The default situation is that when you put something online it is publicly available. That means the good and the bad associated with being online. This shouldn't come as news to anyone.
You should take some steps to mitigate some of the bad, such as not posting your email on any webpage. This has been a common practice for many years.
The point is, the good far outweighs the bad. If you don't like that, you can either keep your documents off the web, or you can password protect everything so you control access.
The reason to hate it is that it's the Universal "Specialty" font. If you don't want a serif font, or a plain font like Arial, the first tool of choice is Comic Sans.
That's because it's the only web safe font that comes close to looking like hand writing.
There are very limited choices when it comes to choosing fonts for the web. You can't blame comic sans, but more the lack of choice.
They're using the system to do video-conference book-signings. You still get your 15 seconds, and you still get a personal signature. The only difference is that the author doesn't have to travel, and doesn't have to smell you.
The fans want to see the author in person. Might as well just have the author take email requests for book signings, record it, put it on youtube or even do it live over the internet. Then ship the autographed book. Would be much cheaper.
This is just an author being lazy. I can understand if the author couldn't physically make it, but this just seems like a case of an author that can't be bothered with her pesky readers. In the end, I think it might give her what she wanted, but not how she wanted.
All you need to do is send Google a DCMA takedown notice. You don't need a lawyer for that. You can find DCMA takedown notices online that you can modify.
You can also send the takedown notice to the webhost.
If the person is running AdSense on their site, which many do, and that's why they steal content, sending the DCMA take down notice could result in them losing their adsense account and their incentive to steal your content.
Google indexes web content, but if you want the content you put online to not be indexed by Google, you have a mechanism to do that and even to request your site's crawled content be removed.
But most people don't want that. If it wasn't for Google, their website wouldn't generate much if any traffic or revenue.
If Google and TPB are so similar, the question should be, why aren't more people trying to take advantage of the popularity of bittorrent?
I think some people are. From what i hear, it seems that some people are putting their content out there, in the hopes that it triggers sales. For instance, software that has a fee, and then a recurring charge, or things of that nature.
Not only that, how do you know what you're actually signing if you're not there to read it in person?
You don't even need to figure out a way to store and reproduce it. Just through a piece of carbon paper under the document and have a second contract under it, or even just a blank sheet of paper to be filled out later.
And obviously someone that doesn't understand why people obtain signatures.
A signed copy of a book can increase it's value but when you consider how many book signings they do these days, it's pretty meaningless, at least for the near future.
People get autographs for the same reason they take pictures with celebrities. To have some sort of proof they met the celebrity.
With digital cameras so readily available and portable, I'm surprised people are still looking for autographs (other than to sell on ebay).
With book tours, people don't just want their book signed, they want to have their 15 seconds to talk to the author.
I guess Google was down the other night huh? "Important" news like that would have instantly hit major news sites, blogs, what have you, that get crawled frequently. It would have probably been on Google news too.
It is far cheaper and better to take down and build new, esp. in residential buildings. You start the building from scratch with current materials and with full knowledge of the structure. You don't have to pay labor costs, which are vary but typically are 50% of the actual expense of work, for careful deconstruction that renovation often necessitates.
You really don't know what you're talking about.
Let's take a residential example. In my area, a brand new 2 story home runs about $800k+.
There are many 50's era capes and ranches that go for $400-$500k. A tear down and rebuild, from the foundation up will cost over $350k. If you just rip off the roof and build a full second story, redo the first floor, you're looking at around $200-250k and you can move in much quicker.
Want to speed it up even more, they can rip off a roof and set in a modular second story addition in a day.
The point is you have to know what you want to build, if you can find something close to that, that you can build on, you're going to save a lot more money than if you demo and start over.
If you want to build a 40 room mansion, but you're starting from an 8 room house, you don't see the same cost benefit.
With residential construction, you can usually live in the home through many remodeling projects, removing the expense of temporary housing.
You also don't know crap about TOH. It's very rare that they demolish the whole house. The most they generally do is demo down to the framing, only where they have to, and build additions.
The show is called "This Old House" not This New House so they try and preserve as much of it as possible.
It would be cost prohibitive to recreate a lot of the original work, especially things like trim work that you can't even get these days. Look at the Brooklyn Brownstone project they recently did. They spent a lot to repair and refinish all that woodwork because redoing it all over to the exact look would be too expensive. What your normal tear down rebuild contractor would do is just replace it all with the 4" trim you get at Home Depot. All the charm of the home, and value, would be lost.
They also didn't tear down the facade or the framing.
You even seem to contradict yourself in some of the things you say.
As for lofts, they were rezoned residential when manufacturing left the city. To tear them down and rebuild would have been too expensive. Instead they modified them. That was a lot cheaper and made the project feasible. In the beginning, these lofts were very cheap and not desirable but then became trendy and prices skyrocketed as more and more manufacturing left these areas and residential amenities came into the neighborhoods. I used to live in such a building.
If it is, or is not better, or is or is not worth the price is meaningless. For the vast majority of uses, there are cheaper alternatives that are good enough.
Paying an extra $500, if you're only buying one or two computers, may not seem like a big deal. But when you are planning desktop deployments for your company and looking to order hundreds or thousands of desktops, it starts to add up. Now you're spending a lot more money and in mast cases the users won't need "better" they just need "good enough". If you care about you're employees, that savings on the desktop could be used for something that would have a greater increase in productivity, such as ergonomic chairs or a well stocked break room.
Then you have to worry about seamless integration in your infrastructure. Fact is, Macs still don't make sense outside the home in most cases.
It's usually not cheaper to demolish and build new.
You have the cost of demo, construction, zoning issues, etc. If you can find a location that has many of the characteristics you need, you're usually better off. If you find a location that isn't suitable for much else, you can usually get it cheap.
By the way, the guy in the video looked familiar. At first I thought all the network people looked and sounded the same. But it turns out he's Dean Nelson, Senior Director Global Lab & Datacenter Design Services at Sun and founder of Data Center Pulse. I remember him from this data center video.
Create recharging stations at the various taxi stands. Cabs aren't always driving around. A lot of times they're lining up in front of airports, penn station, etc. Instead of driving around looking for a fare, they can wait and top off every once in a while and on breaks.
Another option is to buy 2-3x as many batteries as electric cars. The batteries are constantly charged and when a cab needs to be recharged, swap out the batteries. The logistics need to be worked out, but it should be doable. Batteries need to be easy to swap.
The nice thing with Java development is it's portability. It's why the specification process can be a pain. It comes in handy.
An app I built for a client was deployed at a host that kept having problems, including being hacked. Because of standardization in the spec, the application could be deployed on a different server, using a different app server brand without any issues.
With Google App Engine, you can't do that. You have to specifically code for it. It' smore than just using their api's. Some things you would have on a normal java webapp server, you won't have with App Engine. So you can't just transfer an existing app and you might not be able to transfer away from it.
This may seem like a non issue for people working in PHP or something similar where there is one vendor, but the Java Community Process is good for vendors. It allows multiple vendors to compete to make a better implementation of the spec.
They plan on showing them computer simulations of violent acts to illustrate how bad violence is.
I've seen the prototype of the simulation. It's pretty neat. It's from a first person perspective of someone running around killing people and being shot at. And it progresses. First you get to see what the horrors are of killing people with a pistol. Then you pick up a shot gun and see how horrible it is. Then you pick up a machine gun and see that atrocity.
There's even a little number at the top that keeps count of how much you've learned.
I was trying to correct the poster about the anti-wealthy comment.
I actually think it's a good idea for the government to invest in important innovation. Especially in an environment where it is hard to raise capital.
Aptera is much better. Mostly because they're actually affordable from the get go ($30k) and actually redefine an efficient car
Some of us would like to drive a car without having to find a matching purse.
The aptera doesn't even look like a car. It's likely won't even be considered a car in most states because it has 3 wheels. You'd need a motorcycle endorsement and when I got mine I don't remember seeing any trikes around the driving test range.
You'd look kinda stupid wearing a helmet (required in many states on a motorcycle) in your bubble trike.
Seriously. The two aren't even the same thing. Might as well compare the Tesla to a segway.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a big surprise.
Wonder if Solaris will become their main development platform again.
The default situation is that when you put something online it is publicly available. That means the good and the bad associated with being online. This shouldn't come as news to anyone.
You should take some steps to mitigate some of the bad, such as not posting your email on any webpage. This has been a common practice for many years.
The point is, the good far outweighs the bad. If you don't like that, you can either keep your documents off the web, or you can password protect everything so you control access.
The reason to hate it is that it's the Universal "Specialty" font. If you don't want a serif font, or a plain font like Arial, the first tool of choice is Comic Sans.
That's because it's the only web safe font that comes close to looking like hand writing.
There are very limited choices when it comes to choosing fonts for the web. You can't blame comic sans, but more the lack of choice.
They're using the system to do video-conference book-signings. You still get your 15 seconds, and you still get a personal signature. The only difference is that the author doesn't have to travel, and doesn't have to smell you.
The fans want to see the author in person. Might as well just have the author take email requests for book signings, record it, put it on youtube or even do it live over the internet. Then ship the autographed book. Would be much cheaper.
This is just an author being lazy. I can understand if the author couldn't physically make it, but this just seems like a case of an author that can't be bothered with her pesky readers. In the end, I think it might give her what she wanted, but not how she wanted.
All you need to do is send Google a DCMA takedown notice. You don't need a lawyer for that. You can find DCMA takedown notices online that you can modify.
You can also send the takedown notice to the webhost.
If the person is running AdSense on their site, which many do, and that's why they steal content, sending the DCMA take down notice could result in them losing their adsense account and their incentive to steal your content.
No.
Google indexes web content, but if you want the content you put online to not be indexed by Google, you have a mechanism to do that and even to request your site's crawled content be removed.
But most people don't want that. If it wasn't for Google, their website wouldn't generate much if any traffic or revenue.
If Google and TPB are so similar, the question should be, why aren't more people trying to take advantage of the popularity of bittorrent?
I think some people are. From what i hear, it seems that some people are putting their content out there, in the hopes that it triggers sales. For instance, software that has a fee, and then a recurring charge, or things of that nature.
Not only that, how do you know what you're actually signing if you're not there to read it in person?
You don't even need to figure out a way to store and reproduce it. Just through a piece of carbon paper under the document and have a second contract under it, or even just a blank sheet of paper to be filled out later.
And obviously someone that doesn't understand why people obtain signatures.
A signed copy of a book can increase it's value but when you consider how many book signings they do these days, it's pretty meaningless, at least for the near future.
People get autographs for the same reason they take pictures with celebrities. To have some sort of proof they met the celebrity.
With digital cameras so readily available and portable, I'm surprised people are still looking for autographs (other than to sell on ebay).
With book tours, people don't just want their book signed, they want to have their 15 seconds to talk to the author.
The name might just be in reference to TPB.
Unfortunately, even though they got 3,000 members, 90% of them are leachers.
told her to just search twitter to find out
I guess Google was down the other night huh? "Important" news like that would have instantly hit major news sites, blogs, what have you, that get crawled frequently. It would have probably been on Google news too.
Actually, their biggest mistake was getting 100 people and "creating" those social media pages for them.
They should have just selected 100 people that already had popular social networks accounts.
Wow. You totally sidestepped the Sarin gas question.
You must think it's ok to eat babies too.
It is far cheaper and better to take down and build new, esp. in residential buildings. You start the building from scratch with current materials and with full knowledge of the structure. You don't have to pay labor costs, which are vary but typically are 50% of the actual expense of work, for careful deconstruction that renovation often necessitates.
You really don't know what you're talking about.
Let's take a residential example. In my area, a brand new 2 story home runs about $800k+.
There are many 50's era capes and ranches that go for $400-$500k. A tear down and rebuild, from the foundation up will cost over $350k. If you just rip off the roof and build a full second story, redo the first floor, you're looking at around $200-250k and you can move in much quicker.
Want to speed it up even more, they can rip off a roof and set in a modular second story addition in a day.
The point is you have to know what you want to build, if you can find something close to that, that you can build on, you're going to save a lot more money than if you demo and start over.
If you want to build a 40 room mansion, but you're starting from an 8 room house, you don't see the same cost benefit.
With residential construction, you can usually live in the home through many remodeling projects, removing the expense of temporary housing.
You also don't know crap about TOH. It's very rare that they demolish the whole house. The most they generally do is demo down to the framing, only where they have to, and build additions.
The show is called "This Old House" not This New House so they try and preserve as much of it as possible.
It would be cost prohibitive to recreate a lot of the original work, especially things like trim work that you can't even get these days. Look at the Brooklyn Brownstone project they recently did. They spent a lot to repair and refinish all that woodwork because redoing it all over to the exact look would be too expensive. What your normal tear down rebuild contractor would do is just replace it all with the 4" trim you get at Home Depot. All the charm of the home, and value, would be lost.
They also didn't tear down the facade or the framing.
You even seem to contradict yourself in some of the things you say.
As for lofts, they were rezoned residential when manufacturing left the city. To tear them down and rebuild would have been too expensive. Instead they modified them. That was a lot cheaper and made the project feasible. In the beginning, these lofts were very cheap and not desirable but then became trendy and prices skyrocketed as more and more manufacturing left these areas and residential amenities came into the neighborhoods. I used to live in such a building.
Imaging that. Charging more for a better product!
If it is, or is not better, or is or is not worth the price is meaningless. For the vast majority of uses, there are cheaper alternatives that are good enough.
Paying an extra $500, if you're only buying one or two computers, may not seem like a big deal. But when you are planning desktop deployments for your company and looking to order hundreds or thousands of desktops, it starts to add up. Now you're spending a lot more money and in mast cases the users won't need "better" they just need "good enough". If you care about you're employees, that savings on the desktop could be used for something that would have a greater increase in productivity, such as ergonomic chairs or a well stocked break room.
Then you have to worry about seamless integration in your infrastructure. Fact is, Macs still don't make sense outside the home in most cases.
It's usually not cheaper to demolish and build new.
You have the cost of demo, construction, zoning issues, etc. If you can find a location that has many of the characteristics you need, you're usually better off. If you find a location that isn't suitable for much else, you can usually get it cheap.
By the way, the guy in the video looked familiar. At first I thought all the network people looked and sounded the same. But it turns out he's Dean Nelson, Senior Director Global Lab & Datacenter Design Services at Sun and founder of Data Center Pulse. I remember him from this data center video.
Create recharging stations at the various taxi stands. Cabs aren't always driving around. A lot of times they're lining up in front of airports, penn station, etc. Instead of driving around looking for a fare, they can wait and top off every once in a while and on breaks.
Another option is to buy 2-3x as many batteries as electric cars. The batteries are constantly charged and when a cab needs to be recharged, swap out the batteries. The logistics need to be worked out, but it should be doable. Batteries need to be easy to swap.
Obvious things like 1-2-3-4 are not allowed.
That's the combination to my luggage!
And that's my computer account password too! That's surprisin #@&%*! NO CARRIER
That's my slashdot password.
Wow. He wasn't joking.
Obvious things like 1-2-3-4 are not allowed.
That's the combination to my luggage!
And that's my computer account password too! That's surprisin #@&%*! NO CARRIER
That's my slashdot password.
So, maybe the could put some of it to use building a cloud of their own.
They area
The nice thing with Java development is it's portability. It's why the specification process can be a pain. It comes in handy.
An app I built for a client was deployed at a host that kept having problems, including being hacked. Because of standardization in the spec, the application could be deployed on a different server, using a different app server brand without any issues.
With Google App Engine, you can't do that. You have to specifically code for it. It' smore than just using their api's. Some things you would have on a normal java webapp server, you won't have with App Engine. So you can't just transfer an existing app and you might not be able to transfer away from it.
This may seem like a non issue for people working in PHP or something similar where there is one vendor, but the Java Community Process is good for vendors. It allows multiple vendors to compete to make a better implementation of the spec.
Actually, that's exactly what's going to happen.
They plan on showing them computer simulations of violent acts to illustrate how bad violence is.
I've seen the prototype of the simulation. It's pretty neat. It's from a first person perspective of someone running around killing people and being shot at. And it progresses. First you get to see what the horrors are of killing people with a pistol. Then you pick up a shot gun and see how horrible it is. Then you pick up a machine gun and see that atrocity.
There's even a little number at the top that keeps count of how much you've learned.
err... I came across wrong...
I was trying to correct the poster about the anti-wealthy comment.
I actually think it's a good idea for the government to invest in important innovation. Especially in an environment where it is hard to raise capital.
We've done much worse with tax payer money.
Geez, for some reason....there seems to be an almost inherit distaste for anyone with any type of wealth in this country these days.
No. It's a distaste for anyone with any type of wealth that is looking for tax payer money. I think that's deserved.
Giving tax payer money to a company that will be producing cars for the wealthy may not sit well with people.
Do they pay you for your sig, and do you get more if you first post?
Does who pay me for my sig? That's one of my side projects I'm working on. Not done yet.
Aptera is much better. Mostly because they're actually affordable from the get go ($30k) and actually redefine an efficient car
Some of us would like to drive a car without having to find a matching purse.
The aptera doesn't even look like a car. It's likely won't even be considered a car in most states because it has 3 wheels. You'd need a motorcycle endorsement and when I got mine I don't remember seeing any trikes around the driving test range.
You'd look kinda stupid wearing a helmet (required in many states on a motorcycle) in your bubble trike.
Seriously. The two aren't even the same thing. Might as well compare the Tesla to a segway.
Or, we could call it what everyone else is calling it. Grid computing or sometimes cloud computing.