This shouldn't be a worry if you have a digital cell phone. A simple cord turns your phone into a modem. With Verizon, for example, you get full internet access, billed simply as regular phone minutes. There's no additional charge. The speed is only 14.4, but that's plenty for email, credit card validation, etc.
...by the book-burning, Bible-bashing, fascist-police-state Radical Right, who have taken over their school boards, and infiltrated their little brains through Fox News.
What I find so disturbing is how this generation is so easily cowed.
I help my coworkers and we all got Thinkpad T41s recently and they do 1600x1400 or something of that nature.
90% of them immediately after getting their new laptop were upset/couldn't read/needed help fixing and then weren't happy with how it looked.
Adjusting it down to 1024x768 or whatever they were comfortable with was fuzzy and looked like trash.
reading 1600x1400 on a 14 - 15" screen is hard for them older folk, you know, people over 25 - 30.
This is why I like my old T20. It has a 14" screen with a *native* 1024x768 resolution. Most websites are designed to this. Even then some of the fonts they use are ridiculously small, in an attempt to be arty.
BTW I'm 40 but my eyes haven't changed at all since my 20s. I watch younger people at their high resolution screens, faces all screwed up, squinting. They'll have wrinkles for sure when they're my age, as well as bad eyes.
The PATRIOT act passed because a majority in the House and Senate thought it was a good idea, and the President agreed.
Good idea how? Good for the country, or good for the political careers of politicians afraid to dissent from the GOP leadership? That majority does not tolerate dissent. It's "with us, or against us," remember?
I'm sure it depends on the region and school, as attitudes vary a lot. But at 40, even with demonstrated ability and a proven track record, I feel a lot of age prejudice.
First, it's a class thing. This is worse on the East Coast -- I really believe CA is much more egalitarian. One who is middle aged but not yet through college or grad school is seen as some kind of fallen person. Most registrars and profs are from upper middle class, white collar backgrounds themselves, and feel uncomfortable with anything else. Young people are not peers anyway, and therefore not threatening. Plus they're a clean slate. But registrars and profs have many prejudices about people their own age, who are not exactly like themselves. "Typical sales type, not an intellectual," or, "postal worker type, not an original thinker," or "typical hairdresser, probably flaky," etc. Then there's the, "if you're so smart, then why did you spend so many years doing X," attitude -- as if college, grad school, internship, then working for BigCorp is the only path in life. The only way around these prjudices is to have a marketable sob story, like how you swam all the way from Cambodia and/or raised younger siblings by working three jobs all through your twenties. Even with stellar grades, the doubt will always be present.
Academics love to talk about how everyone has untapped potential. But underneath, what they really believe in is destiny. You have to convince them that your destiny was academic and/or white collar all along. Having "fallen" into anything else is evidence to the contrary.
Also, colleges like kids who are being supported by Mom and Dad. It brings in money. And if Mom and Dad are rich, it might bring in endowments -- especially if Junior will inherit.
I used to be against affirmative action. But now, feeling a sort of prejudice myself, I can't imagine how bad it is for a minority student. No matter how good you are, you're always at a disadvantage if you don't quite fit in with the rest of the gang.
Finally, 70% of college students in the US are "non-traditional." But you'd never know it, from how everything is geared toward young people supported by Mom and Dad. Someone ought to tell college administrators!
Get a good used Panasonic Toughbook. I use one on my boat for navigation software. It's been doused by the occasional wave, toppled onto the cabin sole, fallen on, had food and drink spilled all over it, and never missed a beat. I'm sure it's pretty dustproof too. They're standard issue in police cars, etc. Expensive new, but used ones can be had for a reasonable price. There are several dealers specializing in reconditioning and reparing them, and selling parts for them. Well worth it, IMO.
The suggestion for a cheap X terminal was good too.
Microsoft selling antivirus/anti-spy/ad software is like those street people in the Bronx who throw muddy water on your windshield so you have to pay them to clean it.
I wonder what everyone's doing with all these huge drives, other than indulging a compulsive collecting habit. How much music can one listen to, and how many movies can one possibly watch?
I can easily recall 5 superperformers at my company (4.0 doctorates from top schools with 3-5 years experience at work), and they all share the same traits: stubborn, egocentric, verbose, scared of precision error greater than 1e-10, and always in the goddamn way of deadlines!
Of course it's not about the technology, the product, or anything tangible. The tech boom was not driven by technologists, but by investment bankers. And what's their product? An investment/gambling vehicle -- stock!
Notice how many companies morphed and remorphed as the "technology" changed. This was not because of changing technology or changing demand for actual products. It's because they were always trying to convince their shareholders, or potential shareholders, that their stock would be the one to take advantage of the Next Big Thing. Hardware companies became software companies, which became web services companies, which became application service providers, which became web services companies again, giving way to media companies, which then became hardware companies again. Whatever this week's buzz was about, that's what they said they did. Sheesh.
Marketing material was so vague because they were trying to keep their options open!
IMO, most of the dotcoms really were "dotCONS" -- absolutely crooked.
When I was a kid in the 70s, our prime social activity was going to each others' houses and taping each others' records. When VHS took over in the 80s, everyone shared movies this way too. Nothing has changed.
People who could afford to buy new did so to avoid the hassle, and they do now too. Most grown ups with jobs and other responisbilities don't have the time or inclination to fuck around on Kazaa. It's easier and cheaper to just buy or rent a DVD. Also notice how the $20 CDs sit for months, while the ones in the $7 rack sell like crazy. The problem with first-run music is that it's too aggressively priced.
Copying is mostly done by people who were never going to be customers in the first place, because they don't have the money. But copying reinforces their interest as fans, which the media corps will profit from eventually. A pirated CD today leads to a future concert ticket sale, etc. Even the media corps' own marketing people know this.
I'm drowning in acronym soup already.
on
Two Books On Plone
·
· Score: 1
Someone throw me a life preserver! (I like the OpenACS one myself.)
When - When would it be shut down Why - Why would it be shut down Where - Which areas would be shut down How - How do we shut it down, and how do we operate without it.
Exactly. Is there really a plan? Or is the President just staging an act of "acting decisively" in front of the press and the public -- one of this administration's most commonly used PR ploys.
It's true that TV was always inane. There's also more good programming now than ever. But it comes at a price, and a steep one at that. A decent cable or satellite subscription, w/o premium channels, costs $50/month in most places. And most of that is crap -- infomercials, celebrity gossip shows, etc. Though you get 70 channels instead of 13, there's no more worth watching than the stuff we got for free back in the 70s. If you want the good stuff, you have to spring for the premium channels, boosting your bill to $70-100, or more.
For me it's just not worth it. I'll get my news from the 'net and the newspaper, my analysis from intelligent magazines (which I can read for free at the library), and my video entertainment from Netflix. If I really start to feel deprived w/o CNN, etc., I'll get satellite radio -- but it hasn't happened yet. After a couple of years w/ no cable, I feel more satisfied with what I'm getting, and better informed. Until I feel flush enough to literally throw away over $100 a month on a super-deluxe satellite/cable package w/ Tivo, it's not worth screwing around with.
This would be great for technical manual writing. Help you take pictures of the mechanicla interfaces.
Yes it would, but equally effective is to send it to the art director, who's *really* good with Photoshop. There are plenty of freelance Photoshop gurus serving smaller tech writing operations too.
Do you really want your government running any kind of telecom infrastructure? I mean, I am all for "services for the people" and all that jazz but on the other side, I am also for smaller government.
Quit talking about this stuff in the abstract like you're on Crossfire or something.
Because of foot dragging by telcos and cable companies, many municipal governments have simply created networks themselves. They've been able to do it at much lower cost, because they're not funding TV spots and full page print ads, or subsidizing their other services, or trying to tack on a profit. Typically the cost to the consumer has been about half the commercial rate, with the networks still making a little money or breaking even.
This makes even more sense with wireless, which costs so little to deploy in the first place. Ditto with governments who already have wired networks in place for monitoring power grids, water lines, etc.
Government builds roads, harbors, and airports. Why? Because they facilitate commerce. The same is true of data networks.
The car-related restriction that bothers me the most is being restricted to one's car to go anywhere or do anything. This is life California.
The scary thing is, new development in the rest of the country is following the same template, only worse. If you think LA is a horror of sprawl, try Atlanta or Greensboro.
The best thing that could happen to California, and the US, is $5/gal gasoline. There would be a lot of short term pain for sure, but in the end we'd make better choices about where to live, work, shop, and send our kids to school. The idea that "...it's only a 25 minute commute..." is simply absurd.
Slashdot Mirror
Another benefit of this is being able to record cell phone conversations, if that's something you need.
This shouldn't be a worry if you have a digital cell phone. A simple cord turns your phone into a modem. With Verizon, for example, you get full internet access, billed simply as regular phone minutes. There's no additional charge. The speed is only 14.4, but that's plenty for email, credit card validation, etc.
Honestly, I had completely forgotten about them, and didn't know they were still around.
...by the book-burning, Bible-bashing, fascist-police-state Radical Right, who have taken over their school boards, and infiltrated their little brains through Fox News.
What I find so disturbing is how this generation is so easily cowed.
I help my coworkers and we all got Thinkpad T41s recently and they do 1600x1400 or something of that nature.
90% of them immediately after getting their new laptop were upset/couldn't read/needed help fixing and then weren't happy with how it looked.
Adjusting it down to 1024x768 or whatever they were comfortable with was fuzzy and looked like trash.
reading 1600x1400 on a 14 - 15" screen is hard for them older folk, you know, people over 25 - 30.
This is why I like my old T20. It has a 14" screen with a *native* 1024x768 resolution. Most websites are designed to this. Even then some of the fonts they use are ridiculously small, in an attempt to be arty.
BTW I'm 40 but my eyes haven't changed at all since my 20s. I watch younger people at their high resolution screens, faces all screwed up, squinting. They'll have wrinkles for sure when they're my age, as well as bad eyes.
The PATRIOT act passed because a majority in the House and Senate thought it was a good idea, and the President agreed.
Good idea how? Good for the country, or good for the political careers of politicians afraid to dissent from the GOP leadership? That majority does not tolerate dissent. It's "with us, or against us," remember?
Other computer makers, such as HP, have so far been unsuccessful in marketing small computers to consumers.
That's because everything HP makes is ugly and boring, like a plastic wastebasket from Wal-Mart.
I'm sure it depends on the region and school, as attitudes vary a lot. But at 40, even with demonstrated ability and a proven track record, I feel a lot of age prejudice.
First, it's a class thing. This is worse on the East Coast -- I really believe CA is much more egalitarian. One who is middle aged but not yet through college or grad school is seen as some kind of fallen person. Most registrars and profs are from upper middle class, white collar backgrounds themselves, and feel uncomfortable with anything else. Young people are not peers anyway, and therefore not threatening. Plus they're a clean slate. But registrars and profs have many prejudices about people their own age, who are not exactly like themselves. "Typical sales type, not an intellectual," or, "postal worker type, not an original thinker," or "typical hairdresser, probably flaky," etc. Then there's the, "if you're so smart, then why did you spend so many years doing X," attitude -- as if college, grad school, internship, then working for BigCorp is the only path in life. The only way around these prjudices is to have a marketable sob story, like how you swam all the way from Cambodia and/or raised younger siblings by working three jobs all through your twenties. Even with stellar grades, the doubt will always be present.
Academics love to talk about how everyone has untapped potential. But underneath, what they really believe in is destiny. You have to convince them that your destiny was academic and/or white collar all along. Having "fallen" into anything else is evidence to the contrary.
Also, colleges like kids who are being supported by Mom and Dad. It brings in money. And if Mom and Dad are rich, it might bring in endowments -- especially if Junior will inherit.
I used to be against affirmative action. But now, feeling a sort of prejudice myself, I can't imagine how bad it is for a minority student. No matter how good you are, you're always at a disadvantage if you don't quite fit in with the rest of the gang.
Finally, 70% of college students in the US are "non-traditional." But you'd never know it, from how everything is geared toward young people supported by Mom and Dad. Someone ought to tell college administrators!
Get a good used Panasonic Toughbook. I use one on my boat for navigation software. It's been doused by the occasional wave, toppled onto the cabin sole, fallen on, had food and drink spilled all over it, and never missed a beat. I'm sure it's pretty dustproof too. They're standard issue in police cars, etc. Expensive new, but used ones can be had for a reasonable price. There are several dealers specializing in reconditioning and reparing them, and selling parts for them. Well worth it, IMO.
The suggestion for a cheap X terminal was good too.
Pshaw...
Microsoft selling antivirus/anti-spy/ad software is like those street people in the Bronx who throw muddy water on your windshield so you have to pay them to clean it.
I wonder what everyone's doing with all these huge drives, other than indulging a compulsive collecting habit. How much music can one listen to, and how many movies can one possibly watch?
I can easily recall 5 superperformers at my company (4.0 doctorates from top schools with 3-5 years experience at work), and they all share the same traits: stubborn, egocentric, verbose, scared of precision error greater than 1e-10, and always in the goddamn way of deadlines!
But they were *superperformers* though...
Of course it's not about the technology, the product, or anything tangible. The tech boom was not driven by technologists, but by investment bankers. And what's their product? An investment/gambling vehicle -- stock!
Notice how many companies morphed and remorphed as the "technology" changed. This was not because of changing technology or changing demand for actual products. It's because they were always trying to convince their shareholders, or potential shareholders, that their stock would be the one to take advantage of the Next Big Thing. Hardware companies became software companies, which became web services companies, which became application service providers, which became web services companies again, giving way to media companies, which then became hardware companies again. Whatever this week's buzz was about, that's what they said they did. Sheesh.
Marketing material was so vague because they were trying to keep their options open!
IMO, most of the dotcoms really were "dotCONS" -- absolutely crooked.
When I was a kid in the 70s, our prime social activity was going to each others' houses and taping each others' records. When VHS took over in the 80s, everyone shared movies this way too. Nothing has changed.
People who could afford to buy new did so to avoid the hassle, and they do now too. Most grown ups with jobs and other responisbilities don't have the time or inclination to fuck around on Kazaa. It's easier and cheaper to just buy or rent a DVD. Also notice how the $20 CDs sit for months, while the ones in the $7 rack sell like crazy. The problem with first-run music is that it's too aggressively priced.
Copying is mostly done by people who were never going to be customers in the first place, because they don't have the money. But copying reinforces their interest as fans, which the media corps will profit from eventually. A pirated CD today leads to a future concert ticket sale, etc. Even the media corps' own marketing people know this.
Someone throw me a life preserver! (I like the OpenACS one myself.)
When - When would it be shut down
Why - Why would it be shut down
Where - Which areas would be shut down
How - How do we shut it down, and how do we operate without it.
Exactly. Is there really a plan? Or is the President just staging an act of "acting decisively" in front of the press and the public -- one of this administration's most commonly used PR ploys.
"XML is nothing more than a human-readable data file format..."
I'd say that's a pretty good reason right there, especially compared to a non-human-readable one (MS).
A Technical Writer shouldn't have to do much more than parse the comments in the code,
What comments? We technical writers should be so lucky to have comments to work with!
It's true that TV was always inane. There's also more good programming now than ever. But it comes at a price, and a steep one at that. A decent cable or satellite subscription, w/o premium channels, costs $50/month in most places. And most of that is crap -- infomercials, celebrity gossip shows, etc. Though you get 70 channels instead of 13, there's no more worth watching than the stuff we got for free back in the 70s. If you want the good stuff, you have to spring for the premium channels, boosting your bill to $70-100, or more.
For me it's just not worth it. I'll get my news from the 'net and the newspaper, my analysis from intelligent magazines (which I can read for free at the library), and my video entertainment from Netflix. If I really start to feel deprived w/o CNN, etc., I'll get satellite radio -- but it hasn't happened yet. After a couple of years w/ no cable, I feel more satisfied with what I'm getting, and better informed. Until I feel flush enough to literally throw away over $100 a month on a super-deluxe satellite/cable package w/ Tivo, it's not worth screwing around with.
This would be great for technical manual writing. Help you take pictures of the mechanicla interfaces.
Yes it would, but equally effective is to send it to the art director, who's *really* good with Photoshop. There are plenty of freelance Photoshop gurus serving smaller tech writing operations too.
Do you really want your government running any kind of telecom infrastructure? I mean, I am all for "services for the people" and all that jazz but on the other side, I am also for smaller government.
Quit talking about this stuff in the abstract like you're on Crossfire or something.
Because of foot dragging by telcos and cable companies, many municipal governments have simply created networks themselves. They've been able to do it at much lower cost, because they're not funding TV spots and full page print ads, or subsidizing their other services, or trying to tack on a profit. Typically the cost to the consumer has been about half the commercial rate, with the networks still making a little money or breaking even.
This makes even more sense with wireless, which costs so little to deploy in the first place. Ditto with governments who already have wired networks in place for monitoring power grids, water lines, etc.
Government builds roads, harbors, and airports. Why? Because they facilitate commerce. The same is true of data networks.
I'm sure Clear Channel would make a great replacement for the FCC.
Well it already has replaced the FCC, or at least its lackeys have, bought and paid for by Clearchannel.
The car-related restriction that bothers me the most is being restricted to one's car to go anywhere or do anything. This is life California.
The scary thing is, new development in the rest of the country is following the same template, only worse. If you think LA is a horror of sprawl, try Atlanta or Greensboro.
The best thing that could happen to California, and the US, is $5/gal gasoline. There would be a lot of short term pain for sure, but in the end we'd make better choices about where to live, work, shop, and send our kids to school. The idea that "...it's only a 25 minute commute..." is simply absurd.
Implementation, integration, training, and support.