Need I say anymore? The iPhone is no longer king! Hoorah!
Pretty sure that the iPhone was never king among the geeks that care about hardware specs. The iPhone is king among the people who care about the number of apps, user experience, and style. The kind of people who base their decision on what they see on TV, or what their friends like, and not what they read on Slashdot.
You're right, it is a pissing contest, and there's really no point in it. The US does not need to build that high. For that matter, western Europe does not have a single building in the top 100 for height. This is a huge white elephant for the UAE, and white elephants are something the US already has plenty of.
Building a building that goes to 11 is not a technological challenge. Heck, Burj Dubai was designed by a US firm. There are a dozen firms in the US and around the world that could build a building a hundreds of feet taller than the Burj Dubai if there was a need. There isn't. Pursuing a giant national phallic symbol is not what the US should be spending its resources on.
I'm astounded about the tremendous amount of disinformation surrounding something as well-understood as diseases and the immune system. From the "OMG I have a virus, give me an antibiotic" crowd to the "Vaccines cause the evulz" nuts...sheesh.
Indeed, Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts, no?
Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.
So you're saying that every black person who wasn't Rosa Parks should be condemned for not standing up for their rights?
Some people (and, naturally, most companies) just want to go about their business without getting in trouble. This is not a moral weakness on their part. Not everyone is a born crusader.
By the way, what have you done to protest censorship in China recently? Nothing? Then STFU already.
Unlike the companies in the article, the DEC brand is not being pimped by a lousy shell company to licensors that are slapping it on discount pantyhose.
Wow, what a bunch of morons. In addition to hiring people that understand you just can't do that kind of stuff, my company has controls in place to prevent it. Want to reboot a production server? You need a change ticket, approval and you're going to be doing it during the maintenance window unless it's an emergency. Gotta do it? Call it an emergency and explain yourself later. Can't? Find another job.
Nobody is talking about production servers. Not even testing servers. We're talking about developers' own workstations, and possibly development servers.
If your developers can't be trusted in their own environment, then you need to find better developers.
Not sure why this is moderated as interesting. The point of a spacial file browser is to use your spacial memory (which is big, and is the reason why you can find things all around the house or on a messy desk easily) to manage your files. Every time you open a folder, it opens in the same place on your screen. This lets you mentally associate screen locations with files.
The problem with spacial browsers is that they don't scale beyond a certain point. They were great on older machines where you'd only have a few hundred files, but managing a thousand files with a spacial UI will just confuse the user. A good compromise would be to use spacial mode for documents and an explorer for everything else.
This is pretty contradictory.
The real problem with a spatial interface is when you're examining a folder structure that you've never encountered before, or encounter so rarely that you don't have a chance to get a spatial sense of. Like the depths of the OS, or a music or photo library managed by a music or photo management app, or a file server that's modified all the time by other people
That's why the ever-changing, unmappable web demands a browser-style interface.
It's that direct stipulation that leads to short-sightedness, and ends up costing taxpayers billions in the long run.
"Oh, well we don't need to shore up these levies in New Orleans. There's no immediate benefit when there hasn't been a major hurricane in years."
"Oh, bridges can last a little while longer than designed. We'll just send someone by periodically to do a cursory check. That's a lot cheaper than replacing all those 1930s projects."
"Who cares about preventative care. If you want that, get insurance and go to your doctor. Never mind that taxpayers will cover you when your problem gets worse and you go to the emergency room uninsured."
"Regulation is an inefficient burden on commerce. It's hard to show a direct benefit when you back during a boom and ignore any lessons more than three years old. Just let it all go, and the publicly-chartered companies will police themselves!"
I think we have very different opinions on "efficient". I believe that long-term and indirect benefits can be significantly more efficient than short-term nearsightedness, and the government if anyone should be able to look at the long term. In this case, for example, he should find a way to fund the projects he uses (such as buying support licenses), because in the long term it will keep the projects active and improving, and save significant cost versus a system redesign due to an EOL/abandoned software product.
I'm struggling to imagine how failing to contribute to a FOSS project is in any way equivalent to failing to maintain vital public safety infrastructure.
I'm forced to conclude you're making a straw man argument
Second... I don't want my tax dollars being used for a mirror server. Plenty of other people do that already, and even if they didn't, we have bittorrent.
Indeed. Government should be as efficient as possible. As a public servant, your responsibility is to the taxpayers. You should offer only those contributions which do not increase the burden on those taxpayers, or which directly benefit them.
If you can't contribute bugfixes or enhancements, then contribute by filing bug reports and feature requests. Possibly documentation, but only if it is something that you, your coworkers, or your eventual replacement would use in the future. (IE documenting the structure of an unclear config file, not writing a detailed tutorial.)
Anything else you want to do, do it on your own time and your own dime.
You can bet that Bumfuck, TX would have a lot fewer judges, clerks, and lawyers if there weren't so many patent lawsuits filed there. For that reason alone, they are unlikely to crack down.
Much as some states (Delaware, for example) have a nice side business iin providing corporation-friendly incorporation laws, this district generates considerable (for them) local revenue in patent suits by providing friendly jurisdiction.
I wonder how much it would cost for technology corporations to simply buy up all the land in the district and effectively evict the entire population.
Did they put a separate door for the pilots? If they would start making it physically impossible for the passengers to enter the cockpit giving each a seperate exterior door, we could get rid of a bunch of the useless security theater.
1. Only the US, Israel, and a few other countries might care. Probably half of Boeing's customers wouldn't want this arrangement, and would be fine with strengthened, locking cockpit doors. 2. Unless all in-service planes were replaced with the new aircraft, they would still have to screen everyone at the gate. 3. The whole reason we call it "security theater" is that it's not really for security. This wouldn't change anything.
Telco solution: We must charge everyone based on usage!
If they can identify 3% of people are using 40%, then by all means put a 'cap' on the fixed price service that *doesn't* affect the 97% of normal users. Charge for extra service for the offending 3%.
Spoken like a telecom executive. The people who use our service the most are "offending."
And what about a tabbed and paned interface loses the ability to see two windows side by side? You can easily have 3 windows maximized at once, with different panes and drag bars between them for resizing the 3 workspaces. I'm just talking about getting rid of the window borders and crap you don't need in order to work with multiple windows at once.
Nothing. I'm a big fan of tabbed, windowed interfaces. I was talking about maximizing only.
Maximizing made sense when we were all using 640x480 screens. Every pixel was precious and had to be dedicated to the task at hand.
Today, with huge, HD-resolution widescreens becoming standard, it really doesn't make much sense. I'd much rather use the extra space to display two files side-by-side than one file with lots of extra blank space. Even if I don't have enough space to show both of them completely, I'd rather have one of them peeking out to the side than covered up completely.
'The FBI could not comment on this specific case, but said if child pornography is ever downloaded accidentally, the user needs to call authorities immediately.'
At which point you've just confessed to trafficking in child porn. No, the proper thing to do is have a secure file deletion utility to nuke all evidence on your system.
No. Just buy a new hard drive and destroy the old one. Open the old hard drive and use a sawsall to cut the disks in to little pieces and scatter them.
Yeah, then the worst that could happen is that you'll be charged with littering.
If you'd step outside your own borders once in awhile, you'd recognize this sentence structure as something that works in a foreign language, but has been translated into English by a non-native speaker.
Yes, hence the subject line.
Constructive criticism is useful, but please don't be unkind.
What part of that post was "unkind?" It was a fairly straightforward, if blunt, explanation of why the sentence structure makes its meaning ambiguous and how it could be clarified.
By the time FCC gets around to rule making and enforcement about POTS, Google would have deployed a coast-to-coast Wi-Fi for free. It would still be called Beta though. All the telephone companies pumping voice through a pair of copper wires would go the way the companies that shipped freight over a pair iron rails.
You mean companies like Norfolk Southern, CSX, BNSF, and Union Pacific, all of which move freight far more energy efficiently (by an order of magnitude) over a far less congested infrastructure, than the ones that do it using diesel trucks on the overloaded, crumbling US highway system?
Slashdot Mirror
521MB RAM vs 256MB RAM
800x480 vs 480x320
1Ghz vs 600Mhz
5MP vs 3MP
AMOLED vs TFT
To top it off the nexus one is a slimmer device.
Need I say anymore? The iPhone is no longer king! Hoorah!
Pretty sure that the iPhone was never king among the geeks that care about hardware specs. The iPhone is king among the people who care about the number of apps, user experience, and style. The kind of people who base their decision on what they see on TV, or what their friends like, and not what they read on Slashdot.
You know, the vast majority of the population.
For now Android is a toy while the iphone is well ahead as a tool to get work done
A toy that lets us develop our own datacenter management tools and deploy them to our employees without having to suck Apple's App Store dick.
Which you can also do with the iPhone, through Ad Hoc distribution. But don't let facts get in the way of your trolling.
You're right, it is a pissing contest, and there's really no point in it. The US does not need to build that high. For that matter, western Europe does not have a single building in the top 100 for height. This is a huge white elephant for the UAE, and white elephants are something the US already has plenty of.
Building a building that goes to 11 is not a technological challenge. Heck, Burj Dubai was designed by a US firm. There are a dozen firms in the US and around the world that could build a building a hundreds of feet taller than the Burj Dubai if there was a need. There isn't. Pursuing a giant national phallic symbol is not what the US should be spending its resources on.
Or was a quote altered to push a US (only?) brand?
Aspirin was once a trademark, too. Still is, in some places.
Most Americans know "acetaminophen" as Tylenol in the same way that they know "acetylsalicylic acid" as aspirin.
Mod parent up.
I'm astounded about the tremendous amount of disinformation surrounding something as well-understood as diseases and the immune system. From the "OMG I have a virus, give me an antibiotic" crowd to the "Vaccines cause the evulz" nuts...sheesh.
wen evrything u say is n txts, u dont need 2 touch type
Indeed, Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts, no?
Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.
So you're saying that every black person who wasn't Rosa Parks should be condemned for not standing up for their rights?
Some people (and, naturally, most companies) just want to go about their business without getting in trouble. This is not a moral weakness on their part. Not everyone is a born crusader.
By the way, what have you done to protest censorship in China recently? Nothing? Then STFU already.
Unlike the companies in the article, the DEC brand is not being pimped by a lousy shell company to licensors that are slapping it on discount pantyhose.
Wow, what a bunch of morons. In addition to hiring people that understand you just can't do that kind of stuff, my company has controls in place to prevent it. Want to reboot a production server? You need a change ticket, approval and you're going to be doing it during the maintenance window unless it's an emergency. Gotta do it? Call it an emergency and explain yourself later. Can't? Find another job.
Nobody is talking about production servers. Not even testing servers. We're talking about developers' own workstations, and possibly development servers.
If your developers can't be trusted in their own environment, then you need to find better developers.
Not sure why this is moderated as interesting. The point of a spacial file browser is to use your spacial memory (which is big, and is the reason why you can find things all around the house or on a messy desk easily) to manage your files. Every time you open a folder, it opens in the same place on your screen. This lets you mentally associate screen locations with files.
The problem with spacial browsers is that they don't scale beyond a certain point. They were great on older machines where you'd only have a few hundred files, but managing a thousand files with a spacial UI will just confuse the user. A good compromise would be to use spacial mode for documents and an explorer for everything else.
This is pretty contradictory.
The real problem with a spatial interface is when you're examining a folder structure that you've never encountered before, or encounter so rarely that you don't have a chance to get a spatial sense of. Like the depths of the OS, or a music or photo library managed by a music or photo management app, or a file server that's modified all the time by other people
That's why the ever-changing, unmappable web demands a browser-style interface.
It's that direct stipulation that leads to short-sightedness, and ends up costing taxpayers billions in the long run.
"Oh, well we don't need to shore up these levies in New Orleans. There's no immediate benefit when there hasn't been a major hurricane in years."
"Oh, bridges can last a little while longer than designed. We'll just send someone by periodically to do a cursory check. That's a lot cheaper than replacing all those 1930s projects."
"Who cares about preventative care. If you want that, get insurance and go to your doctor. Never mind that taxpayers will cover you when your problem gets worse and you go to the emergency room uninsured."
"Regulation is an inefficient burden on commerce. It's hard to show a direct benefit when you back during a boom and ignore any lessons more than three years old. Just let it all go, and the publicly-chartered companies will police themselves!"
I think we have very different opinions on "efficient". I believe that long-term and indirect benefits can be significantly more efficient than short-term nearsightedness, and the government if anyone should be able to look at the long term. In this case, for example, he should find a way to fund the projects he uses (such as buying support licenses), because in the long term it will keep the projects active and improving, and save significant cost versus a system redesign due to an EOL/abandoned software product.
I'm struggling to imagine how failing to contribute to a FOSS project is in any way equivalent to failing to maintain vital public safety infrastructure.
I'm forced to conclude you're making a straw man argument
Second... I don't want my tax dollars being used for a mirror server. Plenty of other people do that already, and even if they didn't, we have bittorrent.
Indeed. Government should be as efficient as possible. As a public servant, your responsibility is to the taxpayers. You should offer only those contributions which do not increase the burden on those taxpayers, or which directly benefit them.
If you can't contribute bugfixes or enhancements, then contribute by filing bug reports and feature requests. Possibly documentation, but only if it is something that you, your coworkers, or your eventual replacement would use in the future. (IE documenting the structure of an unclear config file, not writing a detailed tutorial.)
Anything else you want to do, do it on your own time and your own dime.
dissonant lies about my government.
Oh, come on, your lies just need to get a little rhythm....
Unless you're a web browser developer, keeping track of global browser market-shares is just plain nerdy.
Being a web browser developer is not nerdy?
Or is it a revenue stream for them?
You can bet that Bumfuck, TX would have a lot fewer judges, clerks, and lawyers if there weren't so many patent lawsuits filed there. For that reason alone, they are unlikely to crack down.
Much as some states (Delaware, for example) have a nice side business iin providing corporation-friendly incorporation laws, this district generates considerable (for them) local revenue in patent suits by providing friendly jurisdiction.
I wonder how much it would cost for technology corporations to simply buy up all the land in the district and effectively evict the entire population.
Did they put a separate door for the pilots? If they would start making it physically impossible for the passengers to enter the cockpit giving each a seperate exterior door, we could get rid of a bunch of the useless security theater.
1. Only the US, Israel, and a few other countries might care. Probably half of Boeing's customers wouldn't want this arrangement, and would be fine with strengthened, locking cockpit doors.
2. Unless all in-service planes were replaced with the new aircraft, they would still have to screen everyone at the gate.
3. The whole reason we call it "security theater" is that it's not really for security. This wouldn't change anything.
GroupWise based email archiving system, as they were switching to Exchange.
Per your link (and my recollection) it was Lotus Notes that was replaced with Exchange.
Or someone has a vocabulary big enough to use the word "ludicrous" without having learned it from a Mel Brooks movie.
The OP is just noting that the article horribly mis-spelled Ludacris' name, right?
Claim: 3% of users consume 40% of bandwidth
Telco solution: We must charge everyone based on usage!
If they can identify 3% of people are using 40%, then by all means put a 'cap' on the fixed price service that *doesn't* affect the 97% of normal users. Charge for extra service for the offending 3%.
Spoken like a telecom executive. The people who use our service the most are "offending."
Heck I've gone through my friend's list and purged out people I don't talk to or in other instances strongly dislike from way back in high school.
Personally, I think its irresponsible of your friend to have given you the kind of access necessary to remove people from his or her list.
And what about a tabbed and paned interface loses the ability to see two windows side by side? You can easily have 3 windows maximized at once, with different panes and drag bars between them for resizing the 3 workspaces. I'm just talking about getting rid of the window borders and crap you don't need in order to work with multiple windows at once.
Nothing. I'm a big fan of tabbed, windowed interfaces. I was talking about maximizing only.
Maximizing made sense when we were all using 640x480 screens. Every pixel was precious and had to be dedicated to the task at hand.
Today, with huge, HD-resolution widescreens becoming standard, it really doesn't make much sense. I'd much rather use the extra space to display two files side-by-side than one file with lots of extra blank space. Even if I don't have enough space to show both of them completely, I'd rather have one of them peeking out to the side than covered up completely.
'The FBI could not comment on this specific case, but said if child pornography is ever downloaded accidentally, the user needs to call authorities immediately.'
At which point you've just confessed to trafficking in child porn. No, the proper thing to do is have a secure file deletion utility to nuke all evidence on your system.
No. Just buy a new hard drive and destroy the old one. Open the old hard drive and use a sawsall to cut the disks in to little pieces and scatter them.
Yeah, then the worst that could happen is that you'll be charged with littering.
If you'd step outside your own borders once in awhile, you'd recognize this sentence structure as something that works in a foreign language, but has been translated into English by a non-native speaker.
Yes, hence the subject line.
Constructive criticism is useful, but please don't be unkind.
What part of that post was "unkind?" It was a fairly straightforward, if blunt, explanation of why the sentence structure makes its meaning ambiguous and how it could be clarified.
By the time FCC gets around to rule making and enforcement about POTS, Google would have deployed a coast-to-coast Wi-Fi for free. It would still be called Beta though. All the telephone companies pumping voice through a pair of copper wires would go the way the companies that shipped freight over a pair iron rails.
You mean companies like Norfolk Southern, CSX, BNSF, and Union Pacific, all of which move freight far more energy efficiently (by an order of magnitude) over a far less congested infrastructure, than the ones that do it using diesel trucks on the overloaded, crumbling US highway system?