Would you buy tickets that cost $25 than anywhere else more because the airline advertised redundancy in its IT systems? People choose flights based on price (secondarily, on frequent flier plans, etc.), but how is a consumer supposed to choose based on factors like this, except in the most general terms (on-time percentage)? The airline management knows this, and would be silly to invest too much in things that will raise costs without enabling them to increase revenues.
It's the same in Japan: ATMs there have accepted cash for a long time (credit/debit cards are less widely used). So one of my Japanese teachers, when he first came to the States, tried to make a deposit by inserting some twenties into the deposit slot of the ATM. He had to get the bank staff to open the machine up and retrieve it.
Not quite. The idea then was that we would teach the machines the rules, and they would follow them better/more cheaply than a human brain. The innovation here is that the system goes and looks at the published medical literature and figures out the rules on its own.
It is a conspiracy theory. The principal party to the conspiracy would be not the Soviets but the US government agency/ies that covered it up. It's also a stupid theory, of course.
That's true as the term is used in biology, but there's no reason it should automatically have the same connotation in other fields, and in fact it doesn't. In other areas, such as technology, it has long (at least since the 19th century) had the sense of increasing complexity and/or gradual improvement. Why should the fact thay in biology it has a specialized meaning force us to abandon its other usages?
It is not an abridgement of freedom of speech to be unable to sing a particular song without owing royalties--it would be illegal for Congress to ban the expression of birthday greetings in general, but one can do so in other ways. There are other legal restrictions of speech (e.g. laws against libel and threats) that are also constitutional.
Which seems odd to me, but that was apparently what they agreed to.
It's pretty much the same as a painting Tyson might have purchased from an artist: he would own the painting, but the artist would retain copyright (unless it was contracted as a work for hire). It doesn't matter, legally, that the work happens to be on his body.
No, he/she is quoting the Constitution directly. You, on the other hand, have treated the right to free speech as an absolute right, which I agree that it should be, but the US constitution does not make it that; it only guarantees protection from government control of speech.
Doesn't this have the possibility of replacing the computers in the computer lab? A PC for every kid that is their own person machine. All they do is plug it in when they go into the lab. Of course, troubleshooting problems on these things might be a nightmare, but you'll have that.
Given that the thing has no storage, what's the point of the kids having their own personal machines, when the machines are all identical and anything that was really "theirs" would in fact be sitting on a server somewhere? What's the advantage of walking into the lab, plugging "your" machine in, and logging into your account over simply logging into an account on a permanent desktop machine (even a low-powered thin client)? At least until middle school age, they're not going to be tinkering with the hardware, and they won't have the other necessary components (display, keyboard/mouse for input), so what's the added value? Or why not just give each kid a USB flash drive with their account data on it? That would be cheaper and more useful.
On the contrary, the more customers you have, or more precisely the denser the network, the easier it should be. Laying fiber to widely-spaced exurban housing is far more costly, per customer, compared to running it through urban areas.
ISP's don't give two shits what you do with your bandwidth, as it's not a server.
Of course they do. They generally don't want you to share it with your neighbors, since that means they have fewer paying customers. And they generally don't want to be in the law enforcement business, responding to subpoenas, etc., if they don't have to.
Slashdot Mirror
Would you buy tickets that cost $25 than anywhere else more because the airline advertised redundancy in its IT systems? People choose flights based on price (secondarily, on frequent flier plans, etc.), but how is a consumer supposed to choose based on factors like this, except in the most general terms (on-time percentage)? The airline management knows this, and would be silly to invest too much in things that will raise costs without enabling them to increase revenues.
It's the same in Japan: ATMs there have accepted cash for a long time (credit/debit cards are less widely used). So one of my Japanese teachers, when he first came to the States, tried to make a deposit by inserting some twenties into the deposit slot of the ATM. He had to get the bank staff to open the machine up and retrieve it.
Bye, Doug!
That would be "What fucketh thou?"
Not quite. The idea then was that we would teach the machines the rules, and they would follow them better/more cheaply than a human brain. The innovation here is that the system goes and looks at the published medical literature and figures out the rules on its own.
Some planes I've been on have done this.
It is a conspiracy theory. The principal party to the conspiracy would be not the Soviets but the US government agency/ies that covered it up. It's also a stupid theory, of course.
True, but they haven't flown since 1997.
That's true as the term is used in biology, but there's no reason it should automatically have the same connotation in other fields, and in fact it doesn't. In other areas, such as technology, it has long (at least since the 19th century) had the sense of increasing complexity and/or gradual improvement. Why should the fact thay in biology it has a specialized meaning force us to abandon its other usages?
Ethernet over USB.
Easier just to disconnect the power. Pro tip: nearly 100% of malware infections occur in machines that are powered up.
It is not an abridgement of freedom of speech to be unable to sing a particular song without owing royalties--it would be illegal for Congress to ban the expression of birthday greetings in general, but one can do so in other ways. There are other legal restrictions of speech (e.g. laws against libel and threats) that are also constitutional.
Which seems odd to me, but that was apparently what they agreed to.
It's pretty much the same as a painting Tyson might have purchased from an artist: he would own the painting, but the artist would retain copyright (unless it was contracted as a work for hire). It doesn't matter, legally, that the work happens to be on his body.
No, he/she is quoting the Constitution directly. You, on the other hand, have treated the right to free speech as an absolute right, which I agree that it should be, but the US constitution does not make it that; it only guarantees protection from government control of speech.
In some fields. Physics usually treats it as non-finite.
Some are dealing with zero money to spend, you insensitive clod.
Simple. For software, pay for the support+license, not the license.
He is, but you're probably getting all your news from the Daily Bugle, which never prints anything good about Spider-Man.
If you're shaking a sieveful of eggs, the size of the holes isn't your biggest problem.
Then why not give each kid a $5 SD card and leave the PC (even if it's one of these tiny ones) in place?
Doesn't this have the possibility of replacing the computers in the computer lab? A PC for every kid that is their own person machine. All they do is plug it in when they go into the lab. Of course, troubleshooting problems on these things might be a nightmare, but you'll have that.
Given that the thing has no storage, what's the point of the kids having their own personal machines, when the machines are all identical and anything that was really "theirs" would in fact be sitting on a server somewhere? What's the advantage of walking into the lab, plugging "your" machine in, and logging into your account over simply logging into an account on a permanent desktop machine (even a low-powered thin client)? At least until middle school age, they're not going to be tinkering with the hardware, and they won't have the other necessary components (display, keyboard/mouse for input), so what's the added value? Or why not just give each kid a USB flash drive with their account data on it? That would be cheaper and more useful.
To be nitpicky, HDMI carries audio, too, and most HDMI displays would have speakers as well, so those kind of go together.
On the contrary, the more customers you have, or more precisely the denser the network, the easier it should be. Laying fiber to widely-spaced exurban housing is far more costly, per customer, compared to running it through urban areas.
Unless of course you're one of those people who refers to female friends as "girlfriends", in which case, I hate you.
Women do that too, but this is /.
No, it hasn't.
ISP's don't give two shits what you do with your bandwidth, as it's not a server.
Of course they do. They generally don't want you to share it with your neighbors, since that means they have fewer paying customers. And they generally don't want to be in the law enforcement business, responding to subpoenas, etc., if they don't have to.