We don't do a lot of chemistry below 91 K. At those temperatures, it seems perfectly reasonable that reactions that offer very slight energy gains on Earth could be extremely useful for a Titanian organism.
The reverse for a place like Mercury. We have the ideal set of elements and chemical reactions for the temperature range on Earth - of course those same elements aren't going to form life in a different temperature range. That's beside the point.
It doesn't have to be that pronounced. Just so that if in 3v3 3 rocks beats 3 scissors, you're fine. These things tend to be more pronounced when you add players, since there's sort of a snowball effect when you get more. Say you've got a 10% damage bonus, well in 3v3 that's pretty much a 30% damage bonus as far as the first guy you kill is concerned if you play your cards right.
But I play more RTS, where skill tends to be the balancing factor (though obviously civ plays a role.)
Except the difference is that.Net derives most of its appeal from its tight integration with Windows. You try and port it and the OS simply doesn't have the supporting utilities you've built it to work with.
Java on the other hand is self-contained. So while you do have to do porting, Java code, in practice, doesn't make as many assumptions about the environment it's running in.
Well, that's basically it. The bottleneck with gaming is really graphics, and if you've got optimized graphics routines, what's doing the higher-level processing is not as big of an issue as one might think.
The irony is that it was probably a good assumption eight years ago that no one would decrypt this stuff. But after eight years of occupation, the tools are readily available on the open markets we've created and nurtured.
Simple. The US business models are all based on convincing people they need more bandwidth. It's just like how mobile providers force you into slow, difficult to use voicemail systems that eat up minutes instead of giving you a simple and easy to use inbox just like you use for text messages. They're not interested in optimizing network usage, they're interested in increasing network usage so they can charge more.
Doesn't matter if they're fighting each other. They'll still be fighting on our machines we'd rather use for other things. We've already seen it with bots that turn on Windows update so that the exploit it got in with can't be used by another bot to get in.
That means Microsoft's latest offerings get grouped with Mac OS and Linux because they have made pretty decent improvements.
In theory yes. In fact, Window's latest offerings are only protected from programs targeted at older versions of the OS. If you're targeting Windows 7 explicitly, it's actually fairly easy to get escalated privileges.
Debugging is not the user's responsibility. If it never worked to begin with, regardless of cause, a refund is naturally required, EULAs and their writers be damned.
You wouldn't expect a refund for something that doesn't even install properly? That's the very definition of why you should get a refund. Yes, it's fine that their program doesn't work on my machine. They shouldn't expect me to let them keep my money if that's the case.
All the studies I've seen show that at worst, the number of of mistakes introduced and corrected every month on Wikipedia remains about neutral, and the number of errors comparable, if not better than print.
You're worrying about 'extra mistakes' but you're neglecting the addition of extra information which the print won't have either. Even if you had a nice digital competitor like Encyclopedia Britannica, there's no evidence (or even credible reason to believe) that the ratio of mistakes introduced to facts introduced would be better than on the payed service.
Not necessarily. A metric pizza would have a circumference of 1 meter, and therefore have a diameter of roughly 30 cm. With a diameter of 100/pi, you would have a radius of 50/pi, and an area of 10,000/pi cm2. Dividing that up into six slices would give you a little over 500cm2 per person, which is about as round a number as one might expect. 10 slices gives 300 cm2, which is in no way metric.
He was running on a deadline, and discovered he had a non-story with very little time before publication, so naturally he was a little hostile to a good explanation. I imagine he'll realize it was a stupid article in a week or two...
But, website operators that aren't idiots don't change URLs.
Yes they do. Everyone does it. Nobody likes to do it, but inevitably it eventually happens to some pages. Furthermore, what if I'm not linking a specific site, but just an article that I happened to find on that site? Then that's where you really want something descriptive in the title. Just because a website ceases to exist doesn't necessarily mean the content I was linking to is gone.
On the other hand, say it did disappear. Then you would have everything you needed to know about what I'm linking to. And I think that links should describe everything you need to know about the content so that you could conceivably figure out what it was if the content is still available somewhere.
So when the linked site goes down you have some information about the content beyond bit.ly/ERFHUQ.
And when even supposedly tech-savvy people can't properly back-up their webpages, it's incredibly shortsighted to use a link that tells you nothing about the content.
No limit on Facebook, though it does truncate with a 'read more' bit of Ajax after so many characters.
Really, it's a massive deficiency in Twitter that there's no way to share a link built into the service. Facebook has a 'share link' button so you don't have to just enter the link in the body of your message.
The current legislation is to prevent them from doing this, and it has everything to do with the networks (the networks exist to provide a good environment for their advertisers.)
You legislate it away by saying not that there's a 'maximum volume' but that the advertisements cannot create a significant difference in volume from the programming. It's easy enough to quantify, you just did. So you just outlaw what you described, and say that the dynamic range has to stay down with the show.
Really? You make decisions because advertising annoys you? I mean, ideally yes, but factually once its caught your eye it's in your mind. These people have massive studies to determine what gets people buying, and sadly I think they know very well what makes ads effective.
I hope you don't want a GPS - the entire point of a motorcycle is to be off the beaten track in the first place.
Don't be a dick. The entire point of a GPS is so you can go off the beaten trail without having to worry.
Oh right, the point of a motorcycle is to put yourself into needless danger, because that's more 'fun' not because of better mileage, and more adaptability.
Yes, but as a general rule you don't say "I made a huge mistake and here's what I learned from it" unless the interviewer asks you about it. Or if you are 99% sure they've read about it. But you'd better be very sure.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't do a lot of chemistry below 91 K. At those temperatures, it seems perfectly reasonable that reactions that offer very slight energy gains on Earth could be extremely useful for a Titanian organism.
The reverse for a place like Mercury. We have the ideal set of elements and chemical reactions for the temperature range on Earth - of course those same elements aren't going to form life in a different temperature range. That's beside the point.
It doesn't have to be that pronounced. Just so that if in 3v3 3 rocks beats 3 scissors, you're fine. These things tend to be more pronounced when you add players, since there's sort of a snowball effect when you get more. Say you've got a 10% damage bonus, well in 3v3 that's pretty much a 30% damage bonus as far as the first guy you kill is concerned if you play your cards right.
But I play more RTS, where skill tends to be the balancing factor (though obviously civ plays a role.)
Except the difference is that .Net derives most of its appeal from its tight integration with Windows. You try and port it and the OS simply doesn't have the supporting utilities you've built it to work with.
Java on the other hand is self-contained. So while you do have to do porting, Java code, in practice, doesn't make as many assumptions about the environment it's running in.
Well, that's basically it. The bottleneck with gaming is really graphics, and if you've got optimized graphics routines, what's doing the higher-level processing is not as big of an issue as one might think.
Like most sites with obscene levels of advertising, Flashblock strips out half of it, and the rest is palatable.
The irony is that it was probably a good assumption eight years ago that no one would decrypt this stuff. But after eight years of occupation, the tools are readily available on the open markets we've created and nurtured.
Simple. The US business models are all based on convincing people they need more bandwidth. It's just like how mobile providers force you into slow, difficult to use voicemail systems that eat up minutes instead of giving you a simple and easy to use inbox just like you use for text messages. They're not interested in optimizing network usage, they're interested in increasing network usage so they can charge more.
Doesn't matter if they're fighting each other. They'll still be fighting on our machines we'd rather use for other things. We've already seen it with bots that turn on Windows update so that the exploit it got in with can't be used by another bot to get in.
In theory yes. In fact, Window's latest offerings are only protected from programs targeted at older versions of the OS. If you're targeting Windows 7 explicitly, it's actually fairly easy to get escalated privileges.
After a decade of squinting at smartphones and netbooks, we'll all be taking on the project together.
Debugging is not the user's responsibility. If it never worked to begin with, regardless of cause, a refund is naturally required, EULAs and their writers be damned.
Well it is. It's just that certain modular operating systems are, shall we say, lacking some key modules.
You wouldn't expect a refund for something that doesn't even install properly? That's the very definition of why you should get a refund. Yes, it's fine that their program doesn't work on my machine. They shouldn't expect me to let them keep my money if that's the case.
All the studies I've seen show that at worst, the number of of mistakes introduced and corrected every month on Wikipedia remains about neutral, and the number of errors comparable, if not better than print.
You're worrying about 'extra mistakes' but you're neglecting the addition of extra information which the print won't have either. Even if you had a nice digital competitor like Encyclopedia Britannica, there's no evidence (or even credible reason to believe) that the ratio of mistakes introduced to facts introduced would be better than on the payed service.
Not necessarily. A metric pizza would have a circumference of 1 meter, and therefore have a diameter of roughly 30 cm. With a diameter of 100/pi, you would have a radius of 50/pi, and an area of 10,000/pi cm2. Dividing that up into six slices would give you a little over 500cm2 per person, which is about as round a number as one might expect. 10 slices gives 300 cm2, which is in no way metric.
He was running on a deadline, and discovered he had a non-story with very little time before publication, so naturally he was a little hostile to a good explanation. I imagine he'll realize it was a stupid article in a week or two...
But maybe I'm giving him too much credit.
Yes they do. Everyone does it. Nobody likes to do it, but inevitably it eventually happens to some pages. Furthermore, what if I'm not linking a specific site, but just an article that I happened to find on that site? Then that's where you really want something descriptive in the title. Just because a website ceases to exist doesn't necessarily mean the content I was linking to is gone.
Here's an example, though obviously this is unlikely to ever disappear:
http://catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/
On the other hand, say it did disappear. Then you would have everything you needed to know about what I'm linking to. And I think that links should describe everything you need to know about the content so that you could conceivably figure out what it was if the content is still available somewhere.
So when the linked site goes down you have some information about the content beyond bit.ly/ERFHUQ.
And when even supposedly tech-savvy people can't properly back-up their webpages, it's incredibly shortsighted to use a link that tells you nothing about the content.
No limit on Facebook, though it does truncate with a 'read more' bit of Ajax after so many characters.
Really, it's a massive deficiency in Twitter that there's no way to share a link built into the service. Facebook has a 'share link' button so you don't have to just enter the link in the body of your message.
The current legislation is to prevent them from doing this, and it has everything to do with the networks (the networks exist to provide a good environment for their advertisers.)
You legislate it away by saying not that there's a 'maximum volume' but that the advertisements cannot create a significant difference in volume from the programming. It's easy enough to quantify, you just did. So you just outlaw what you described, and say that the dynamic range has to stay down with the show.
Really? You make decisions because advertising annoys you? I mean, ideally yes, but factually once its caught your eye it's in your mind. These people have massive studies to determine what gets people buying, and sadly I think they know very well what makes ads effective.
I guess not.
The reality that Microsoft can implement backdoors in your software without your knowledge? Is that worth the minor convenience MS software gives you?
Don't be a dick. The entire point of a GPS is so you can go off the beaten trail without having to worry.
Oh right, the point of a motorcycle is to put yourself into needless danger, because that's more 'fun' not because of better mileage, and more adaptability.
Yes, but as a general rule you don't say "I made a huge mistake and here's what I learned from it" unless the interviewer asks you about it. Or if you are 99% sure they've read about it. But you'd better be very sure.