if needed. However it's on the high side. If it was in the 5000-8000 range? I think we'd have easily done it by now.
You mean journaling and some other features migrated to ReiserFS...
It pushed some issues, also went about things the wrong way with the community.
Fundamentally, and this is an issue that caused community issues with Reiser pushed on it initially, a filesystem's integrity is paramount. People trust it to safely store data. Reliability tradeoffs for performance doesn't cut it; regardless of the benchmarks. The other thing, how committed is the community to taking care of it? Last thing you want is a couple terabytes of data on a disk that you cannot read. The geek boys that want to simply run benchmarks might get a kick out of it but it's devastating when you lose data to something you trusted..
Wasn't New Century Schoolbook demonstrated to be noticeably easier to read in large scale tests? ALl the subtle things, the serifs, the a-spacing and c-spacing. I could have sworn I saw a study on that from like the 70s.
The problem is, the easier to read NCS font is ugly to look at. There are intermediate options, but sans-serifed fonts with simple lines and curves have a better looking style. A car in particular is a difficult blend of style and function.
It's more than that. They do statistics to try to identify language patterns and then associate those language patterns with bias.
That might be a very reasonable approach, in fact it might be the best we have but I don't think the language patterns are that great at identifying bias so much as they identify the bias of constituents. Freakanomics radio had an show about this a while back. The closest you get is a couple derivatives away from the actual intent, you chart politicians and their level of 'loyalty' then you chart their speech patterns and think tanks they frequently quote and then you compare the usage of newspapers and other articles to those speech patterns. It's better than nothing but they also identified that papers with more bias tend their bias toward their customer base. Read: papers in conservative places tend to be more conservative or at least use speech patterns that are consistent with conservative speech patterns and the same is true for liberal places.
Seems like more liberal folks in more conservative places would adopt the conservative speech patterns but not the intent. The intent or actual viewpoint doesn't always match the choices of words, does it?
The difference? There are a couple but the first of which is that the lawyers and judges involved are not stupid, they may not be techsters but they are almost certainly not stupid and this encrypted data is but one piece of evidence and you f-ed up long before if you're in this position. Second, there is a judge that will judge.
If you pistol is stolen or lost, you have some obligation to report it as such. It's typically registered and in that case, they know you have it, know the make and model. If you conveniently discover that it is missing when a court requests it they can check to see if you reported it lost or stolen beyond that, there is a judge there to judge you and he'll judge your credibility as he sees it from your behavior up to that point. Basically, keep track of your weapons, particularly when you're getting ready to be involved in a trial. Are you the kind of person that loses a pistol and forgets to tell anyone?
The password isn't quite the same. They may have some idea if you regularly used the computer. Again, I'll reiterate a couple things, the other guys aren't stupid and you didn't get in this position simply because of an encrypted drive. Now if you've spent 3 years doing something considered crime and there is other testimony where you've suggested you don't remember something because it's on the computer you use daily and now you don't remember the password, I can tell you how I'd judge you. Or maybe it's on the computer you resisted handing over and kept in a safe, those factors might not be admissible in the case against you but they certainly come in to play when you attempt to "forget" the password. Do you regularly use computer and keep track of dozens of accounts and passwords but this one computer you had locked up in a safe at your mothers house that you tried to pretend didn't exist, you forgot how to log in?
Seriously, I have been trying to get over the MS hate that I've had since Windows 3. They're just another big company, trying to do what they can and at least they try to compete in new markets even though they routinely get shelled by the competition when they stray off the desktop.
But WTF?!?. Badges in Visual Studio? For real? They have no idea what they are doing. Are they chasing 15 year old developers to be? This is a company with 10s of billions in cash that can subsidize products like Xbox for years and years. This is fucking Bob in the IDE.
Ubuntu (and it's variants) and OpenSuse are pretty damned good, it's literally minutes and you've got an integrated, modern KDE, or Unity or GNOME up and running. You want more software of security patches? It's just a couple clicks and you're there. Now if you had some concrete numbers on instability or performance numbers then you could talk about something, real numbers, not just hearsay.
Thing is, I don't think you can find and interesting performance difference between Linux and FreeBSD, excluding the possibility that there might be a few pathological cases where one really out performs the other, and the Linux community is such that if you could produce a real benchmark, they'd invalidate it before too long and fix the performance problem. And from my own experience shipping products and running businesses on it, I don't think you could show a substantial difference in reliability. Now one thing I know you could measure the difference on is the amount of time managing them and I think Linux has a gigantic lead here.
I'm not a BSD hater exactly, but they need a better story than they've had and they need a different sort of community. If you like oldskool like UNIX, real UNIX, then BSD is just the thing. If you want UNIXy like stuff with some more contemporary things (think upstart, systemd, I don't know a full desktop UI) then Linux is pretty clearly the choice. Now that newer stuff may not be what you want, I'm personally sort of surprised how well Linux does in the embedded world where a BSD might be far better suited in a multitude of ways. PCBSD is getting nice, it's still nowhere near the level of polish that Ubuntu is though. LLVM and Clang have finally provided them with a non-GCC build chain option, there has been a ton of cycles spent on GPL vs. BSD licenses and in this particular case, I don't see how BSD has benefited in those discussions, at the end of the day the difference fundamentally lets businesses do stuff and just not contribute it back. Maybe I'm wrong but while BSD was worrying about a build chain, Linux platforms were building GNOME and KDE and remarkably simple graphical installers and easy to use automatic patch systems and support for tons of hardware and the list goes on.
That's part of the solution. I'm not sure how many people are killed by the police every year (maybe 8-10 in Colorado alone) but if they don't want to be recorded, then the masses should vote to disarm them, give them pepper spray and nothing else.
I don't visit it nearly as much as I used to, it's still in my home page tabs and I scan it regularly but with a family and my career where it is I can't post as much. Some parts of growing up suck.
The world is so different now. I'll tell you what slashdot showed me and helped me with, in the mid to late 1990s it became clear that nerds and geeks could change the world. A couple guys with a computer and an idea could start a company, make money, employ people and ultimately make a difference. The hard part of that for most of us introverted nerdy dudes is "community." A few people can really make a difference but it still takes a community around them and there are community skills. "Opensource" was taking off, VA Linux and Redhat were hot stocks, I was young, fresh out of college, full of piss and viniger but I didn't know how to take part. (Why is that? I have no idea, it's really odd saying it but it's true)
I guess I had two experiences: At work, we hired a relatively well known Linux kernel hacker to help with something and he showed me how to contribute, the hows and whys of things. It was incredible how it built the community confidence. I knew how to code, I knew technology but for some reason I felt like I didn't want to look stupid or be rejected or I didn't know how to play with others. Second, I took part in the Loki Hack competition at the Atlanta Linux Showcase. ESR was there, Ryan Gordon was there a couple other guys that seem to still be nerd famous, Taco and Hemos showed up with some food or something a couple times. I remember thinking "these guys are 'doing it!'" and you guys were cool enough and friendly with *everybody* It was oddly confidence building. I have no idea why exactly I felt that way, but being around other people doing the things you want to do, contributing to a cause, taking part inspires and gives confidence to contribute and take part.
Community, communication, and all sorts of other not-quite-as-technical things are incredibly important to making something like Linux succeed. It's really hard to quantify, but I've seen and felt the difference, it's incredibly important and valuable. Thank for that. I've made my career with Linux and opensource technologies, I've got a home and a family that that stuff has helped me realize.
Slashdot Mirror
nm. There was a violawww from 1992.. I don't think I ever used it.
Do you mean "Cello?"
I thought it was mostly for gopher.
Please describe the tax situation you're imagining. The federal rate, excluding state tax and payroll tax, is 28% for $150k. You're numbers are off by at least 10%. More money is more money and people with that income have it dramatically easier than people with half that income, make no mistake about it but your numbers of wrong.
It's a dramatically easier lifestyle than someone making half that, no question, but the numbers are wrong.
To the extent that they're not sold on the black market.
A really good exploitable bug on very popular platforms is very valuable. The numbers of reported CVEs have been dropping industry wide, not because of better development practices...
I always wonder what it is about businesses that seem unable to do just about anything to turn themselves around versus more successful ones. Simply the guy at the helm? The corporate culture? A too-entrenched bureaucracy? How does a single company make bad decision after bad decision so persistently?
This is a truly fascinating question. I have a theory that a company like Sega can't turn around because
For example with a, they seemed to be at a juncture where they had to partner on hardware, stop doing hardware, or like triple down on hardware and maybe get some outside investment to do that. They had made money with hardware in the past, simply cutting that off or partnering with a sony (that had a wonderful Nintendo partnership) had to be a very tough decision. Then the question is, if they only do software, is there any chance that they will have the successes that they had had before? I suspect by the time they could legitimately talk about that, the answer was decisively 'no' and Sony and MS had already begun to build some of their own franchises and were really starting to roll. They would have had to be willing to acknowledge that there was going to be a "new normal" and that it was normal for them to make a lot less money.
Some of those questions are hard, I was at IBM in the mid 90s and it was because the people running things weren't involved with the history of things that they were able to make some of those hard choices. It's easy to stand on the side and say what Sega should have done, it's different when you built the genesis and watched it make money.
We had a baby in 2010, cut the cord because we didn't want to contaminate him will all the bullshit. Sports is the only thing we remotely miss..
This is very easy to stop if they want, cut out the reality shit, produce quality content. Make the news news again with a bit less opinion. And by quality content, I'd say figuring out Law and Order and CSI and then making n versions of those shows in different cities probably isn't good enough. No more American Idol type crap. Like real quality entertainment, like dramas and comedies. I'd gladly pay for a news channel and 5 to 10 channels with good quality stuff on it.
That takes money, takes risk and takes some intelligence to try to suss out the good from the bad. Thus I predict it won't happen, not from the current batch of media and distribution companies. They're too fat and lazy and used to just cashing checks.
As a thought experiment, I've been pondering how we need to change our police and how we can with some of this technology. Wearables seem novel and like they could very easily be factored in as evidence in certain crime situations, it seems like it has to be after the fact though. More fundamentally, with cameras and the different recognitions and perhaps a few other sensors, I cannot imagine a case where we wouldn't be able to detect weapons in a crowd in a public space, maybe within the next 15 years.
Say for example you could, with a high degree of confidence, identify the absence of guns in a crowd or report that n people out of this crowd are most likely carrying weapons, you could instruct the police on how to engage them, whether or not they need to have lethal weapons or not. Likewise, maybe even as a service, you could be notified if there were too many weapons in your vicinity or something to that effect. That seems like a very interesting and increasingly possible service. Is concealed carry protected as a privacy? There will be some interesting problems, the militarized police will likely never want to relinquish their weapons, even if they knew there were engaging unarmed people, I have no idea what their excuse will be (other than weapons help them to present an image of power and authority) And I suspect that concealed carry folks will be upset of others around them know about it and react to it. There will be some interesting policy challenges and this stuff seems like it is almost certainly coming down the pipe.
How is semiconductors not a core business for a company that still makes huge profits off mainframes and midranges?? Sure, keep design in house, but you'll lose the flexibility you have. Imagine your research division came up with an amazing new chip design they wanted to work on right away, but were told "Nope, it'll take 6 months to ramp up GlobalFoundries, TSMC, or whatever. Sorry."
Actually, if they can partner with a fabrication company and get the quality they need it will increase their margins. Fabs are expensive and just not worth it until you have massive volumes. Old IBM would buy up a stake (or more likely, keep a stake) their partner and it'll almost certainly be whomever buys their current fabrication ability.
Look at Apple, they don't have a fab... It's odd to me that this issue strikes such a cord, IBM has a checkered history at best in this department. More importantly, the game has shifted from raw cycles and MIPS to performance per watt and while they've done some good stuff in that area a contract fab that can chase the field can probably do better. There was a good block of time, a decade, where IBM owned POWER end to end and it was mediocre compared to the competition. Ideally they can focus more on their designs and make them even better. It's also very clear that they have a new product family they are focusing on, they've made some bold predictions about how big the Watson market will potentially be and if they can really productize that stuff and make it work as good as it worked on Jeopardy without a support staff then I simply don't see why everyone won't have a Watson in 15 years. They are going after that. I'm 14 years removed from IBM but that looks like it's potentially an exciting development.
It's just changing. Answer me this, realistically, what do any PC makes bring to the table any more? Apple brings it all, they are the odd one. HP? Dell? etc..? They take intel parts, they take other 3rdparty parts and integrate them, then they take software from MS and charge a premium on the whole thing. It's a commodity business. It can absolutely be done as well by China and India and other countries. Is there any special skill in assembling those parts? I don't mean this to offend anybody but all of the PC business is going to and should migrate to wherever the labor is the most plentiful and inexpensive. If anything, it seems shocking that all those companies haven't bailed out of that business years ago. Fabing chips in particular seems like a business already designed for that.
They're building them elsewhere though. And some of them are built by US companies.
The nuclear industry seems a lot like the American automotive industry, and maybe for good reasons. They've had to fight political battles and prove themselves against fossil fuels in and early on people were not concerned with global warming.
I know there are prototype "meltdown proof" reactors but why aren't they the norm? Anything to do with output and cost? Fukushima's best plan now is to freeze the ground for I don't know how many years? It's going to cost half a billion dollars to build the system but it might need to stay in operation for decades... maybe longer? The costs at Chernobyl are still in the billions and it's not making energy any more, that's just to keep the already ruined land from getting worse.. These things are pre-optimized for nearer term profits for the operators and the longer term clean up costs in the rare (but not so rare it never happens) even of a disaster and the longer term waste storage costs just aren't factored in, not on the correct scale at least.
I know we have thorium an there are some compelling options that seem like there could be abundant, affordable energy for ages to come without contributing to global warming but the downsides are staggering and more importantly, we actually experience the downsides, they aren't impossibly rare. I don't think the problems are such that solutions cannot be engineered but it seems like they're more focused on other things than building the best nuclear solutions..
IBM and Intel rocked that model for another decade, if you look at the PS/2 line up, half of them were very nearly obsolete when they were released. Intel had it's SX chips..
What kind of reality distortion field do you think that team had? I don't mean this in an offensive way but the Mac was demonstrated and announced at nearly the same time, (with it's own "SX" style 16bit bus 32bit chip...) People talk about the Apple reality distortion field but I can't imagine what being on the PC Jr. team must have been like when the Mac dropped... "Oh, people don't really care about graphics and stuff..." or "well, this is a business machine, not a toy..." or what on earth did you tell yourself?
That Porsche may have 600 hp, but in the hand of an excellent driver, it would be still a very safe car.
Nothing against the Porsche, but it would never be a "very safe car" regardless of the driver, the better the driver, the less likely you are to find out how "safe" the car is but that doesn't make the car safer.
As I have gotten older, I've become less offended by the Fast and Furious movies, they're just fun movies, that's all. From the news, it sounds like everyone involved had fun and enjoyed each other, that makes it somewhat sad, they didn't seem to take what they were doing too seriously and they were just making fun movies and having a good time. I say this without intending to be an asshole but that car was a chainsaw without a safety guard, it's meant for expert drivers and tracks, this is exactly the outcome that makes that so. Being in some car movies and maybe some celebrity sports car races doesn't make you a professional racing car driver. I'm absolutely certain this wouldn't have been the outcome if they were obeying the traffic laws or in a lot of different (albeit less sexy) vehicles. Also, there are a lot of dead really really good racing drivers, guys who were among the best in the world and at the tops of their games when they made a mistake in a very unforgiving vehicle.
Nobody is denying them the ability to push for a unified vision. The market just isn't buying it. This isn't a punishment people are imposing, they think it's the way to let the good assets really fly highly. And it also happens to be an easy way to kill the bad assets.
Does Xbox need to be part of MS to succeed? If so why? If not, could it really dominate Nintendo and Sony on its own?
How about bing? If they lived and died by their own revenues, would they get more hungry?
The idea a lot of people have is that MS simply does too much, not that they don't have a unified vision but they have that vision, a giant legacy and a lot of cruft.
HBase and Hadoop is a very interesting option for certain kinds of data. It becomes more and more interesting as you add more and more machines too...
I have no idea how the data is structured or how it is queried and worked with but HBase may be a very interesting option. Once you dork around with the configs a bit and get it booted up, it's insanely easy to scale it.
They can. They have to in F1.
This, the P1 and the new Porsche 918 use electrics because of the insane torque... They are upfront about it, a Ferrari is about performance, not green.
Since you mentioned it, what are the good calculator apps for smartphones? THey all seem to focus on a smaller subset of things, I'd like an HP48 or Ti89 replacement. Either that, or why not Mathematica or Maple or Derive on the iPhone?
Any suggestions?
We live in Colorado (300+ days of blue sky and sun shine) and were greeted with a similar story. To cover our normal usage, we'd need a $26,000 system and with all the rebates and what have you, we'd still need to shell out $12,000. 6 to 8 years to pay for itself.
It's not crazy crazy expensive, I think it's in the range of something a homeowner can purchase. Maybe get an equity line of credit if needed. However it's on the high side. If it was in the 5000-8000 range? I think we'd have easily done it by now.
You mean journaling and some other features migrated to ReiserFS...
It pushed some issues, also went about things the wrong way with the community.
Fundamentally, and this is an issue that caused community issues with Reiser pushed on it initially, a filesystem's integrity is paramount. People trust it to safely store data. Reliability tradeoffs for performance doesn't cut it; regardless of the benchmarks. The other thing, how committed is the community to taking care of it? Last thing you want is a couple terabytes of data on a disk that you cannot read. The geek boys that want to simply run benchmarks might get a kick out of it but it's devastating when you lose data to something you trusted..
Wasn't New Century Schoolbook demonstrated to be noticeably easier to read in large scale tests? ALl the subtle things, the serifs, the a-spacing and c-spacing. I could have sworn I saw a study on that from like the 70s.
The problem is, the easier to read NCS font is ugly to look at. There are intermediate options, but sans-serifed fonts with simple lines and curves have a better looking style. A car in particular is a difficult blend of style and function.
It's more than that. They do statistics to try to identify language patterns and then associate those language patterns with bias.
That might be a very reasonable approach, in fact it might be the best we have but I don't think the language patterns are that great at identifying bias so much as they identify the bias of constituents. Freakanomics radio had an show about this a while back. The closest you get is a couple derivatives away from the actual intent, you chart politicians and their level of 'loyalty' then you chart their speech patterns and think tanks they frequently quote and then you compare the usage of newspapers and other articles to those speech patterns. It's better than nothing but they also identified that papers with more bias tend their bias toward their customer base. Read: papers in conservative places tend to be more conservative or at least use speech patterns that are consistent with conservative speech patterns and the same is true for liberal places.
Seems like more liberal folks in more conservative places would adopt the conservative speech patterns but not the intent. The intent or actual viewpoint doesn't always match the choices of words, does it?
The difference? There are a couple but the first of which is that the lawyers and judges involved are not stupid, they may not be techsters but they are almost certainly not stupid and this encrypted data is but one piece of evidence and you f-ed up long before if you're in this position. Second, there is a judge that will judge.
If you pistol is stolen or lost, you have some obligation to report it as such. It's typically registered and in that case, they know you have it, know the make and model. If you conveniently discover that it is missing when a court requests it they can check to see if you reported it lost or stolen beyond that, there is a judge there to judge you and he'll judge your credibility as he sees it from your behavior up to that point. Basically, keep track of your weapons, particularly when you're getting ready to be involved in a trial. Are you the kind of person that loses a pistol and forgets to tell anyone?
The password isn't quite the same. They may have some idea if you regularly used the computer. Again, I'll reiterate a couple things, the other guys aren't stupid and you didn't get in this position simply because of an encrypted drive. Now if you've spent 3 years doing something considered crime and there is other testimony where you've suggested you don't remember something because it's on the computer you use daily and now you don't remember the password, I can tell you how I'd judge you. Or maybe it's on the computer you resisted handing over and kept in a safe, those factors might not be admissible in the case against you but they certainly come in to play when you attempt to "forget" the password. Do you regularly use computer and keep track of dozens of accounts and passwords but this one computer you had locked up in a safe at your mothers house that you tried to pretend didn't exist, you forgot how to log in?
What will a judge think from your story?
Seriously, I have been trying to get over the MS hate that I've had since Windows 3. They're just another big company, trying to do what they can and at least they try to compete in new markets even though they routinely get shelled by the competition when they stray off the desktop.
But WTF?!?. Badges in Visual Studio? For real? They have no idea what they are doing. Are they chasing 15 year old developers to be? This is a company with 10s of billions in cash that can subsidize products like Xbox for years and years. This is fucking Bob in the IDE.
Ubuntu (and it's variants) and OpenSuse are pretty damned good, it's literally minutes and you've got an integrated, modern KDE, or Unity or GNOME up and running. You want more software of security patches? It's just a couple clicks and you're there. Now if you had some concrete numbers on instability or performance numbers then you could talk about something, real numbers, not just hearsay.
Thing is, I don't think you can find and interesting performance difference between Linux and FreeBSD, excluding the possibility that there might be a few pathological cases where one really out performs the other, and the Linux community is such that if you could produce a real benchmark, they'd invalidate it before too long and fix the performance problem. And from my own experience shipping products and running businesses on it, I don't think you could show a substantial difference in reliability. Now one thing I know you could measure the difference on is the amount of time managing them and I think Linux has a gigantic lead here.
I'm not a BSD hater exactly, but they need a better story than they've had and they need a different sort of community. If you like oldskool like UNIX, real UNIX, then BSD is just the thing. If you want UNIXy like stuff with some more contemporary things (think upstart, systemd, I don't know a full desktop UI) then Linux is pretty clearly the choice. Now that newer stuff may not be what you want, I'm personally sort of surprised how well Linux does in the embedded world where a BSD might be far better suited in a multitude of ways. PCBSD is getting nice, it's still nowhere near the level of polish that Ubuntu is though. LLVM and Clang have finally provided them with a non-GCC build chain option, there has been a ton of cycles spent on GPL vs. BSD licenses and in this particular case, I don't see how BSD has benefited in those discussions, at the end of the day the difference fundamentally lets businesses do stuff and just not contribute it back. Maybe I'm wrong but while BSD was worrying about a build chain, Linux platforms were building GNOME and KDE and remarkably simple graphical installers and easy to use automatic patch systems and support for tons of hardware and the list goes on.
That's part of the solution. I'm not sure how many people are killed by the police every year (maybe 8-10 in Colorado alone) but if they don't want to be recorded, then the masses should vote to disarm them, give them pepper spray and nothing else.
I don't visit it nearly as much as I used to, it's still in my home
page tabs and I scan it regularly but with a family and my career
where it is I can't post as much. Some parts of growing up suck.
The world is so different now. I'll tell you what slashdot showed me
and helped me with, in the mid to late 1990s it became clear that
nerds and geeks could change the world. A couple guys with a computer
and an idea could start a company, make money, employ people and
ultimately make a difference. The hard part of that for most of us
introverted nerdy dudes is "community." A few people can really make a
difference but it still takes a community around them and there are
community skills. "Opensource" was taking off, VA Linux and Redhat
were hot stocks, I was young, fresh out of college, full of piss and
viniger but I didn't know how to take part. (Why is that? I have no
idea, it's really odd saying it but it's true)
I guess I had two experiences: At work, we hired a relatively well
known Linux kernel hacker to help with something and he showed me how
to contribute, the hows and whys of things. It was incredible how it
built the community confidence. I knew how to code, I knew technology
but for some reason I felt like I didn't want to look stupid or be
rejected or I didn't know how to play with others. Second, I took
part in the Loki Hack competition at the Atlanta Linux Showcase. ESR
was there, Ryan Gordon was there a couple other guys that seem to
still be nerd famous, Taco and Hemos showed up with some food or
something a couple times. I remember thinking "these guys are 'doing
it!'" and you guys were cool enough and friendly with *everybody* It
was oddly confidence building. I have no idea why exactly I felt that
way, but being around other people doing the things you want to do,
contributing to a cause, taking part inspires and gives confidence to
contribute and take part.
Community, communication, and all sorts of other
not-quite-as-technical things are incredibly important to making
something like Linux succeed. It's really hard to quantify, but I've
seen and felt the difference, it's incredibly important and valuable.
Thank for that. I've made my career with Linux and opensource
technologies, I've got a home and a family that that stuff has helped
me realize.