Yes, for an even better solution why not just point out that you can find the answers on the internet. The point of homework is *not* to find a way out of doing it, and the point of waiting on your TI-84 is *not* so that you will waste your precious time. That title goes to slashdot.
"instead of waiting 4-5 seconds to do something, i am interested in spending hours of effort to recreate/relearn it on a different platform"
Why not use the "agonizing eternity" of 4-5 seconds to reflect on life, maybe hum a song, or do anything that helps your mind relax before you develop ADD and can ONLY do math?
On the other hand, 3Mbit can do decent VOIP for a bit over 3 dozen people. Just imagine the confusion when you bring a USB-powered Skype phone on board.
Bonus points if it's an old timey rotary phone, and you pick it up and say "hello operator,"
They're not "getting rid of pixels," since you'll still have pixels on your monitor and your graphics card will still buffer what it's drawing to the screen.
The paper sounds interesting enough, but the summary has essentially nothing to do with it.
No no, they also specify a hardware appliance of several algorithmically aware lasers that will dance around in a box to the exact specification of the vector design, and it would generate a new frame as fast as the light could get from one end to the other. It was on page p[k_, n_]:= ((k - 2) n (n + 1))/2 - (k - 3) n;
great. just waiting for laptops to follow this format as they inevitably will. then we'll be able to read up to 3 lines of text at a time!
And they might find it in their heart to put the number pad back on to average laptops again instead of reserving them for the hideously overpriced (and hard to justify to management) ones...
You are right, but the bottom line (to steal the adage) is that "no one gets fired for choosing microsoft". Yes you are locked in, but you are locked in to an ecosystem that 90%+ of the world's businesses run on, so it is seen as the safest of all choices (and cost is a small factor compared to job safety).
This will take off when Samba can integrate with Google Apps and let companies throw away anything microsoft-related (but still be microsoft-like)...
To be specific about how wrong you are about almost everything: yes disasters can happen anywhere, at any time. But NO, there is NOT the same chance of a major earthquake happening in Minnesota, as there is of one happening in southern California. And to that end, the list of disasters is not infinitely long, as you suggest, which is the only way that the net disaster rate for any given spot on the surface of the earth could be the same. Some places are far far far safer to live than others. Deal with it.
Thank you for providing the textbook demonstration of the human nature of completely fucking up risk assessment. I couldn't have said it better myself. You pointed out all the things that are wrong with demand driven disaster planning, right down to the complete misunderstanding of what terms like "once-in-a-thousand-years" means. Kudos!
So Chernobyl had zero deaths and zero health side effects and zero long-term ecological disruptions? I'd be interested in knowing your sources for that because they conflict with the news reports I was listening to when it happened.
This discussion is specific to the US, which despite having many more nuclear plants than the former USSR, never had an incident remotely similar to Chernobyl. So no when we are talking about US plants and US responses, you don't get to include that.
Given the consequences of an accident, the safety record of nuclear power is appalling.
If you have any concept of critical thinking, this sentence is appalling. What does the safety record (which is still 0 fatalities, 0 health side effects, 0 long term ecological disruptions) have to do with the potential outcome of an accident? The same can't be said for any other form of large scale energy production in the US, let alone almost every other human pursuit. Coal kills, and that is appalling.
And where would you consider to be a "safe" area in the US that has no storms, no earthquakes, etc? And is also somewhat accessible and relatively close to a large population center?
I know this was just snark but here goes: There is a significant variation in the US when it comes to disasters. Everyone likes to think that disasters are truly random, but then again everyone (in general) is terrible at assessing risk. You don't have to look very hard to find areas that receive significantly fewer damaging hurricanes, damaging tornadoes, damaging earthquakes, damaging floods/tsunamis, damaging wildfires, etc. Do you really think that everywhere in the US is as prone to calamity as, say, Southern California? Give me a break.
And why should it matter how close they are to population centers? The nationwide grid is pretty good at getting energy from one state to another.
It gets kinda embarrassing when nerds reinforce their own negative stereotypes to proclaim that anything that might actually relevant they're not interested in.
I love Firefly and Game of Thrones as much as the next nerd, but we're not helping our self image by throwing a temper tantrum every time "real" news shows up in the feed.
The A123 story has been beaten to death though; this whole story should be modded flamebait since Slashdot editors know full well that the ensuing discussion will be a firestorm of politically motivated bickering that will stretch for 500+ posts (and generate a heap of ad impressions). Sure, for experienced users it's easy to ignore this kind of rabbit hole and never enter the discussion to begin with, but what kind of message are we sending out when the site's most active stories are all political ones? "Real" news would be some breakthrough (or letdown) on a line of battery r&d, or how a company is starting or stopping. This story is barely an addendum to their obituary (already over-covered on slashdot) and it will still get way more attention than a story about Linux or arduinos or other "properly" geeky pursuits.
Because in the constitution it said *nothing* about giving grants to US-based high tech battery manufacturers... therefore it is illegal for the federal government to do so (according to him). Pretty simple, really.
You never know, this might be part of the trend in manufacturing returning to US soil; with ultra-cheap material from China sailed in through the great lakes, they can slap the stuff together with the help of minimum wage machine operators, keep the "Made in USA" label, and stick them in $100,000 cars with the profit sailing back to China (and probably some fresh water out of the lake while they are at it).
Free market advocates will be filling this thread with more vitriol about how it always backfires when the government picks winners or losers, but the Chinese will basically be the only source of battery technology in a future where everything relies on electricity... Are you OK with the free market picking the US as the loser?
I guess what my post was poorly alluding to was that consumers are out there buying iPads because they are lured by how shiny it is and how good the games are, and THEN take it to their work and ask "why can't I be productive with this?" If you rounded up all the iPad owners who have had it for a few months or more, and asked them if they would trade their iPad in for something that was completely productive but didn't play angry birds, I bet you would get a LOT of interest. It's just that consumers are so short sighted, and that put the electronics market is in a full nosedive; every year we line up to buy a brand new round of shit we don't need, that has even less features, while the computers that literally make the world tick sit unchanged for going on 20 years.
You can have your Lobster Lobster, but you can't have Kobe Kobe. Kobe beef refers to more than just a specific breed of cattle. It refers to how they're fed, too.
You overlooked the option of cultivating grain and grass with kobe grade beef as fertilizer...
I watch DVDs or Blurays on the $50 thing plugged into my TV, not on a slate/phone/whatever where the CABLE to get the damn thing to show up on my big screen TV is about $50...
(and yes i know that HDMI is showing up on most laptops; pretend i dont have one of those)
Microsoft has no clue what users actually want, film at 11.
When is Microsoft going to learn to make a truly consumer-oriented device other than the XBox? Not with support for Office (that takes up most of your space apparently), not with support for Outlook, but to do the things people are using other tablets for.
Every time they release a product, the marketing is so heavily geared to Office/Outlook/Exchange I have to wonder if Microsoft is aware of the fact that loads of people use computers for things that don't involve their business applications.
If your marketing is focused on how I can do spreadsheets and connect to my corporate Exchange server, then you have no idea of what it is I'd be looking to use this kind of device for. Because I don't want either of those features.
It just always seems Microsoft is so focused on their business tools, that the result is too much focus on that. And it always seems like they launch a product after someone else has been successful with it, and then miss some of the attributes of the other product which make it successful in the first place.
If Microsoft wanted the surface to be successful, they would have put it in the hands of corporate purchasing and said "ban iPads from your wifi network, give these out, and your workers will be productive again!". They got the features right for what any enterprise would want it to do, they just don't get that consumers looking to blow $500 don't give a crap about productivity. their BOSS does.
I think the actual biggest reason for this is people who wanted a tablet already got a different product from Samsung or Motorola or Apple and they're not going to spend all that money again just to switch. MS came into the game WAY too late.
Also we're at the verge of a netbook-caliber tablet crash where everyone realizes they all suck and stop buying them. They're too fragile, they don't have a DVD drive, they're harder to type on, the screen is tiny, they get dirty with fingerprints, they don't run 99% of software ever written, everything they do on it is designed to cost money, the browsers don't display pages correctly, the battery life is a lie, most don't have USB flash drive capabilities, they don't work with the majority of printers, and it's difficult to do meaningful work on them in any way shape or form. That's actually slightly more cons than netbooks and they went from boom to flop in approximately 2 years.
Your post mostly makes sense (especially the frustration of being in an ecosystem where the tablet purchaser is merely a commodity whose eyeballs will be sold to the highest bidder)... what the fuck is a DVD drive? I remember old, slow, failure prone round plasticky things but the last time i had a need for one in ANY computing related task was probably more than 5 years ago... Are you talking about that?
"Herd immunity (or community immunity) describes a form of immunity that occurs when the vaccination of a significant portion of a population (or herd) provides a measure of protection for individuals who have not developed immunity"
It's about the vaccinated, who are already actively protected, creating a passive protection effect for the non-vaccinated through numbers.
You are correct that herd immunity benefits everyone (Even the unvaccinated) but similarly a lack of herd immunity puts more in danger than just the willfully unvaccinated (since not everyone can be vaccinated for reasons other than their own ignorance/arrogance, and a vaccine doesn't guarantee every recipient 100% immunity). Yes, it would be nice if we could just stand back and let the antivax nuts make their way out of the gene pool, but unfortunately that's not exactly how it works. Plus, not all vaccines are cheap; a government mandate is basically the only way to get the kind of uptake that provides herd immunity. There are many dangers to the path the antivax idiots are interested in going down.
If 1000 people each spend 5 minutes reading TFS, skimming the comments, and trolling a little here and there, that's 3.17 days *demanded* PER article! A dozen articles a day, and that's like a zillion DAYS A DAY!
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, for an even better solution why not just point out that you can find the answers on the internet. The point of homework is *not* to find a way out of doing it, and the point of waiting on your TI-84 is *not* so that you will waste your precious time. That title goes to slashdot.
"instead of waiting 4-5 seconds to do something, i am interested in spending hours of effort to recreate/relearn it on a different platform"
Why not use the "agonizing eternity" of 4-5 seconds to reflect on life, maybe hum a song, or do anything that helps your mind relax before you develop ADD and can ONLY do math?
what karma? it's friday.
On the other hand, 3Mbit can do decent VOIP for a bit over 3 dozen people.
Just imagine the confusion when you bring a USB-powered Skype phone on board.
Bonus points if it's an old timey rotary phone, and you pick it up and say "hello operator,"
Dear person who insists on trying to run Netflix watch instantly from inflight wifi,
STOPIT!
Sincerely,
Every other passenger
Then paste the BMP into a Word doc.
I was thinking Excel, for the coup de grâce of technological misapplication. (i see this all the time, unfortunately)
They're not "getting rid of pixels," since you'll still have pixels on your monitor and your graphics card will still buffer what it's drawing to the screen.
The paper sounds interesting enough, but the summary has essentially nothing to do with it.
No no, they also specify a hardware appliance of several algorithmically aware lasers that will dance around in a box to the exact specification of the vector design, and it would generate a new frame as fast as the light could get from one end to the other. It was on page p[k_, n_] := ((k - 2) n (n + 1))/2 - (k - 3) n;
Just to spite them, i am going to republish their PDF using a 1024x14576 .bmp file.
great. just waiting for laptops to follow this format as they inevitably will. then we'll be able to read up to 3 lines of text at a time!
And they might find it in their heart to put the number pad back on to average laptops again instead of reserving them for the hideously overpriced (and hard to justify to management) ones...
You are right, but the bottom line (to steal the adage) is that "no one gets fired for choosing microsoft". Yes you are locked in, but you are locked in to an ecosystem that 90%+ of the world's businesses run on, so it is seen as the safest of all choices (and cost is a small factor compared to job safety).
This will take off when Samba can integrate with Google Apps and let companies throw away anything microsoft-related (but still be microsoft-like)...
To be specific about how wrong you are about almost everything: yes disasters can happen anywhere, at any time. But NO, there is NOT the same chance of a major earthquake happening in Minnesota, as there is of one happening in southern California. And to that end, the list of disasters is not infinitely long, as you suggest, which is the only way that the net disaster rate for any given spot on the surface of the earth could be the same. Some places are far far far safer to live than others. Deal with it.
Thank you for providing the textbook demonstration of the human nature of completely fucking up risk assessment. I couldn't have said it better myself. You pointed out all the things that are wrong with demand driven disaster planning, right down to the complete misunderstanding of what terms like "once-in-a-thousand-years" means. Kudos!
So Chernobyl had zero deaths and zero health side effects and zero long-term ecological disruptions? I'd be interested in knowing your sources for that because they conflict with the news reports I was listening to when it happened.
This discussion is specific to the US, which despite having many more nuclear plants than the former USSR, never had an incident remotely similar to Chernobyl. So no when we are talking about US plants and US responses, you don't get to include that.
Given the consequences of an accident, the safety record of nuclear power is appalling.
If you have any concept of critical thinking, this sentence is appalling. What does the safety record (which is still 0 fatalities, 0 health side effects, 0 long term ecological disruptions) have to do with the potential outcome of an accident? The same can't be said for any other form of large scale energy production in the US, let alone almost every other human pursuit. Coal kills, and that is appalling.
And where would you consider to be a "safe" area in the US that has no storms, no earthquakes, etc? And is also somewhat accessible and relatively close to a large population center?
I know this was just snark but here goes: There is a significant variation in the US when it comes to disasters. Everyone likes to think that disasters are truly random, but then again everyone (in general) is terrible at assessing risk. You don't have to look very hard to find areas that receive significantly fewer damaging hurricanes, damaging tornadoes, damaging earthquakes, damaging floods/tsunamis, damaging wildfires, etc. Do you really think that everywhere in the US is as prone to calamity as, say, Southern California? Give me a break.
And why should it matter how close they are to population centers? The nationwide grid is pretty good at getting energy from one state to another.
It gets kinda embarrassing when nerds reinforce their own negative stereotypes to proclaim that anything that might actually relevant they're not interested in.
I love Firefly and Game of Thrones as much as the next nerd, but we're not helping our self image by throwing a temper tantrum every time "real" news shows up in the feed.
The A123 story has been beaten to death though; this whole story should be modded flamebait since Slashdot editors know full well that the ensuing discussion will be a firestorm of politically motivated bickering that will stretch for 500+ posts (and generate a heap of ad impressions). Sure, for experienced users it's easy to ignore this kind of rabbit hole and never enter the discussion to begin with, but what kind of message are we sending out when the site's most active stories are all political ones? "Real" news would be some breakthrough (or letdown) on a line of battery r&d, or how a company is starting or stopping. This story is barely an addendum to their obituary (already over-covered on slashdot) and it will still get way more attention than a story about Linux or arduinos or other "properly" geeky pursuits.
How can you be robbed of something you gave away?
Because in the constitution it said *nothing* about giving grants to US-based high tech battery manufacturers... therefore it is illegal for the federal government to do so (according to him). Pretty simple, really.
You never know, this might be part of the trend in manufacturing returning to US soil; with ultra-cheap material from China sailed in through the great lakes, they can slap the stuff together with the help of minimum wage machine operators, keep the "Made in USA" label, and stick them in $100,000 cars with the profit sailing back to China (and probably some fresh water out of the lake while they are at it).
Free market advocates will be filling this thread with more vitriol about how it always backfires when the government picks winners or losers, but the Chinese will basically be the only source of battery technology in a future where everything relies on electricity... Are you OK with the free market picking the US as the loser?
I guess what my post was poorly alluding to was that consumers are out there buying iPads because they are lured by how shiny it is and how good the games are, and THEN take it to their work and ask "why can't I be productive with this?" If you rounded up all the iPad owners who have had it for a few months or more, and asked them if they would trade their iPad in for something that was completely productive but didn't play angry birds, I bet you would get a LOT of interest. It's just that consumers are so short sighted, and that put the electronics market is in a full nosedive; every year we line up to buy a brand new round of shit we don't need, that has even less features, while the computers that literally make the world tick sit unchanged for going on 20 years.
but i digress.
You can have your Lobster Lobster, but you can't have Kobe Kobe. Kobe beef refers to more than just a specific breed of cattle. It refers to how they're fed, too.
You overlooked the option of cultivating grain and grass with kobe grade beef as fertilizer...
How about watching or ripping a DVD or Bluray?
I watch DVDs or Blurays on the $50 thing plugged into my TV, not on a slate/phone/whatever where the CABLE to get the damn thing to show up on my big screen TV is about $50...
(and yes i know that HDMI is showing up on most laptops; pretend i dont have one of those)
Microsoft has no clue what users actually want, film at 11.
When is Microsoft going to learn to make a truly consumer-oriented device other than the XBox? Not with support for Office (that takes up most of your space apparently), not with support for Outlook, but to do the things people are using other tablets for.
Every time they release a product, the marketing is so heavily geared to Office/Outlook/Exchange I have to wonder if Microsoft is aware of the fact that loads of people use computers for things that don't involve their business applications.
If your marketing is focused on how I can do spreadsheets and connect to my corporate Exchange server, then you have no idea of what it is I'd be looking to use this kind of device for. Because I don't want either of those features.
It just always seems Microsoft is so focused on their business tools, that the result is too much focus on that. And it always seems like they launch a product after someone else has been successful with it, and then miss some of the attributes of the other product which make it successful in the first place.
If Microsoft wanted the surface to be successful, they would have put it in the hands of corporate purchasing and said "ban iPads from your wifi network, give these out, and your workers will be productive again!". They got the features right for what any enterprise would want it to do, they just don't get that consumers looking to blow $500 don't give a crap about productivity. their BOSS does.
I think the actual biggest reason for this is people who wanted a tablet already got a different product from Samsung or Motorola or Apple and they're not going to spend all that money again just to switch. MS came into the game WAY too late.
Also we're at the verge of a netbook-caliber tablet crash where everyone realizes they all suck and stop buying them. They're too fragile, they don't have a DVD drive, they're harder to type on, the screen is tiny, they get dirty with fingerprints, they don't run 99% of software ever written, everything they do on it is designed to cost money, the browsers don't display pages correctly, the battery life is a lie, most don't have USB flash drive capabilities, they don't work with the majority of printers, and it's difficult to do meaningful work on them in any way shape or form. That's actually slightly more cons than netbooks and they went from boom to flop in approximately 2 years.
Your post mostly makes sense (especially the frustration of being in an ecosystem where the tablet purchaser is merely a commodity whose eyeballs will be sold to the highest bidder)... what the fuck is a DVD drive? I remember old, slow, failure prone round plasticky things but the last time i had a need for one in ANY computing related task was probably more than 5 years ago... Are you talking about that?
Hey, cut that out. That's my luggage combination!
Don't worry, they will never figure out that it only works when standing on your head...
Incorrect. it only matters to the un-vaccinated.
"Herd immunity (or community immunity) describes a form of immunity that occurs when the vaccination of a significant portion of a population (or herd) provides a measure of protection for individuals who have not developed immunity"
It's about the vaccinated, who are already actively protected, creating a passive protection effect for the non-vaccinated through numbers.
You are correct that herd immunity benefits everyone (Even the unvaccinated) but similarly a lack of herd immunity puts more in danger than just the willfully unvaccinated (since not everyone can be vaccinated for reasons other than their own ignorance/arrogance, and a vaccine doesn't guarantee every recipient 100% immunity). Yes, it would be nice if we could just stand back and let the antivax nuts make their way out of the gene pool, but unfortunately that's not exactly how it works. Plus, not all vaccines are cheap; a government mandate is basically the only way to get the kind of uptake that provides herd immunity. There are many dangers to the path the antivax idiots are interested in going down.
If 1000 people each spend 5 minutes reading TFS, skimming the comments, and trolling a little here and there, that's 3.17 days *demanded* PER article! A dozen articles a day, and that's like a zillion DAYS A DAY!
Hyperbole much?