I think most people would be happy paying 1/8th the price for chinese made ink in a bottle that works 95% as well as HP's "pharmaceutical grade" printer ink. There is color printing, and then there is photo printing. Most people don't give a damn if there's the occasional smudge on their google maps printout.
You should be printing your photos at walmart or snapfish or (insert industrial photo printing operation of your choice here) using dye-sublimation printing anyways, not consumer grade inks. HP does sell printers that will print using archival grade pigments (not dyes) but most consumers can't afford the printer that uses that kind of ink.
Excuse me if I'm being snarky here; I played the game for about half of the two week demo period before uninstalling it -- Let me get this correct: 20% of the population are power gamers who play the game with all the politics, player run corporations, goonfleet, band of brothers, epic space battles etc, and 80% of the game plays the games simply as point and click questing WoW in spaceships, unaware of the benefits of joining an active corporation?
I think you are correct; OS design has sort of hit a glass celing. Cars wear out, but office PCs will chug along hidden out of sight doing MS Word for 10+ years until the hard drive gives out, at which point it's cheaper/easier to just call up dell and tell them to fedex a new computer overnight.
Eventually the world will standardize on 24" 1080p+ displays and someone will come up with a better way of utilizing all that space. Win 3.1 worked really great on 640x480 screens and took advantage of the space given to it. The iPhone, PalmOS (not WebOS) and the new W.Phone7 all do a really good job of using the tiny space and fat fingers allocated to them. Who knows what the OS will transform into with more people using 19"+ screens, and maybe more importantly, enough ram + cpu to run all the programs on their computer at once. I think intelligent app switching might be the "next big thing". I use photoshop maybe once a day, but I don't like sitting through the load screen for 2 minutes, but I also don't like it sitting in my starbar at the bottom of the screen all day taking up space. Superfetch does an ok job, but somewhere there's a happy medium between superfetch and multiple desktops.
Win7 is not an enormous upgrade over XP, but there are enough tweaks in 7 to prefer it over XP SP3 if you have the choice on your netbook. The one thing I really like about Win7 over XP is that Mac and Linux have no problem connecting to windows shares now. I just got done recovering an old OSX HFS drive with the recovered data going to my Windows box, and transfering my trip pictures off my netbook and it went without a hitch. XP was always causing me grief and wouldn't show up in network/workgroup browsers.
I don't think anyone is arguing that W7 is a generational leap over XP in the way that OSX was over OS9, but it's a nice series of tweaks and fixes of "100 papercuts" as the Ubuntu crew likes to call it. It would have been nice if they'd released incremental updates and features on a schedule similar to Apple's, but I'm rather content with Win7 for the moment.
I just did a fresh install of Win7 "Home Premium" and it was 13GB. I would imagine the mobile version that doesn't come with ~8GB of drivers would be less than 8GB. By 2008 there were trimmed down highly functional versions of XP floating around on the pirate bay that would fit on a 128mb thumbdrive, including their malware payload. I would imagine they'll be able to pare Win7 in the same manner to ~2GB without much problem.
It's also what makes it interesting to read about as an outsider. 300,000 people is on par with the state of Wyoming, except they're all using the same set of forums and actively engaged with one another. We have a hard time getting 50% of the population in the real world to vote, or send back census forms; these people are all actively engaged. WoW might have X million users, but there's only ~20,000 people on one server/shard/instance/whatever. I'm guessing many of those server numbers come from multiple characters on one account.
people on this council are going to use their new power to further their own personal interests
You must not get out of mom's basement much:) This is how the real world works as well. Bush Sr. was head of the CIA, became president, one of his sons became President as well, the other a govenor of Florida. McCain, before running for Senate and President, was in the Navy as an officer. McCain's father was an Admiral, and his father was an Admiral. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that McCain's son will at the very least be a captain of an aircraft carrier if he doesn't go into politics by then.
The principal of a nearby elementary school is married to a Whataburger resturant owner; guess where they have their team building meetings, and who caters all the staff lunches?
Most of the major cities in South America are actually pretty nice, as are most of the smaller ones. As an American, I wouldn't mind living and working down there. The "hellhole" parts aren't much worse than the Gulf Coast in the US. Except maybe Rio. For a population of 6 million, half of that lives in abject poverty on a scale that's almost Darfur-scale depressing.
Paraguay/Rural Bolivia, Suriname and the Guyanas I have not visited and from what I understand they are about as poor and lacking of infrastructure as you can get.
I never thought I'd see the day when/. links to fox news.
It's a fairly well written article though. I'd say it's head and shoulders above anything they've linked to on Tom's Hardware, but that's not saying much.
Well hey, since it's apparently free to fly at supersonic speeds, you could just fly south over Houston, once you hit the gulf just fly around the tip of Florida and up to London!!! It'd be even easier flying from LA - just head south around the tip of Argentina off the coast of south america and it's a straight shot to London!
I don't think anyone on either side is denying they're changing ("omitting") the curriculum. They took a publicly recorded vote on the matter. Bush's orwellian era is over, take a deep breath and relax:)
Interesting, that's true! I'm arguing the difference between suppressing and withholding however.
What I meant was,
Textbooks can only hold so much information and minds can only retain so much - you have to pick and choose what to put in there. This is a job that has to be done by humans, and humans can't be 100% objective, especially when it comes to history. While I do agree that there's a political agenda behind this (and I'm not hearing too many people denying this) you have to admit that while devious, this is a pretty legitimate tactic. They're withholding certain facts in light of other ones. It's not that they've gone about burning books and removing tangential volumes from libraries that teach other ideologies - THAT would be suppressing the truth/facts. That's not what they're doing here - they're attempting to change, or highlight certain ideologies by removing the parts they don't feel are relevant. Again, devil's advocate.
Lucky for us, the Texas Board of Education is either indirectly or directly elected by the people, and the problem will sort itself out according to the will of the people.
I think you're confusing the Republican Party with their constituents. For the most part their constituents don't really care or understand about the Republican platform, but the Republican Party is willing to bend to some of their whims to get their vote.
Playing devil's advocate here, they aren't changing facts, nor are they actively suppressing the truth, they're just... withholding certain facts. Like separation of church and state. Not to say that's a good thing, as the arab world is attempting to "forget" the holocaust, in the same way we're trying to forget the whole church and state thing. Of course we've been omiting huge chunks of recent world history for quite some time; our worldview is based on the British worldview. Nobody ever talks about the Dutch trading company, or the Sino-Japanese wars. The CIA's involvement in Iraq, Cuba and countless other countries has been glossed over. Hell we tried to side with the Russians to go to (nuclear) war with China in the 1950's but the Russians talked us out of it.
I can't imagine why you wouldn't want to keep copies of your original photos either. I've got all 20-25,000 photos archived on my large drive. The whole archive is only maybe 100gb so - JPEG consumer quality cameras don't produce pictures much larger than 2-4MB. I just don't wipe the older drives I've upgraded from on the off chance my current drive gets nuked. I'm just saying it's silly to keep a local backup of your blu-ray discs, or more likely, a pirated copy of a movie you could just as easily re-download in 30 minutes time. Wasting money on a backup solution for something easily accessible on your bookshelf or bittorrent (or both!) seems like you have issues with collecting things and place a higher value on the collection than actually watching them. My buddy has 250 movies like another person said, but they're all in DVD format and sit on his bookshel(ves) next to the TV; roughly half of them still have the cellophane shrinkwrap on them, and the other half he's watched perhaps once, many of them he's only seen the special features (he saw the movie in theaters years ago) before shelving it forever. When we watch movies at his house we end up watching one of about 10 movies time after time instead of something we haven't seen before.
250 movies that you watch every year, in addition to the ones you rent, or go see with friends, or simply non-movie stuff you watch like sitcoms and/or live events like the news/sports? You must only work 2 hours a day to keep up with your busy viewing schedule and still have time to sleep, shower and spend time with other humans (they exist outside of movies, you know). 10 movies that you re-watch year after year I can understand, but 250 just blows my mind. Do you schedule that a year in advance? What happens if you miss a day?
I mean, you already have it in another (optical) format. If you already have a physical backup, what's the point of archiving it on a hard drive? It's going to take you just as long to find that movie in explorer as it is going to take you to pull it off the shelf and stick it in the drive. I can understand the need for photo storage, since there's no other physical media they come on and memory cards are relatively expensive. But unless you're accessing the same data you already have in optical format at least once a month it seems that you're backing it up to hard drive just to be able to say you've got 250 movies on your hard drive. It's unrealistic to watch all those movies every year just to justify having them on a $100-200 hard drive + the time (how long does it take to rip a movie, 30 minutes?). Maybe I just value my time better.
That seems like a tremendous waste of your time and money to rip and store something off Blu-Ray that you might watch once a year. I don't even have enough time to max out my Netflix account, let alone re-watch stuff I've already seen before.
You'd have to have one hell of a bit torrent hobby/debilitating movie watching problem to need more than 2 TB of video on tap on a hard drive for entertainment purposes.
Unless you're doing HD video editing, or you like to keep a copy of every picture ever taken by your 8+ MP DSLR in RAW format, few people actually need that space. You might be able to fill 100GB with installed video games but the average person who is buying a 1TB drive is probably upgrading granny's computer and thinking "well hey, for $30 more I can get ten times the space" and opt for the $100 1TB drive instead of the 100GB drive. I just replaced the primary drive on my file server and said "hey, for $6 more, I can upgrade from an 80gb drive to a 320 gb model".
At 5 watts per drive, how many months do you have to own a 2 TB 5900rpm drive to offset the cost of electricity for the cumulative size in 250GB drives? I'm guessing it's somewhere around the 3-5 year mark. That's assuming 100% use all the time. Drives use significantly less than 5w when idle/doing anything besides the initial spinup.
Slashdot Mirror
I think most people would be happy paying 1/8th the price for chinese made ink in a bottle that works 95% as well as HP's "pharmaceutical grade" printer ink. There is color printing, and then there is photo printing. Most people don't give a damn if there's the occasional smudge on their google maps printout.
You should be printing your photos at walmart or snapfish or (insert industrial photo printing operation of your choice here) using dye-sublimation printing anyways, not consumer grade inks. HP does sell printers that will print using archival grade pigments (not dyes) but most consumers can't afford the printer that uses that kind of ink.
quick! Nobody tell the Navy they've been using numerous nuclear powered aircraft carriers for earth bound travel for almost 50 years without incident!
Excuse me if I'm being snarky here; I played the game for about half of the two week demo period before uninstalling it -- Let me get this correct: 20% of the population are power gamers who play the game with all the politics, player run corporations, goonfleet, band of brothers, epic space battles etc, and 80% of the game plays the games simply as point and click questing WoW in spaceships, unaware of the benefits of joining an active corporation?
I think you are correct; OS design has sort of hit a glass celing. Cars wear out, but office PCs will chug along hidden out of sight doing MS Word for 10+ years until the hard drive gives out, at which point it's cheaper/easier to just call up dell and tell them to fedex a new computer overnight.
Eventually the world will standardize on 24" 1080p+ displays and someone will come up with a better way of utilizing all that space. Win 3.1 worked really great on 640x480 screens and took advantage of the space given to it. The iPhone, PalmOS (not WebOS) and the new W.Phone7 all do a really good job of using the tiny space and fat fingers allocated to them. Who knows what the OS will transform into with more people using 19"+ screens, and maybe more importantly, enough ram + cpu to run all the programs on their computer at once. I think intelligent app switching might be the "next big thing". I use photoshop maybe once a day, but I don't like sitting through the load screen for 2 minutes, but I also don't like it sitting in my starbar at the bottom of the screen all day taking up space. Superfetch does an ok job, but somewhere there's a happy medium between superfetch and multiple desktops.
SP 1.5
Win7 is not an enormous upgrade over XP, but there are enough tweaks in 7 to prefer it over XP SP3 if you have the choice on your netbook. The one thing I really like about Win7 over XP is that Mac and Linux have no problem connecting to windows shares now. I just got done recovering an old OSX HFS drive with the recovered data going to my Windows box, and transfering my trip pictures off my netbook and it went without a hitch. XP was always causing me grief and wouldn't show up in network/workgroup browsers.
I don't think anyone is arguing that W7 is a generational leap over XP in the way that OSX was over OS9, but it's a nice series of tweaks and fixes of "100 papercuts" as the Ubuntu crew likes to call it. It would have been nice if they'd released incremental updates and features on a schedule similar to Apple's, but I'm rather content with Win7 for the moment.
I just did a fresh install of Win7 "Home Premium" and it was 13GB. I would imagine the mobile version that doesn't come with ~8GB of drivers would be less than 8GB. By 2008 there were trimmed down highly functional versions of XP floating around on the pirate bay that would fit on a 128mb thumbdrive, including their malware payload. I would imagine they'll be able to pare Win7 in the same manner to ~2GB without much problem.
It's also what makes it interesting to read about as an outsider. 300,000 people is on par with the state of Wyoming, except they're all using the same set of forums and actively engaged with one another. We have a hard time getting 50% of the population in the real world to vote, or send back census forms; these people are all actively engaged. WoW might have X million users, but there's only ~20,000 people on one server/shard/instance/whatever. I'm guessing many of those server numbers come from multiple characters on one account.
You must not get out of mom's basement much
The principal of a nearby elementary school is married to a Whataburger resturant owner; guess where they have their team building meetings, and who caters all the staff lunches?
For those of us following along at home, what is 0.0 space? I caught the tail end of the Goonfleet collapse, but that's about it.
This is my favorite:
The trend toward a progressive lowering of volume estimates is not because the world's oceans are losing water.
Most of the major cities in South America are actually pretty nice, as are most of the smaller ones. As an American, I wouldn't mind living and working down there. The "hellhole" parts aren't much worse than the Gulf Coast in the US. Except maybe Rio. For a population of 6 million, half of that lives in abject poverty on a scale that's almost Darfur-scale depressing.
Paraguay/Rural Bolivia, Suriname and the Guyanas I have not visited and from what I understand they are about as poor and lacking of infrastructure as you can get.
I never thought I'd see the day when /. links to fox news.
It's a fairly well written article though. I'd say it's head and shoulders above anything they've linked to on Tom's Hardware, but that's not saying much.
Well hey, since it's apparently free to fly at supersonic speeds, you could just fly south over Houston, once you hit the gulf just fly around the tip of Florida and up to London!!! It'd be even easier flying from LA - just head south around the tip of Argentina off the coast of south america and it's a straight shot to London!
I don't think anyone on either side is denying they're changing ("omitting") the curriculum. They took a publicly recorded vote on the matter. Bush's orwellian era is over, take a deep breath and relax :)
Interesting, that's true! I'm arguing the difference between suppressing and withholding however.
What I meant was,
Textbooks can only hold so much information and minds can only retain so much - you have to pick and choose what to put in there. This is a job that has to be done by humans, and humans can't be 100% objective, especially when it comes to history. While I do agree that there's a political agenda behind this (and I'm not hearing too many people denying this) you have to admit that while devious, this is a pretty legitimate tactic. They're withholding certain facts in light of other ones. It's not that they've gone about burning books and removing tangential volumes from libraries that teach other ideologies - THAT would be suppressing the truth/facts. That's not what they're doing here - they're attempting to change, or highlight certain ideologies by removing the parts they don't feel are relevant. Again, devil's advocate.
Lucky for us, the Texas Board of Education is either indirectly or directly elected by the people, and the problem will sort itself out according to the will of the people.
I think you're confusing the Republican Party with their constituents. For the most part their constituents don't really care or understand about the Republican platform, but the Republican Party is willing to bend to some of their whims to get their vote.
History is written by the winners, inconvenient facts are more quickly forgotten as well.
Playing devil's advocate here, they aren't changing facts, nor are they actively suppressing the truth, they're just... withholding certain facts. Like separation of church and state. Not to say that's a good thing, as the arab world is attempting to "forget" the holocaust, in the same way we're trying to forget the whole church and state thing. Of course we've been omiting huge chunks of recent world history for quite some time; our worldview is based on the British worldview. Nobody ever talks about the Dutch trading company, or the Sino-Japanese wars. The CIA's involvement in Iraq, Cuba and countless other countries has been glossed over. Hell we tried to side with the Russians to go to (nuclear) war with China in the 1950's but the Russians talked us out of it.
History is written by the winners.
I can't imagine why you wouldn't want to keep copies of your original photos either. I've got all 20-25,000 photos archived on my large drive. The whole archive is only maybe 100gb so - JPEG consumer quality cameras don't produce pictures much larger than 2-4MB. I just don't wipe the older drives I've upgraded from on the off chance my current drive gets nuked. I'm just saying it's silly to keep a local backup of your blu-ray discs, or more likely, a pirated copy of a movie you could just as easily re-download in 30 minutes time. Wasting money on a backup solution for something easily accessible on your bookshelf or bittorrent (or both!) seems like you have issues with collecting things and place a higher value on the collection than actually watching them. My buddy has 250 movies like another person said, but they're all in DVD format and sit on his bookshel(ves) next to the TV; roughly half of them still have the cellophane shrinkwrap on them, and the other half he's watched perhaps once, many of them he's only seen the special features (he saw the movie in theaters years ago) before shelving it forever. When we watch movies at his house we end up watching one of about 10 movies time after time instead of something we haven't seen before.
Article doesn't mention if it's intended as a theatrical release or bit torrent release
250 movies that you watch every year, in addition to the ones you rent, or go see with friends, or simply non-movie stuff you watch like sitcoms and/or live events like the news/sports? You must only work 2 hours a day to keep up with your busy viewing schedule and still have time to sleep, shower and spend time with other humans (they exist outside of movies, you know). 10 movies that you re-watch year after year I can understand, but 250 just blows my mind. Do you schedule that a year in advance? What happens if you miss a day?
I mean, you already have it in another (optical) format. If you already have a physical backup, what's the point of archiving it on a hard drive? It's going to take you just as long to find that movie in explorer as it is going to take you to pull it off the shelf and stick it in the drive. I can understand the need for photo storage, since there's no other physical media they come on and memory cards are relatively expensive. But unless you're accessing the same data you already have in optical format at least once a month it seems that you're backing it up to hard drive just to be able to say you've got 250 movies on your hard drive. It's unrealistic to watch all those movies every year just to justify having them on a $100-200 hard drive + the time (how long does it take to rip a movie, 30 minutes?). Maybe I just value my time better.
That seems like a tremendous waste of your time and money to rip and store something off Blu-Ray that you might watch once a year. I don't even have enough time to max out my Netflix account, let alone re-watch stuff I've already seen before.
You'd have to have one hell of a bit torrent hobby/debilitating movie watching problem to need more than 2 TB of video on tap on a hard drive for entertainment purposes.
Unless you're doing HD video editing, or you like to keep a copy of every picture ever taken by your 8+ MP DSLR in RAW format, few people actually need that space. You might be able to fill 100GB with installed video games but the average person who is buying a 1TB drive is probably upgrading granny's computer and thinking "well hey, for $30 more I can get ten times the space" and opt for the $100 1TB drive instead of the 100GB drive. I just replaced the primary drive on my file server and said "hey, for $6 more, I can upgrade from an 80gb drive to a 320 gb model".
At 5 watts per drive, how many months do you have to own a 2 TB 5900rpm drive to offset the cost of electricity for the cumulative size in 250GB drives? I'm guessing it's somewhere around the 3-5 year mark. That's assuming 100% use all the time. Drives use significantly less than 5w when idle/doing anything besides the initial spinup.
Well good for them! They have to pay for that website (and their new datacenter) somehow. Demographic data isn't the same as personal data, however.