TFA states that the plane left with 18,000 pounds of fuel, potentially lost 2,600 pounds, and uses 102 pounds/hour. With 15,400 pounds in the tank, the plane should have been able to fly for almost 151 hours. It took 67 hours to circumnavigate.
There is no legally significant difference between someone sending you a million emails and someone sending you a million pieces of junk mail.
The difference (the senders of junk snailmail pay for the service they use; the senders of spam impose this cost on their targets) is a matter of common knowledge.
There's an alternative way to view this as well. If I were to receive one million junk mail letters, that would constitute an enormous effort on my part to take out the trash, and it's likely that the garbage truck would refuse to pick it up without making me pay more.
This same scenario exists with our ISP's. They pass on the cost of dealing with all that spam to us (storage, virus scanning, backups, etc). Minus all that spam, I'd betcha that their costs would be quite less (not that they'd pass the savings on to us, but anyway...)
First off, the need for degree depends on the employer. Most big firms are sticklers for degrees to allow any amount of management advancement. Their rationale is typically based on some need to "prove" to customers and employees that they have the credentials to back their position. It's a bunch of crap, but it's reality. Furthermore, the big firms like not only the bachelor's degree, but MBA's for their mgmt, for the same reasons. I can't really speak for smaller firms (haven't been with one in a very long time), but it seems less prevalent from those I deal and talk with.
Second, there's variation on this, but the higher up you go, the less time you'll have for side endeavors, like finishing your degree. The Exec-Mgr position virtually guarantees that won't happen without you leaving the company. And if the scenario above applies, you could be stuck with little to no advancement possibilities.
Third, understand what you'd be getting into. In both cases, you will not likely be writing code, and at the executive mgr position, you probably won't get much chance to read code either. So, if you think you are a life-long programmer, you'd better take a side project, or you'll hate either decision. Factor the previous two paragraphs into this as well...
If it were me, I'd take the "lesser" mgr position. If you're good enough, you'll have the opportunity for the Exec-Mgr position later, plus you'll have the time to do other stuff now that needs done (family, school, hobbies, etc) before taking that next step.
Hate to say that I've seen this in action, but let me try to restate this in my experience.
Rep #1 still gets fired, finds another job somewhere else doing same thing, making same money, no career movement, despite continuing to do "The Right Thing" [TM].
Rep #2 gets promoted after Regional Mgr bails for some other company of at least that position, if not higher, after seeing writing on wall when customer sat begins to tank. Rep #2, not being able to see that far into the future, ultimately gets canned, but lands safely, likely with former Reg-Mgr's new company, also likely in a better job.
Two years later, Rep #1 is still in a shit job, #2 and Reg-Mgr are still riding high. It's the Dilbert Principle in action.
In both cases the 6 years different versions of Windows are more similar than the latest versions of both.
Might be more to do with Microsoft not innovating rather than anything to do with the maturation of Linux. Putting a new skin on the GUI does not equate to innovation.
I think many of you are missing the ulterior motive here. They even stated in the article that w/o the broadband infrastructure, they may not be able to attract companies to a planned technology park near the UL-Lafayette campus. Without having broadband there, they'll lose the companies, and that means lost opportunities.
While I think broadband does offer some unique and beneficial educational advantages, that's not the reason the city officials want it so badly. Like most things, it comes down to money.
There are lots of things that could conceivably take out all the people on the earth, but I can only think of one that would destroy the sun
You're either new here or haven't spent enough time watching Star Trek episodes and movies. After all, any good/.'er knows that Dr. Soran has a rocket that will cause the implosion of a star in order to get to the Nexus.
While I wouldn't call it a handout to the religious base that won Bush the election, this is more on the money than any other post. Bush did this because he couldn't risk losing that religious base due to what could be seen as wavering on the abortion issue that Republicans are so strongly behind. Bush sacrificed science for politics.
For the record, I lean pro-life myself, but if aborted fetuses or discarded embryos from IVH facilities are just going to be destroyed anyway, why aren't we making use of what is available? We harvest organs from the deceased -- why is this any different?
I don't think anyone can work 14 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Try having a job and raising a child, especially newborns. One the posts in the EA article mentioned the need for post-work/pre-sleep downtime. You don't get any as a new parent with a full-time job. For the first 10 months of my son's life, I was literally getting 4 hours of sleep per night 7 days/week, some of which was not even non-contiguous, and virtually no downtime inbetween. Weekends were not much better since baby-care became the full-time job, while work still be needed to be done. By March of this year, my productivity, both as an employee and a father (unfortunately), seriously tanked. It got to the point that I was considering therapy, but couldn't figure out when I had time to go.
Fortunately, things improved on both fronts (we hired people at work and my son started sleeping through the night and otherwise becoming more self-sufficient), but most companies in my experience only pay lip-service to domestic issues while demanding continually increasing levels of productivity. So the bottom line is that this is not isolated to the game industry, but to any institution that has its work-life balance out of whack.
Now before anyone goes and sheds any tears, I will admit that I'm not alone in this insanity as my wife helps out greatly with the duties, although we're both in the same boat job/child-wise, and her maybe moreso than I. We chose to do this, and I'm a very proud father and wouldn't give up my son for the world. Concurrently, I could find a job that is less stressful, but like the EA programmers, I choose not to because the benefits of my work outweigh the costs. In that light, I have complete respect and sympathy for single parents.
Switching entirely to Linux would have given Sun an enormous boost in respect and confidence
While stranding millions of Solaris customers in a support dead-end. Part of Sun's advantage about the binary compatibility of Solaris relies on there being a current Solaris OS. With no current Solaris, older customers are doomed to switch or die.
So you can't just drop everything and move to another platform without a lot of heartache. Ask HP about their loss of customers following the retirement of Digital UNIX, and then Alpha, and now HP-UX. Those customers on the average are not moving to Linux, they're leaving HP and going to Solaris. Now with Solaris 10, Sun has renewed their commitment and put out an OS that can seriously compete for the mythical title of "best OS".
If the bands and record companies could justify an album because of a theme throughout it or because of a particular style emerging within, then I'd buy the albums. Good examples of this that I liked were Alice in Chains' "Dirt" which had the self-destructive theme, or Moby's "Play" and its trance groove throughout the CD.
But more often than not anymore, the "other" songs on albums are filler material and have little to nothing to do with the overall theme or feel of the album. It's like watching a movie that doesn't have a plot -- there's no reason to watch other than for the individual scenes. Albums today are more like greatest hits compilations except that the songs suck.
You're probably right about this. My fears are that while they have extremely bright minds working on this, that the communist system will lead them into sub-standard quality-control issues, such as occurred in Soviet Russia, and nuclear power is not something to be trifled with.
If they plan to deploy these super-reactors, then they better be prepared to adequately maintain them and allow IAEA inspectors to verify that they are being kept up to spec. Given that they'd have to implement this on a wide scale, we're talking about a global impact if there is a technical or process breakdown with these reactors.
Consider where they'll be in the next 50 years, not where they are now. According the the CIA World Factbook, China's current electricity consumption is 1.3 trillion kWh, oil consumption is 4.57 million bbl/day, and natural gas consumption is a paltry 27.4 billion m^3. By comparison, the US is consuming 3.6 trillion kWh of electricity, 19.65 million bbl/day of oil, and a whopping 640.9 billion m^3 of natural gas (although I will guess that this figure is necessitated due to the majority of the US population living the northeast to upper midwestern parts of the country, thus increasing the need for gas heat in the winter, while China's population base is mainly coastal and temperate and therefore winter heat needs are much less).
The difference is the growth rate of the industrial sectors of the two countries. The US is just barely expanding at a 0.3% growth rate, while China is massively expanding at a 30.4% yearly clip. IOW, China's energy needs for just the industrial sector are doubling just over every 3 years. Now couple this growth in industry with the subsequent growth in quality of life, and you'll have a similar growth in energy demands for the residential sector as well, meaning that there will be a massively increasing need for energy in China over the next 10-20 years.
Now unless they plan to tap some huge clean power source in the very near future, the Chinese are going to have to start doing the same things that the US currently must do in order to feed the energy needs of the country, and probably moreso in their case. But given the Kyoto accords, they will not be held accountable for the ensuing black cloud that will result from this huge and necessary increase of energy production if the industrial machine they are creating is to continue to progress.
I think you're missing my point. Taking your foot off the brake to stop the vehicle is counterintuitive. This isn't like when ABS was introduced and people had to retrain themselves to keep pressure on the brakes during a skid rather than pump them. In those siutations, you're still hitting the brakes to stop. Now if, as you say, stomping on the brake will stop the motion as well, then that's good design because people are conditioned to do that already, but not taking your foot off the brake altogether.
BTW, I'm at least as good and probably better at parallel parking than you. Try doing it with a stick shift truck and let me know how you fare. Otherwise, leave the personal attacks at home -- my driving ability is not the subject of this thread.
Yup, it had the rain-sensing wipers as well. As far as I recall, it wasn't an add-on package, but part of the base package for the car (BTW, purchased in America, for those keeping score...) Pain in the ass though -- they're expensive to replace, and annoying when they keep wiping for no obvious reason after the rain has stopped (but I will give them credit for speeding up when rain was heavy).
With all due respect to those lost to terrorism around the world, there has not been an incident with as far-reaching consequences as the 9/11 attacks, both economic and security-wise. Unlike attacks like the Madrid subway bombings or the PanAm 103 bombing, is wasn't just to strike fear into people's minds; it was done to cripple the American economy and a result, effect the overall global economic condition. No other terrorist attack in recorded history has had this broad-ranging effect.
And while the jury is still out on this, I'd have to say that it was very successful in achieving those goals. Things have permanently changed because of the 9/11 attacks, some for better, some for worse, but life as we know it in this country and around the world has changed as a result. It's a life-altering event on the scale of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings that forces the world to play by new rules. And again, while I do not mean to belittle the terrorist attacks outside of 9/11, they just have not had the same significance or consequences that 9/11 had.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on which way you go. IIRC, around the equator is farther than around the poles.
I'm confused -- which one of your comparisons was supposed to be Ashlee?
TFA states that the plane left with 18,000 pounds of fuel, potentially lost 2,600 pounds, and uses 102 pounds/hour. With 15,400 pounds in the tank, the plane should have been able to fly for almost 151 hours. It took 67 hours to circumnavigate.
Yep, sounds like a hell of a PR stunt.
If he had departed from and arrived back at Chicago O'Hare early, that would have been an accomplishment.
However, 600,000 prairie dogs looked upwards today and went, "Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
For the same reason that people post replies to parent posts that have nothing to do with each other -- to get noticed.
Do their appliances qualify as redistribution?
The difference (the senders of junk snailmail pay for the service they use; the senders of spam impose this cost on their targets) is a matter of common knowledge.
There's an alternative way to view this as well. If I were to receive one million junk mail letters, that would constitute an enormous effort on my part to take out the trash, and it's likely that the garbage truck would refuse to pick it up without making me pay more.
This same scenario exists with our ISP's. They pass on the cost of dealing with all that spam to us (storage, virus scanning, backups, etc). Minus all that spam, I'd betcha that their costs would be quite less (not that they'd pass the savings on to us, but anyway...)
First off, the need for degree depends on the employer. Most big firms are sticklers for degrees to allow any amount of management advancement. Their rationale is typically based on some need to "prove" to customers and employees that they have the credentials to back their position. It's a bunch of crap, but it's reality. Furthermore, the big firms like not only the bachelor's degree, but MBA's for their mgmt, for the same reasons. I can't really speak for smaller firms (haven't been with one in a very long time), but it seems less prevalent from those I deal and talk with.
Second, there's variation on this, but the higher up you go, the less time you'll have for side endeavors, like finishing your degree. The Exec-Mgr position virtually guarantees that won't happen without you leaving the company. And if the scenario above applies, you could be stuck with little to no advancement possibilities.
Third, understand what you'd be getting into. In both cases, you will not likely be writing code, and at the executive mgr position, you probably won't get much chance to read code either. So, if you think you are a life-long programmer, you'd better take a side project, or you'll hate either decision. Factor the previous two paragraphs into this as well...
If it were me, I'd take the "lesser" mgr position. If you're good enough, you'll have the opportunity for the Exec-Mgr position later, plus you'll have the time to do other stuff now that needs done (family, school, hobbies, etc) before taking that next step.
Hate to say that I've seen this in action, but let me try to restate this in my experience.
Rep #1 still gets fired, finds another job somewhere else doing same thing, making same money, no career movement, despite continuing to do "The Right Thing" [TM].
Rep #2 gets promoted after Regional Mgr bails for some other company of at least that position, if not higher, after seeing writing on wall when customer sat begins to tank. Rep #2, not being able to see that far into the future, ultimately gets canned, but lands safely, likely with former Reg-Mgr's new company, also likely in a better job.
Two years later, Rep #1 is still in a shit job, #2 and Reg-Mgr are still riding high. It's the Dilbert Principle in action.
In both cases the 6 years different versions of Windows are more similar than the latest versions of both.
Might be more to do with Microsoft not innovating rather than anything to do with the maturation of Linux. Putting a new skin on the GUI does not equate to innovation.
I think they're called judges.
I think many of you are missing the ulterior motive here. They even stated in the article that w/o the broadband infrastructure, they may not be able to attract companies to a planned technology park near the UL-Lafayette campus. Without having broadband there, they'll lose the companies, and that means lost opportunities.
While I think broadband does offer some unique and beneficial educational advantages, that's not the reason the city officials want it so badly. Like most things, it comes down to money.
There are lots of things that could conceivably take out all the people on the earth, but I can only think of one that would destroy the sun
/.'er knows that Dr. Soran has a rocket that will cause the implosion of a star in order to get to the Nexus.
You're either new here or haven't spent enough time watching Star Trek episodes and movies. After all, any good
While I wouldn't call it a handout to the religious base that won Bush the election, this is more on the money than any other post. Bush did this because he couldn't risk losing that religious base due to what could be seen as wavering on the abortion issue that Republicans are so strongly behind. Bush sacrificed science for politics.
For the record, I lean pro-life myself, but if aborted fetuses or discarded embryos from IVH facilities are just going to be destroyed anyway, why aren't we making use of what is available? We harvest organs from the deceased -- why is this any different?
I don't think anyone can work 14 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Try having a job and raising a child, especially newborns. One the posts in the EA article mentioned the need for post-work/pre-sleep downtime. You don't get any as a new parent with a full-time job. For the first 10 months of my son's life, I was literally getting 4 hours of sleep per night 7 days/week, some of which was not even non-contiguous, and virtually no downtime inbetween. Weekends were not much better since baby-care became the full-time job, while work still be needed to be done. By March of this year, my productivity, both as an employee and a father (unfortunately), seriously tanked. It got to the point that I was considering therapy, but couldn't figure out when I had time to go.
Fortunately, things improved on both fronts (we hired people at work and my son started sleeping through the night and otherwise becoming more self-sufficient), but most companies in my experience only pay lip-service to domestic issues while demanding continually increasing levels of productivity. So the bottom line is that this is not isolated to the game industry, but to any institution that has its work-life balance out of whack.
Now before anyone goes and sheds any tears, I will admit that I'm not alone in this insanity as my wife helps out greatly with the duties, although we're both in the same boat job/child-wise, and her maybe moreso than I. We chose to do this, and I'm a very proud father and wouldn't give up my son for the world. Concurrently, I could find a job that is less stressful, but like the EA programmers, I choose not to because the benefits of my work outweigh the costs. In that light, I have complete respect and sympathy for single parents.
Slashdot headline, July 23, 2006 -- Patent IsNot Granted.
800 posts later, slashdotters still haven't deciphered the meaning of the headline.
Switching entirely to Linux would have given Sun an enormous boost in respect and confidence
While stranding millions of Solaris customers in a support dead-end. Part of Sun's advantage about the binary compatibility of Solaris relies on there being a current Solaris OS. With no current Solaris, older customers are doomed to switch or die.
So you can't just drop everything and move to another platform without a lot of heartache. Ask HP about their loss of customers following the retirement of Digital UNIX, and then Alpha, and now HP-UX. Those customers on the average are not moving to Linux, they're leaving HP and going to Solaris. Now with Solaris 10, Sun has renewed their commitment and put out an OS that can seriously compete for the mythical title of "best OS".
If the bands and record companies could justify an album because of a theme throughout it or because of a particular style emerging within, then I'd buy the albums. Good examples of this that I liked were Alice in Chains' "Dirt" which had the self-destructive theme, or Moby's "Play" and its trance groove throughout the CD.
But more often than not anymore, the "other" songs on albums are filler material and have little to nothing to do with the overall theme or feel of the album. It's like watching a movie that doesn't have a plot -- there's no reason to watch other than for the individual scenes. Albums today are more like greatest hits compilations except that the songs suck.
You're probably right about this. My fears are that while they have extremely bright minds working on this, that the communist system will lead them into sub-standard quality-control issues, such as occurred in Soviet Russia, and nuclear power is not something to be trifled with.
If they plan to deploy these super-reactors, then they better be prepared to adequately maintain them and allow IAEA inspectors to verify that they are being kept up to spec. Given that they'd have to implement this on a wide scale, we're talking about a global impact if there is a technical or process breakdown with these reactors.
Consider where they'll be in the next 50 years, not where they are now. According the the CIA World Factbook, China's current electricity consumption is 1.3 trillion kWh, oil consumption is 4.57 million bbl/day, and natural gas consumption is a paltry 27.4 billion m^3. By comparison, the US is consuming 3.6 trillion kWh of electricity, 19.65 million bbl/day of oil, and a whopping 640.9 billion m^3 of natural gas (although I will guess that this figure is necessitated due to the majority of the US population living the northeast to upper midwestern parts of the country, thus increasing the need for gas heat in the winter, while China's population base is mainly coastal and temperate and therefore winter heat needs are much less).
The difference is the growth rate of the industrial sectors of the two countries. The US is just barely expanding at a 0.3% growth rate, while China is massively expanding at a 30.4% yearly clip. IOW, China's energy needs for just the industrial sector are doubling just over every 3 years. Now couple this growth in industry with the subsequent growth in quality of life, and you'll have a similar growth in energy demands for the residential sector as well, meaning that there will be a massively increasing need for energy in China over the next 10-20 years.
Now unless they plan to tap some huge clean power source in the very near future, the Chinese are going to have to start doing the same things that the US currently must do in order to feed the energy needs of the country, and probably moreso in their case. But given the Kyoto accords, they will not be held accountable for the ensuing black cloud that will result from this huge and necessary increase of energy production if the industrial machine they are creating is to continue to progress.
They are regulated. How well is an exercise left to the reader.
I think you're missing my point. Taking your foot off the brake to stop the vehicle is counterintuitive. This isn't like when ABS was introduced and people had to retrain themselves to keep pressure on the brakes during a skid rather than pump them. In those siutations, you're still hitting the brakes to stop. Now if, as you say, stomping on the brake will stop the motion as well, then that's good design because people are conditioned to do that already, but not taking your foot off the brake altogether.
BTW, I'm at least as good and probably better at parallel parking than you. Try doing it with a stick shift truck and let me know how you fare. Otherwise, leave the personal attacks at home -- my driving ability is not the subject of this thread.
Yup, it had the rain-sensing wipers as well. As far as I recall, it wasn't an add-on package, but part of the base package for the car (BTW, purchased in America, for those keeping score...) Pain in the ass though -- they're expensive to replace, and annoying when they keep wiping for no obvious reason after the rain has stopped (but I will give them credit for speeding up when rain was heavy).
With all due respect to those lost to terrorism around the world, there has not been an incident with as far-reaching consequences as the 9/11 attacks, both economic and security-wise. Unlike attacks like the Madrid subway bombings or the PanAm 103 bombing, is wasn't just to strike fear into people's minds; it was done to cripple the American economy and a result, effect the overall global economic condition. No other terrorist attack in recorded history has had this broad-ranging effect.
And while the jury is still out on this, I'd have to say that it was very successful in achieving those goals. Things have permanently changed because of the 9/11 attacks, some for better, some for worse, but life as we know it in this country and around the world has changed as a result. It's a life-altering event on the scale of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings that forces the world to play by new rules. And again, while I do not mean to belittle the terrorist attacks outside of 9/11, they just have not had the same significance or consequences that 9/11 had.