The article is not talking about that kind of intelligence. They are talking about split second intelligence. They are talking about being about 500 msec of packets being the main scene...
You are confusing two aspects. General, and specific.
Here is the general.
>Equivalent arguments apply to the "free will" of individual human beings. Humans tend to congregate in packs - behaviorally, philosophically or otherwise. This strong tribal leaning that is presumably built into our genes ensures that most behavior patterns will be statistical in nature. Indeed, the actions of an individual can be simply predicted to a first approximation by merely qualitative means even in the absence of complete information by assuming rational behavior. A better approximation can be achieved by modeling the level of rationality of the individual and assigning probabilities based on that.
This is like saying tomorrow 35% of people will eat eggs for breakfast. This is human nature at its best. This is also what sales companies follow.
What the 2.2 million is aimed at is figuring out of if tomorrow people will start grazing like cows on the field. This is called a rare event and something that many people would like to figure out. In fact this is what sales companies would like to figure out and they can't since it is RANDOM for lack of a better word.
You can't predict the unpredicted because that is like saying I can predict tomorrow's lotto numbers. Here is the problem, and this is the problem of the program. There are literally several billion combinations, and the computer software will tell you the same thing, in that there are literally billions of things that people can do to inflict damage.
So you have the answer, and now comes the question what do you do? Do you follow all possible leads? Do you implement all of the solutions? The problem is that you will get answers like 10% this, 5% that, and 25% over there. Each of these answers is completely valid, yet which do you follow? Do you follow 25%? Yet then the 5% is possible, and while 25% is greater than 5%, 5% is still possible.
What people fail to grasp is random. Let me illustrate. There is a statistic that certain storms are 1 in a 100 years. So when can this storm happen? It can happen next year because you have 1 and a 100 years. Then when the 1 in a 100 years storm happens, when can it happen again? Again next year, thus in two years you have 1 in a 100 year storms because that is the way that random happens. Though after that you might not have a storm for another 200 years. Or if you do then the statistics have to change. But notice what happens? Statistics are after the fact, not future predictions.
If you want to see this action for yourself flip a coin. Do you get HTHTHTHT? No you get HHHHHHTHHHHHTTTHHHH, and if you flip often enough you will get a 50 50 distribution. So now comes my challenge predict what you will get, H or T. If it is fair and a random flip you will probably be 50% right!
So what about the 50% wrong? This is a long term statistic, but at the singular level where life and death is involved your odds are 50 50.
This is a fools game and indicative of what quants are trying to do...
But I question the technique. It is like when the Fed reports CPI, and conviently discards certain pieces of data. Yes I know the argument of CPI, but sometimes the Fed includes and ignores things in their own interest. Ignoring "personal" websites is like saying, "oh heck you are not important and therefore will not count you." Tooo convienent if you ask me.
I would rather know what the numbers are without playing any games and I think that is Netcraft.
You are missing my analogy. Hydrogen is what we want. It's clean, plentiful, etc, etc. Yet hydrogen is getting nowhere? This reminds me between the battle of OO and MS Office where OO is hydrogen.
My point is that it is not about the technologies, but about the infrastructure surronding the technologies. Until OO gets this it will be an uphill battle.
>Since code already exists in Evolution's connector I see no reason whatsoever that Thunderbird cannot make use of it. The same applies for Sunbird.
Ok, so let me get this straight. A business should use code from another Open Source product to solve their problems? Don't you see the problem of that argument? Yes you say, "Oh somebody could write that code." Well, that is my point entirely. That code is not written, it is not available, therefore it is not a solution that a company can use.
The reason why people stay with MS Office is because it works! Even on the Mac there was this recent statistic that Microsoft Office is one of the most popular pieces of software. This should be a warning shot to the OO people.
>No, Your analogy is not worth the bits it is stored with.:) grandparent was pointing out that there is already code to utilize an exchange server. That is nothing like needing to provide equipment. It is more like saying the pumps we have are fine, we just need to replace the nozzles with brand X and then we have pumps! Yaay! Stop being a defeatist. At the end of the day, if we listened to defeatists, we would never make progress on anything. Sad yes, but that's reality.
No I am not a defeatist. What I am is somebody who tries to pick problems that I can win.
The essential problem with hydrogen is getting it to the consumer. So no matter how good the car, technology, etc is, unless it gets to the consumer its a dead duck.
The problem and this is what the way up poster talked about is get OO right and stop thinking that by integrating one more piece then the masses will come. It is not about technology and Open Source people are not getting it. There was somebody who down the list pointed out a situation where he wanted an autorun CD of a powerpoint presentation. With PowerPoint a couple of minutes. OO not even possible.
OO is not solving the simple problems.
Here are two simple things that I would want to see in OO.
1) Get a decent extension model framework where it is easy to program. UNO is not it. I tried it and it was scary. 2) Remove the data limits and work on being able to manage large pieces of data. Office 2007 has addressed this partially, but I would love to see it addressed in a major way.
> A copy of Office Pro costs less than your hourly billing rate, and you have no interest in this debate, so why are you posting?
Why am I interesting in this debate? Because I had to buy Office 2007! I was holding out for the longest time, hoping that OO would finally allow me to do what I want. The days of Office pro being less than an hourly rate is long gone, just like the dotcom bubble.
>You should not be using Excel at all. You should be using a proper financial modelling system connected to a relational database, e.g. Business Objects with various add ons. Again, for the level of investing that this necessitates, the cost is unimportant to you.
I advise that you actually look at the tools that investment banks use. They in fact use Excel! Sure there is back end stuff, but traders and quants like Excel because it lets them very quickly come up with ideas and strategies.
>Alternatively of course you are just someone playing at investing. In which case your opinion is not particularly valuable. Given how expensive professionals have been getting it so wrong lately, anyone who trusts the financial models of an amateur without access to proper business modelling tools and data...deserves to buy a share in this wonderful toll bridge I just bought that links England and Wales.
I find it amazing that instead of actually doing a constructive argument you mock me. I could just as easily mock you since you did not even know that professional traders use Excel. Are you a quant? Do you follow the market?
How about edits with Lyx? Sure if you have the time to configure everything.
How about comments with Lyx? Sure if you have the time to configure and assemble everything. Writing a manuscript is not about just putting down words, but a process of edits, proofs, indexing, etc, etc... OO is a joke. Of course Adobe has this figured out so I am not saying Microsoft is the king of the hill. In fact I would argue Adobe is king of the hill here.
>I disagree. MS VBA also bites & MS keeps threatening to drop it from Office. OO.o does support some VBA if you really like it better. OO.o supports python, which is quite cool. The IDE still has a way to go, but I think that having a choice of scripting languages (including the one used by MS Office) gives OO.o a real advantage here.
Sorry, but with Excel I have the following options: VBA (which in 2007 is actually pretty good), XLL (pain, but you get a.NET mapper), UDF (web service on the server side), RTD (realtime data control), or COM... Excel is actually pretty good once you get through the different possibilities.
>I routinely use OO.o Writer for manuscripts. I use GNU Cash for my investing, but I would be able to use OO.o Calc.
Right.... GNU Cash is for investing... Right.... Ok, so I ask how am I supposed to calculate the price of an option based on its implied volatility with GNU Cash? Oops, you mean its not an investment tool? Or how about calculating the cost of a hedge where I buy X calls, and Y puts? Ooops...
OO.o writer is not usable for manuscripts because comments and edits get buggered up. If you want to write without edits, and comments, sure Writer is fine...
>Thunderbird & Sunbird combined have almost everything Exchange offers. They just don't connect to Exchange servers.
That's like saying. Heck I have a car that drives on Hydrogen, but the problem is that there are no Hydrogen gas stations anywhere. Gee, that sort of defeats the purpose no?
>Thankfully the code is modular (e.g. it already has handlers for nntp, imap, pop3) so it should be quite possible to write the code.
That's like saying. Heck a hydrogen car is not a problem, you just need to create some tanking stations anywhere you drive so that you don't run out of hydrogen. Again sort of defeats the purpose no?
>Especially seeing as code already exists in the Evolution plugin that could be utilised.
That's like saying. Heck there are gas stations and they could be used to sell hydrogen. All we need to do is provide the equipment.
Gee at the end of the day, even though it's worse, its simpler to drive a gas guzzling vehicle. Sad yes, but that's reality...
Have you tried using OO for anything related to earning money? I use Office for two purposes; writing manuscripts, and investing. And in these two respects OO fails miserably! (And I have tried to use OO)
WRT to manuscripts I can't keep comments, styles, formating etc straight.
WRT to investing the OO spreadsheet is way to limited, and to extend the spreadsheet with custom functionality is absolutely painful! OOBasic bites, and their component architecture is anything but simple. OO extensions are a joke when compared to Microsoft Office.
So in the end OO is not usable except for extremely simple things. I am complaining because after eight years of using Microsoft Office 2000 OO is not close to the capabilities of 2000. Yet I have and use Office 2007, and that is the sad part.
I know exactly how you feel. I used to use Office 2000 since about 1999. Since then I have been waiting for Open Office to serve as an Microsoft Office replacement. What happened? I upgraded to Office 2007 a month ago. I as well have given up on OO. Maybe one day, but then I will be ready for retirement and won't care.
Normally I would agree on most things with respect to competition being better in the US. HOWEVER, with respect to cellular phones the US has its head up its own arse. The telcos in the US just don't get it, and neither does the government. Year after year the US is behind the world's market and why? Simple because of point 1.
Europe, and not just the EU got this one right. They understood that to grow the pie you need to be open and allow choice. You need to allow people to choose whatever phone, and plan they want.
With respect to profit, dude, you are really wrong here. The North American telcos when compared to cell phone business only are not that large. If you look at the bottom lines Voda phone, Orange, T-Mobile are doing pretty well.
Now with respect to plans and getting good ones. Well, you are taking an extremely biased perspective.
For example the following is considered a plus (T-Mobile) * No nationwide long-distance or roaming charges (BTW this is free throughout Europe)
And why do people have to pay for incoming calls? And what about roaming charges outside of the US? Compare how much you would pay if you were to travel from the US to Canada. Then very quickly you would see how expensive things get.
My point is that you should get to know both sides of the issue before saying Europe does not get it. Again while I normally do think North America is ahead in technology, when it comes to cell technology North America is behind the times...
My door is strong enough to withstand a bomb, but not a nuclear bomb. I can live with that, since most people don't have access to nuclear devices. It is a risk I know I am taking.
Yet with the example illustrated it is as if I had the same door, and beside it a door that only opened once and could be opened with ease.
> If the guards, examiners, and cameras, are on a purely random schedule, and are following the direct orders of a machine, eventually, a social engineering exploit would open the door for the opponent to get a complete schedule from the computer itself.
If you read the article it said the following: Now all airport security officials have to do is press a button labeled "Randomize," and they can throw a sort of digital cloak of invisibility over where they place the cops' antiterror checkpoints on any given day.
This means that the schedule is not known ahead of time. Yes you can raise the argument about whether or not a machine is random, but with Mersenne Twister and random.org the reality is that random, is well, random. So this argument is wrong.
>The radio messages, audio stimulus, and other auditory or visual stimulus that is used to keep the pattern random, can always be intercepted and used to an opponent's advantage, and with the high turnover rate already present in security jobs, it is a simple matter to place somebody on location that can compromise everything.
Ok so you place somebody on watch to watch the random patterns. Well bingo, LA with its cameras has a constant, namely somebody looking for the random patterns. Thus the watcher of the patterns is picked out and removed, attack stopped. Even if the watcher moves about they are a constant in the system.
>The only way to have consistent security, is to have reliable, consistent, and above all, complete coverage of the facility.
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! Have you actually ever followed the math of random? People think that random, cant catch because it is random and thus will miss situations. But the reality is that when you use true random you are using the law of probabilities and you will catch the terrorist in a more effective manner than what we have done currently. With random you use statistics with a certain confidence factor and it truly works. Of course it does mean you need a minimum number of patrols (sampling) to be effective.
This theory is the same theory that makes the manufacturing techniques of the Japanese so effective.
>Try the free trial for Pro,and if it works for you the home version(which the only difference is AD connectivity) can be found for $29
Ok, so to get something working you need to PAY.... Don't you find that a bit ironic?
Are you not making an argument that Windows will remain king of the hill since Windows [fill in the version] Home edition is probably about 50 USD. So for an extra 20 USD you get a full working Windows edition that is compatible with your software...
The comment "It's about good citizenship, not an extra two cents profit per device." galls me.
Good citizen? Hmm, are not many who talk about the virtues of free software also those that have no problems ripping off the music labels or movie studios? Are not many of those people who talk about the RIAA if they were the scum of the earth?
Now while the RIAA might be harsh, it is after all their right to be harsh! What people seem to have forgotten with Free Software and Open Source is that they actually need to contribute back, and need to respect copyrights. The reality today is that people expect their books, music, and other content for free. And until that changes you can forget anybody being a good citizen. Because after all to talk about being a good citizen you have to be a good citizen yourself.
So I ask have you the poster and reader if you have ever not bought a piece of music? Not paid for a piece of software? Or downloaded a movie?
I personally make it a rule to buy my software, buy my movies, and buy my music! I love Open Source, but also respect the basis of the law that supports Open Source and thus think everybody should as well. I live off selling my IP...
These companies use Linux because it saves them money, because they have to pay nothing.
These companies don't support Linux because they don't earn any money with Linux. People who have Windows, and OSX pay money for their software and applications. People who use Linux are cheap skates, which goes back to the original point that they use Linux because it saves them money.
The real problem is not a chicken and egg, but to get Linux users to pry open their wallets and start buying Linux applications and so on. You will then very quickly see how people will begin supporting Linux. Yet that will not happen because people use Linux because you don't have to pay! See the problem?
I actually don't see an answer here, and that's why I am very skeptical that Windows or OSX will ever be de-throned by Linux.
And this is why I am skeptical of Germany, and the Euro...
I know Germany all too well and I hate this sort of corruption, because well that is what it is corruption. I am even willing to bet Stoiber will have a role on the board somewhere here.
What I am referring to are the end user trades. You are probably right that there are only 7000 brokers. But from those 7000 brokers there are 7000 * X traders. Granted some traders are your slower investor types, but then there is E-Trade, Interactive Brokers, etc that all tie in to the main exchange via the broker. When I say trades I don't just mean trades. As the other person who answered you said, remember that there are also oodles and oodles of bid and ask operations. So say that there are 100 actual trades, there are probably another 500 to 1000+ bid and ask operations via the order book. These operations might not result in a trade, but are part of the overall workings of the system. And that is if you have a level 1 feed. If you have a level 2 feed then you can get more information.
To give you an idea of how critical things are, these days the top professional traders don't trade across the network anymore. They actually co host their trading application on the exchange premises. The problem is that the 100 to 300 milliseconds that it takes to go across a REALLY fast internet is already too slow. They need reaction times in two digit millisecond range.
My point is that the NASDAQ is not just about a single trade between a single broker. Its a whole lot more and anybody who compares a game to the Nasdaq and thinks that gamers are cutting edge have not actually looked outside their box. I personally believe cutting edge computing is in the financial arena.
ROTFL.... That was good, I liked that comment, made my day.
From the article:
>EVE Online's servers, for example, which now support only 200,000 players, currently process more than 150 million operations per day.
Oooh look 150 million operations... That would be the combined trading for Dell, Microsoft, IBM, and YHOO. How many stocks are there on the NASDAQ? Hmm, several *thousand* Then you need to add options, futures, and a few other instruments.
Now to top it all off! Equities on a world wide level is about 150-250 billions dollars a day. Currency trading is about 1.5 trillion per day. (Check the webinars at any currency trading shop)
So to say that Gamers are at the forefront of computing is like saying a Tonka Truck is at the forefront of developing trucks! Not to say Tonka trucks don't last because they do, but when compared to a real dump truck they are toys.
Hey when there is mob mentality it is a good thing not to stand in its way. Slashdot is like the stock market... And in the stock market don't stand in the way! Stand to the side and watch when things fall apart...
American's are not the only ones with long ballots. Germany has long ballots as well because you get to vote twice (your first vote and second vote). Then add in all of the tom-dick-harry parties and ballots become 24 inches long. In Switzerland folks vote every three to four months since it is a direct democracy. My point is the long ballot is not an excuse.
What I think is problematic in the US is that there is this automatic tendency to automate tasks and thus making it difficult for the people to carry out the task. Case in point the ballots with hanging chads. Why on earth is there such a ballot? Oh yeah so that you can save a few bucks on counting the votes. But who cares that the voter has to take a Phd on casting votes.
I am sure its not perfect, BUT you have to think twice about this. In a country that is mostly poverty stricken and where people can't really read they have a working democratic system and 348 million people can vote electronically. And what was the population of the US? 300 million...
No, the problem here is quite simple the American voting infrastructure. It's not the fault of the people, nor the political system, but the folks who run the voting infrastructure! They need a good "flogging."
I looked at the Katadyn device and I always wonder why people slap on the Swiss flag. Is that supposed to mean Swiss use it? Heck I am sitting here in Switzerland and have hiked quite a bit through the mountains. Never seen the device. Want to know what people do? They drink the water fresh from the creek, or from one of the fountains that you find scattered throughout the mountains.
Slashdot Mirror
The article is not talking about that kind of intelligence. They are talking about split second intelligence. They are talking about being about 500 msec of packets being the main scene...
You are confusing two aspects. General, and specific.
Here is the general.
>Equivalent arguments apply to the "free will" of individual human beings. Humans tend to congregate in packs - behaviorally, philosophically or otherwise. This strong tribal leaning that is presumably built into our genes ensures that most behavior patterns will be statistical in nature. Indeed, the actions of an individual can be simply predicted to a first approximation by merely qualitative means even in the absence of complete information by assuming rational behavior. A better approximation can be achieved by modeling the level of rationality of the individual and assigning probabilities based on that.
This is like saying tomorrow 35% of people will eat eggs for breakfast. This is human nature at its best. This is also what sales companies follow.
What the 2.2 million is aimed at is figuring out of if tomorrow people will start grazing like cows on the field. This is called a rare event and something that many people would like to figure out. In fact this is what sales companies would like to figure out and they can't since it is RANDOM for lack of a better word.
You can't predict the unpredicted because that is like saying I can predict tomorrow's lotto numbers. Here is the problem, and this is the problem of the program. There are literally several billion combinations, and the computer software will tell you the same thing, in that there are literally billions of things that people can do to inflict damage.
So you have the answer, and now comes the question what do you do? Do you follow all possible leads? Do you implement all of the solutions? The problem is that you will get answers like 10% this, 5% that, and 25% over there. Each of these answers is completely valid, yet which do you follow? Do you follow 25%? Yet then the 5% is possible, and while 25% is greater than 5%, 5% is still possible.
What people fail to grasp is random. Let me illustrate. There is a statistic that certain storms are 1 in a 100 years. So when can this storm happen? It can happen next year because you have 1 and a 100 years. Then when the 1 in a 100 years storm happens, when can it happen again? Again next year, thus in two years you have 1 in a 100 year storms because that is the way that random happens. Though after that you might not have a storm for another 200 years. Or if you do then the statistics have to change. But notice what happens? Statistics are after the fact, not future predictions.
If you want to see this action for yourself flip a coin. Do you get HTHTHTHT? No you get HHHHHHTHHHHHTTTHHHH, and if you flip often enough you will get a 50 50 distribution. So now comes my challenge predict what you will get, H or T. If it is fair and a random flip you will probably be 50% right!
So what about the 50% wrong? This is a long term statistic, but at the singular level where life and death is involved your odds are 50 50.
This is a fools game and indicative of what quants are trying to do...
First I agree it is a numbers game....
But I question the technique. It is like when the Fed reports CPI, and conviently discards certain pieces of data. Yes I know the argument of CPI, but sometimes the Fed includes and ignores things in their own interest. Ignoring "personal" websites is like saying, "oh heck you are not important and therefore will not count you." Tooo convienent if you ask me.
I would rather know what the numbers are without playing any games and I think that is Netcraft.
>Your analogies really suck.
You are missing my analogy. Hydrogen is what we want. It's clean, plentiful, etc, etc. Yet hydrogen is getting nowhere? This reminds me between the battle of OO and MS Office where OO is hydrogen.
My point is that it is not about the technologies, but about the infrastructure surronding the technologies. Until OO gets this it will be an uphill battle.
>Since code already exists in Evolution's connector I see no reason whatsoever that Thunderbird cannot make use of it. The same applies for Sunbird.
Ok, so let me get this straight. A business should use code from another Open Source product to solve their problems? Don't you see the problem of that argument? Yes you say, "Oh somebody could write that code." Well, that is my point entirely. That code is not written, it is not available, therefore it is not a solution that a company can use.
The reason why people stay with MS Office is because it works! Even on the Mac there was this recent statistic that Microsoft Office is one of the most popular pieces of software. This should be a warning shot to the OO people.
>No, Your analogy is not worth the bits it is stored with. :) grandparent was pointing out that there is already code to utilize an exchange server. That is nothing like needing to provide equipment. It is more like saying the pumps we have are fine, we just need to replace the nozzles with brand X and then we have pumps! Yaay! Stop being a defeatist. At the end of the day, if we listened to defeatists, we would never make progress on anything. Sad yes, but that's reality.
No I am not a defeatist. What I am is somebody who tries to pick problems that I can win.
The essential problem with hydrogen is getting it to the consumer. So no matter how good the car, technology, etc is, unless it gets to the consumer its a dead duck.
The problem and this is what the way up poster talked about is get OO right and stop thinking that by integrating one more piece then the masses will come. It is not about technology and Open Source people are not getting it. There was somebody who down the list pointed out a situation where he wanted an autorun CD of a powerpoint presentation. With PowerPoint a couple of minutes. OO not even possible.
OO is not solving the simple problems.
Here are two simple things that I would want to see in OO.
1) Get a decent extension model framework where it is easy to program. UNO is not it. I tried it and it was scary.
2) Remove the data limits and work on being able to manage large pieces of data. Office 2007 has addressed this partially, but I would love to see it addressed in a major way.
> A copy of Office Pro costs less than your hourly billing rate, and you have no interest in this debate, so why are you posting?
Why am I interesting in this debate? Because I had to buy Office 2007! I was holding out for the longest time, hoping that OO would finally allow me to do what I want. The days of Office pro being less than an hourly rate is long gone, just like the dotcom bubble.
>You should not be using Excel at all. You should be using a proper financial modelling system connected to a relational database, e.g. Business Objects with various add ons. Again, for the level of investing that this necessitates, the cost is unimportant to you.
I advise that you actually look at the tools that investment banks use. They in fact use Excel! Sure there is back end stuff, but traders and quants like Excel because it lets them very quickly come up with ideas and strategies.
>Alternatively of course you are just someone playing at investing. In which case your opinion is not particularly valuable. Given how expensive professionals have been getting it so wrong lately, anyone who trusts the financial models of an amateur without access to proper business modelling tools and data...deserves to buy a share in this wonderful toll bridge I just bought that links England and Wales.
I find it amazing that instead of actually doing a constructive argument you mock me. I could just as easily mock you since you did not even know that professional traders use Excel. Are you a quant? Do you follow the market?
How about edits with Lyx? Sure if you have the time to configure everything.
How about comments with Lyx? Sure if you have the time to configure and assemble everything. Writing a manuscript is not about just putting down words, but a process of edits, proofs, indexing, etc, etc... OO is a joke. Of course Adobe has this figured out so I am not saying Microsoft is the king of the hill. In fact I would argue Adobe is king of the hill here.
>I disagree. MS VBA also bites & MS keeps threatening to drop it from Office. OO.o does support some VBA if you really like it better. OO.o supports python, which is quite cool. The IDE still has a way to go, but I think that having a choice of scripting languages (including the one used by MS Office) gives OO.o a real advantage here.
.NET mapper), UDF (web service on the server side), RTD (realtime data control), or COM... Excel is actually pretty good once you get through the different possibilities.
Sorry, but with Excel I have the following options: VBA (which in 2007 is actually pretty good), XLL (pain, but you get a
>I routinely use OO.o Writer for manuscripts. I use GNU Cash for my investing, but I would be able to use OO.o Calc.
Right.... GNU Cash is for investing... Right.... Ok, so I ask how am I supposed to calculate the price of an option based on its implied volatility with GNU Cash? Oops, you mean its not an investment tool? Or how about calculating the cost of a hedge where I buy X calls, and Y puts? Ooops...
OO.o writer is not usable for manuscripts because comments and edits get buggered up. If you want to write without edits, and comments, sure Writer is fine...
>Thunderbird & Sunbird combined have almost everything Exchange offers. They just don't connect to Exchange servers.
That's like saying. Heck I have a car that drives on Hydrogen, but the problem is that there are no Hydrogen gas stations anywhere. Gee, that sort of defeats the purpose no?
>Thankfully the code is modular (e.g. it already has handlers for nntp, imap, pop3) so it should be quite possible to write the code.
That's like saying. Heck a hydrogen car is not a problem, you just need to create some tanking stations anywhere you drive so that you don't run out of hydrogen. Again sort of defeats the purpose no?
>Especially seeing as code already exists in the Evolution plugin that could be utilised.
That's like saying. Heck there are gas stations and they could be used to sell hydrogen. All we need to do is provide the equipment.
Gee at the end of the day, even though it's worse, its simpler to drive a gas guzzling vehicle. Sad yes, but that's reality...
Have you tried using OO for anything related to earning money? I use Office for two purposes; writing manuscripts, and investing. And in these two respects OO fails miserably! (And I have tried to use OO)
WRT to manuscripts I can't keep comments, styles, formating etc straight.
WRT to investing the OO spreadsheet is way to limited, and to extend the spreadsheet with custom functionality is absolutely painful! OOBasic bites, and their component architecture is anything but simple. OO extensions are a joke when compared to Microsoft Office.
So in the end OO is not usable except for extremely simple things. I am complaining because after eight years of using Microsoft Office 2000 OO is not close to the capabilities of 2000. Yet I have and use Office 2007, and that is the sad part.
I wish I had mod points left over...
I know exactly how you feel. I used to use Office 2000 since about 1999. Since then I have been waiting for Open Office to serve as an Microsoft Office replacement. What happened? I upgraded to Office 2007 a month ago. I as well have given up on OO. Maybe one day, but then I will be ready for retirement and won't care.
Normally I would agree on most things with respect to competition being better in the US. HOWEVER, with respect to cellular phones the US has its head up its own arse. The telcos in the US just don't get it, and neither does the government. Year after year the US is behind the world's market and why? Simple because of point 1.
Europe, and not just the EU got this one right. They understood that to grow the pie you need to be open and allow choice. You need to allow people to choose whatever phone, and plan they want.
With respect to profit, dude, you are really wrong here. The North American telcos when compared to cell phone business only are not that large. If you look at the bottom lines Voda phone, Orange, T-Mobile are doing pretty well.
Now with respect to plans and getting good ones. Well, you are taking an extremely biased perspective.
For example the following is considered a plus (T-Mobile)
* No nationwide long-distance or roaming charges (BTW this is free throughout Europe)
And why do people have to pay for incoming calls? And what about roaming charges outside of the US? Compare how much you would pay if you were to travel from the US to Canada. Then very quickly you would see how expensive things get.
My point is that you should get to know both sides of the issue before saying Europe does not get it. Again while I normally do think North America is ahead in technology, when it comes to cell technology North America is behind the times...
Yes you are right...
If I may use a metaphor...
My door is strong enough to withstand a bomb, but not a nuclear bomb. I can live with that, since most people don't have access to nuclear devices. It is a risk I know I am taking.
Yet with the example illustrated it is as if I had the same door, and beside it a door that only opened once and could be opened with ease.
Christian
When it comes to encryption it is exactly for this reason why I use the "clunky", "hard to configure", "no GUI" Open Source!
I know what I have, and what I get, and what others cannot get... Not that I have anything to hide. Just that I like my privacy.
> If the guards, examiners, and cameras, are on a purely random schedule, and are following the direct orders of a machine, eventually, a social engineering exploit would open the door for the opponent to get a complete schedule from the computer itself.
If you read the article it said the following: Now all airport security officials have to do is press a button labeled "Randomize," and they can throw a sort of digital cloak of invisibility over where they place the cops' antiterror checkpoints on any given day.
This means that the schedule is not known ahead of time. Yes you can raise the argument about whether or not a machine is random, but with Mersenne Twister and random.org the reality is that random, is well, random. So this argument is wrong.
>The radio messages, audio stimulus, and other auditory or visual stimulus that is used to keep the pattern random, can always be intercepted and used to an opponent's advantage, and with the high turnover rate already present in security jobs, it is a simple matter to place somebody on location that can compromise everything.
Ok so you place somebody on watch to watch the random patterns. Well bingo, LA with its cameras has a constant, namely somebody looking for the random patterns. Thus the watcher of the patterns is picked out and removed, attack stopped. Even if the watcher moves about they are a constant in the system.
>The only way to have consistent security, is to have reliable, consistent, and above all, complete coverage of the facility.
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! Have you actually ever followed the math of random? People think that random, cant catch because it is random and thus will miss situations. But the reality is that when you use true random you are using the law of probabilities and you will catch the terrorist in a more effective manner than what we have done currently. With random you use statistics with a certain confidence factor and it truly works. Of course it does mean you need a minimum number of patrols (sampling) to be effective.
This theory is the same theory that makes the manufacturing techniques of the Japanese so effective.
>Try the free trial for Pro,and if it works for you the home version(which the only difference is AD connectivity) can be found for $29
Ok, so to get something working you need to PAY.... Don't you find that a bit ironic?
Are you not making an argument that Windows will remain king of the hill since Windows [fill in the version] Home edition is probably about 50 USD. So for an extra 20 USD you get a full working Windows edition that is compatible with your software...
The comment "It's about good citizenship, not an extra two cents profit per device." galls me.
Good citizen? Hmm, are not many who talk about the virtues of free software also those that have no problems ripping off the music labels or movie studios? Are not many of those people who talk about the RIAA if they were the scum of the earth?
Now while the RIAA might be harsh, it is after all their right to be harsh! What people seem to have forgotten with Free Software and Open Source is that they actually need to contribute back, and need to respect copyrights. The reality today is that people expect their books, music, and other content for free. And until that changes you can forget anybody being a good citizen. Because after all to talk about being a good citizen you have to be a good citizen yourself.
So I ask have you the poster and reader if you have ever not bought a piece of music? Not paid for a piece of software? Or downloaded a movie?
I personally make it a rule to buy my software, buy my movies, and buy my music! I love Open Source, but also respect the basis of the law that supports Open Source and thus think everybody should as well. I live off selling my IP...
Its about the money!
These companies use Linux because it saves them money, because they have to pay nothing.
These companies don't support Linux because they don't earn any money with Linux. People who have Windows, and OSX pay money for their software and applications. People who use Linux are cheap skates, which goes back to the original point that they use Linux because it saves them money.
The real problem is not a chicken and egg, but to get Linux users to pry open their wallets and start buying Linux applications and so on. You will then very quickly see how people will begin supporting Linux. Yet that will not happen because people use Linux because you don't have to pay! See the problem?
I actually don't see an answer here, and that's why I am very skeptical that Windows or OSX will ever be de-throned by Linux.
And this is why I am skeptical of Germany, and the Euro...
I know Germany all too well and I hate this sort of corruption, because well that is what it is corruption. I am even willing to bet Stoiber will have a role on the board somewhere here.
What I am referring to are the end user trades. You are probably right that there are only 7000 brokers. But from those 7000 brokers there are 7000 * X traders. Granted some traders are your slower investor types, but then there is E-Trade, Interactive Brokers, etc that all tie in to the main exchange via the broker. When I say trades I don't just mean trades. As the other person who answered you said, remember that there are also oodles and oodles of bid and ask operations. So say that there are 100 actual trades, there are probably another 500 to 1000+ bid and ask operations via the order book. These operations might not result in a trade, but are part of the overall workings of the system. And that is if you have a level 1 feed. If you have a level 2 feed then you can get more information.
To give you an idea of how critical things are, these days the top professional traders don't trade across the network anymore. They actually co host their trading application on the exchange premises. The problem is that the 100 to 300 milliseconds that it takes to go across a REALLY fast internet is already too slow. They need reaction times in two digit millisecond range.
My point is that the NASDAQ is not just about a single trade between a single broker. Its a whole lot more and anybody who compares a game to the Nasdaq and thinks that gamers are cutting edge have not actually looked outside their box. I personally believe cutting edge computing is in the financial arena.
ROTFL.... That was good, I liked that comment, made my day.
From the article:
>EVE Online's servers, for example, which now support only 200,000 players, currently process more than 150 million operations per day.
Oooh look 150 million operations... That would be the combined trading for Dell, Microsoft, IBM, and YHOO. How many stocks are there on the NASDAQ? Hmm, several *thousand* Then you need to add options, futures, and a few other instruments.
Now to top it all off! Equities on a world wide level is about 150-250 billions dollars a day. Currency trading is about 1.5 trillion per day. (Check the webinars at any currency trading shop)
So to say that Gamers are at the forefront of computing is like saying a Tonka Truck is at the forefront of developing trucks! Not to say Tonka trucks don't last because they do, but when compared to a real dump truck they are toys.
Hey when there is mob mentality it is a good thing not to stand in its way. Slashdot is like the stock market... And in the stock market don't stand in the way! Stand to the side and watch when things fall apart...
American's are not the only ones with long ballots. Germany has long ballots as well because you get to vote twice (your first vote and second vote). Then add in all of the tom-dick-harry parties and ballots become 24 inches long. In Switzerland folks vote every three to four months since it is a direct democracy. My point is the long ballot is not an excuse.
What I think is problematic in the US is that there is this automatic tendency to automate tasks and thus making it difficult for the people to carry out the task. Case in point the ballots with hanging chads. Why on earth is there such a ballot? Oh yeah so that you can save a few bucks on counting the votes. But who cares that the voter has to take a Phd on casting votes.
To put this in context. India in 2004 put in electronic voting machines for 348 million people http://www.kablenet.com/kd.nsf/Frontpage/A109B59D2C4BCBA380256E9400373E62?OpenDocument
I am sure its not perfect, BUT you have to think twice about this. In a country that is mostly poverty stricken and where people can't really read they have a working democratic system and 348 million people can vote electronically. And what was the population of the US? 300 million...
No, the problem here is quite simple the American voting infrastructure. It's not the fault of the people, nor the political system, but the folks who run the voting infrastructure! They need a good "flogging."
I looked at the Katadyn device and I always wonder why people slap on the Swiss flag. Is that supposed to mean Swiss use it? Heck I am sitting here in Switzerland and have hiked quite a bit through the mountains. Never seen the device. Want to know what people do? They drink the water fresh from the creek, or from one of the fountains that you find scattered throughout the mountains.