Not invariably. Every so often there's a technology barrier which means that going smaller costs a new factory. That can raise the initial cost of the chips quite a lot. The manufacturer generally eats the cost, but makes it back over the life of the factory. But there used to be a lot more manufacturers. Costs of more expensive factories has caused the market to dwindle, and dwindle again. Now it's almost a world wide monopoly. Intel, AMD, and IBM. Anybody else major? There used to be dozens. (I'm talking computer chips here. Watches can still be made with the old, cheaper factories...or possibly even ink-jet printers, if what I've been reading recently is accurate.)
To me there appears no surprise here. You can't use it except in certain carefully isolated ways. And it's hardly a complete OS.
It's no threat to MSWind. It's an attempt to keep developers from even looking at Linux. ("You want to study an OS? OK, study our toy model.") I'm not saying it's technically crippled. It may be, but I'm not going to check. It's legally crippled.
This is just another one of those things that you're safer ignoring. Did you expect more from MS?
You can say it, of course, but that doesn't make it true.
Personally I find Ruby to be stylistically a superior language in many ways, though of course it's not suited for all problems. My chief gripe with it has to do with the difficulty with doing binary I/O. It seems to presume that everything should be translated into characters. And the lack of a non-text database connection. (I've even seen a manual on Ruby that declared that the external representation of numbers SHOULD be text...which is only true sometimes.)
But if what you're doing is web design, those aren't problems. And in many other circumstances those aren't problems.
Another problem with Ruby is that it can be difficult to locate errors generated by typos, or by forgetting to close a block. This is noxious, but it seems to be difficult to fix.
As I understand it, virtual particles will quickly annihilate each other unless energy is added from outside the system (of the two particles). As such, creation gets split into two pieces: 1) virtual creation, and 2) manifestation, with manifestation requiring the addition of external energy.
Note that space is dense with virtual pairs that haven't got access to an external source of energy, which is why some approaches to calculating quantum interactions require an infinite number of steps (though only some of the steps are significantly important...so the trick to to drop the steps that don't matter before you bother to calculate them).
How is it on longer documents? MSWord98 was decent for short pieces, like a term paper. It was when things got longer that it started really failing.
Mind you, I think the best word processor ever was MS Word5.1b on the Mac. It's been downhill from there. (Especially for generation of indexes...though WordPerfect had some nice ideas about that, too. Unfortunately they were always a minor player in the windowed environments and soon lost traction.)
I've frequently heard people say nice things about LaTex, but every time I've hit that fence I've bounced. Not enough benefit and too much work for what I'm doing. True, it would let me do a few nice things that nothing I'm currently working with would allow...but I don't want to do them badly enough to put up with the extra work.
The lesson I take away is "This is another proof that the US legal system is biased in favor of the litigious powerful."
Imagine that *you* had been the one served. You aren't even in the same state. You don't have a dedicated lawyer. What is the result? Most likely you need to take of an unknown amount of time in the middle of a project which will not be recompensed. You're likely to lose your job.
Wikileaks was more powerful, so they were less affected, but it was still a gratuitously unfair imposition that will not be properly recompensed.
The prices that I've noticed have changed a lot since the 90s, but I do tend to pay more attention to the high end colleges. (If it's not reported as news, I probably wouldn't notice, since I'm not currently looking.)
Going to a 2-year college for two-years and then transferring is a good plan, if you can get the transfer accepted. (I couldn't get my grade points to transfer, but I did get my units to transfer, but again, this was decades ago. Things might have changed.)
Patents are inherently dangerous, but not inherently evil. That the current implementation is evil is an artifact of the implementation.
OTOH, they are inherently dangerous. But they do, or claim to do, a necessary job (i.e., rewarding innovators for innovating).. I'm quite skeptical, however, of any process that grants a monopoly no matter what the justification. Some other way need to be found to accomplish the desired end. Preferably something that targeted more of the reward to the innovator without blocking innovation by others. Also, it should be realized that independent invention happens all the time, and it shouldn't be a "first horse to finish wins all" kind of deal.
Community college generally means a two year college, which can grant AA degrees, but not BA or BS. At least it did when I was going to college.
Also, about your source... I'm not willing to accept anything from MicroSoft as authoritative. Other estimates given seem much more in line with my experience and expectations. (The experience is a few decades old, but the expectations are reasonably current.)
That said, the comment about the Huntsville, Alabama college does seem to imply that it's still possible to locate a decently priced school. (But note how different those prices were from all the rest of the estimates.)
I think they might find they didn't need as many new machines as they thought. (Of course, I'd want to immediately replace ALL the software, to eliminate compatibility problems...but then I've read the MSWind2000 EULA.)
I'll grant that there would be short term disruption...so a better choice would be to freeze their European funds until they had paid their fines. Not to ban imports, but to confiscate the funds derived from selling them until the fines had been paid. Plus an additional amount to cover the costs involved in collecting the fines.
The thing is, you should be expecting the dollar to drop against foreign currencies in general. This is because of the balance of payments. Also because of the amount of dollars held by foreign countries as debt.
As such, this chart of the dollar dropping against the Euro is exactly what one should expect to see. And since experiment and theory concur, it seems like an "expected to be true statement" to say "The dollar drops against the Euro."
I'll grant that five years isn't a long time period, but my estimate is that if you could check the dollar against the average of world currencies for the last three decades that you would seem the same general tendency. (Though not so strongly, the Euro is currently an exceptionally strong currency. It may well weaken in the near future, but I see little to indicate that the dollar may strengthen.)
Why did you say Cisco when the summary said Comcast?
It was Comcast that was reported as paying people to stuff the hearing.
P.S.: No, this isn't an ethical approach, whether in Washington DC or elsewhere. But if it isn't illegal, then immoral companies will do it. Especially if they have no rational grounds to forward in favor of the decision that they want to have reached.
You're conflating at least two meanings of "believe in". Believing that something happens doesn't imply assessing it as desirable.
Additionally, most people who worry about life insurance are beyond the reproductive age, and as such evolution has little "concern" about their living or dying. (I.e., things that are only damaging after the reproductive years are at most mildly selected against by evolution, and can even be selected in favor of. There are suspicions that this may explain why Huntington's Disease persists.)
If you're going to bring in evolution (in favor of natural evolution), you should me more interested in killing off blind children. (But evolution has been dealing with that for mega-centuries. Generally in a very unpleasant manner.) Do remember, however, that even Darwin and Huxley never argued that evolution was a morally correct basis for choosing actions. It took somebody with a axe to grind and little understanding of science to make that claim.
What it takes to impeach a president is the House of Representatives needs to decide to do so.
That's it.
Conviction requires that the Senate agree.
As to just *what* someone can be impeached for... "High crimes and misdemeanors". If that's defined anywhere, I don't know it. (It probably is defined somewhere, but it certainly isn't defined in the constitution.) But practically what a president is impeached for is getting the leadership of the House of Representatives angry enough. The now Speaker of the House promised over two years ago to not impeach the president. Looks like she stays bought. I wonder who paid her off.
Because the Democratic Speaker of the House said she wouldn't support impeachment, and would do everything she could to block it. The villains aren't all Republicans.
Perhaps not, but if they don't their kids will go crazy. Hopefully in non-socially destructive ways, but that can't be guaranteed. Crazy is what can be guaranteed.
What does a 7 year old want with privacy? Privacy. Privacy, in and of itself, is a built in need. Lack of it can drive people crazy (as can too much, called isolation). Deprivation of privacy is, in and of itself, punishment.
OTOH, don't read this too strongly. The need for privacy doesn't immediately translate into the need for a password protected account and root control over one's computer. At 7-years old that seems excessive. But a reasonable middle ground should be taken. Say, the parent promises the child not to read any local odt files without the child being present and having taken the initiative (i.e., the child can show you things that have been written, but you don't ask), but states that mail is probably going to be scanned occasionally. And it's the parent who has root access. (If the root password gets changed, the system gets re-installed. If it happens three times, the computer disappears for awhile.) (Also, the browsing history MUST NOT be cleared without permission on penalty of loss of the computer for 2^n days [where n is the number of times this has happened].)
BUT: It's important that you keep your promise, except in cases of real emergency.
N.B.: A month before each birthday would be a reasonable time to "re-negotiate" what is permissible, and what supervision there will be during the coming year.
P.S.: Circumstances alter cases. The proposals that I made for a seven year old are ones that were deemed reasonable in a particular case. The nature of the child may well alter this.
P.P.S.: Since I've heard of "parental control" software that blocks sites that the parents wouldn't have chosen to block, e.g. sites teaching about evolution, I'm not at all enamored or trusting of commercial parental control software.
That's a possible hypothesis. I'm not going to believe it without a lot more reliable information. (Did you notice that your linked article carries the note "citation needed"?)
Slashdot Mirror
It's an idea, but how well can an ultra-portable with XP installed run MSOffice2008?
If it can, then they may be able to sell an add-on. If it can't...then they're promoting OpenOffice.
Not invariably. Every so often there's a technology barrier which means that going smaller costs a new factory. That can raise the initial cost of the chips quite a lot. The manufacturer generally eats the cost, but makes it back over the life of the factory. But there used to be a lot more manufacturers. Costs of more expensive factories has caused the market to dwindle, and dwindle again. Now it's almost a world wide monopoly. Intel, AMD, and IBM. Anybody else major? There used to be dozens. (I'm talking computer chips here. Watches can still be made with the old, cheaper factories...or possibly even ink-jet printers, if what I've been reading recently is accurate.)
Not really.
To me there appears no surprise here. You can't use it except in certain carefully isolated ways. And it's hardly a complete OS.
It's no threat to MSWind. It's an attempt to keep developers from even looking at Linux. ("You want to study an OS? OK, study our toy model.") I'm not saying it's technically crippled. It may be, but I'm not going to check. It's legally crippled.
This is just another one of those things that you're safer ignoring. Did you expect more from MS?
Nitpick answer: it's either "percent" or "per centum". Percent is an abbreviation. The meaning is "per hundred".
You can say it, of course, but that doesn't make it true.
Personally I find Ruby to be stylistically a superior language in many ways, though of course it's not suited for all problems. My chief gripe with it has to do with the difficulty with doing binary I/O. It seems to presume that everything should be translated into characters. And the lack of a non-text database connection. (I've even seen a manual on Ruby that declared that the external representation of numbers SHOULD be text...which is only true sometimes.)
But if what you're doing is web design, those aren't problems. And in many other circumstances those aren't problems.
Another problem with Ruby is that it can be difficult to locate errors generated by typos, or by forgetting to close a block. This is noxious, but it seems to be difficult to fix.
Is it murder to kill someone who's been declared dead?
I think Monty Python did a skit about this...but they didn't involve the government. That could add a whole new level of fear+absurdity.
And if you believe that "pin point precision" PR, I've got a bridge you might be interested in...
As I understand it, virtual particles will quickly annihilate each other unless energy is added from outside the system (of the two particles). As such, creation gets split into two pieces: 1) virtual creation, and 2) manifestation, with manifestation requiring the addition of external energy.
Note that space is dense with virtual pairs that haven't got access to an external source of energy, which is why some approaches to calculating quantum interactions require an infinite number of steps (though only some of the steps are significantly important...so the trick to to drop the steps that don't matter before you bother to calculate them).
Caution: At physics, I am a dilettante, at best.
How is it on longer documents? MSWord98 was decent for short pieces, like a term paper. It was when things got longer that it started really failing.
Mind you, I think the best word processor ever was MS Word5.1b on the Mac. It's been downhill from there. (Especially for generation of indexes...though WordPerfect had some nice ideas about that, too. Unfortunately they were always a minor player in the windowed environments and soon lost traction.)
I've frequently heard people say nice things about LaTex, but every time I've hit that fence I've bounced. Not enough benefit and too much work for what I'm doing. True, it would let me do a few nice things that nothing I'm currently working with would allow...but I don't want to do them badly enough to put up with the extra work.
Honest? Well, he could have done worse.
The lesson I take away is "This is another proof that the US legal system is biased in favor of the litigious powerful."
Imagine that *you* had been the one served. You aren't even in the same state. You don't have a dedicated lawyer. What is the result? Most likely you need to take of an unknown amount of time in the middle of a project which will not be recompensed. You're likely to lose your job.
Wikileaks was more powerful, so they were less affected, but it was still a gratuitously unfair imposition that will not be properly recompensed.
When I see "Sony", I think rootkit. So I'm not at all interested in how they attempt to justify their existence, merely in what might threaten them.
The prices that I've noticed have changed a lot since the 90s, but I do tend to pay more attention to the high end colleges. (If it's not reported as news, I probably wouldn't notice, since I'm not currently looking.)
Going to a 2-year college for two-years and then transferring is a good plan, if you can get the transfer accepted. (I couldn't get my grade points to transfer, but I did get my units to transfer, but again, this was decades ago. Things might have changed.)
Patents are inherently dangerous, but not inherently evil. That the current implementation is evil is an artifact of the implementation.
OTOH, they are inherently dangerous. But they do, or claim to do, a necessary job (i.e., rewarding innovators for innovating).. I'm quite skeptical, however, of any process that grants a monopoly no matter what the justification. Some other way need to be found to accomplish the desired end. Preferably something that targeted more of the reward to the innovator without blocking innovation by others. Also, it should be realized that independent invention happens all the time, and it shouldn't be a "first horse to finish wins all" kind of deal.
Community college generally means a two year college, which can grant AA degrees, but not BA or BS. At least it did when I was going to college.
... I'm not willing to accept anything from MicroSoft as authoritative. Other estimates given seem much more in line with my experience and expectations. (The experience is a few decades old, but the expectations are reasonably current.)
Also, about your source
That said, the comment about the Huntsville, Alabama college does seem to imply that it's still possible to locate a decently priced school. (But note how different those prices were from all the rest of the estimates.)
Well, they *did* say UNIX, not Linux.
Perhaps they'll find some suckers. (You can easily guess my take on their offer.)
Sorry. A monopolized market is not a free market. Read your Adam Smith.
I think they might find they didn't need as many new machines as they thought. (Of course, I'd want to immediately replace ALL the software, to eliminate compatibility problems...but then I've read the MSWind2000 EULA.)
I'll grant that there would be short term disruption...so a better choice would be to freeze their European funds until they had paid their fines. Not to ban imports, but to confiscate the funds derived from selling them until the fines had been paid. Plus an additional amount to cover the costs involved in collecting the fines.
The thing is, you should be expecting the dollar to drop against foreign currencies in general. This is because of the balance of payments. Also because of the amount of dollars held by foreign countries as debt.
As such, this chart of the dollar dropping against the Euro is exactly what one should expect to see. And since experiment and theory concur, it seems like an "expected to be true statement" to say "The dollar drops against the Euro."
I'll grant that five years isn't a long time period, but my estimate is that if you could check the dollar against the average of world currencies for the last three decades that you would seem the same general tendency. (Though not so strongly, the Euro is currently an exceptionally strong currency. It may well weaken in the near future, but I see little to indicate that the dollar may strengthen.)
Caution: I Am Not A Financial Analyst.
Why did you say Cisco when the summary said Comcast?
It was Comcast that was reported as paying people to stuff the hearing.
P.S.: No, this isn't an ethical approach, whether in Washington DC or elsewhere. But if it isn't illegal, then immoral companies will do it. Especially if they have no rational grounds to forward in favor of the decision that they want to have reached.
You're conflating at least two meanings of "believe in". Believing that something happens doesn't imply assessing it as desirable.
Additionally, most people who worry about life insurance are beyond the reproductive age, and as such evolution has little "concern" about their living or dying. (I.e., things that are only damaging after the reproductive years are at most mildly selected against by evolution, and can even be selected in favor of. There are suspicions that this may explain why Huntington's Disease persists.)
If you're going to bring in evolution (in favor of natural evolution), you should me more interested in killing off blind children. (But evolution has been dealing with that for mega-centuries. Generally in a very unpleasant manner.) Do remember, however, that even Darwin and Huxley never argued that evolution was a morally correct basis for choosing actions. It took somebody with a axe to grind and little understanding of science to make that claim.
What it takes to impeach a president is the House of Representatives needs to decide to do so.
That's it.
Conviction requires that the Senate agree.
As to just *what* someone can be impeached for... "High crimes and misdemeanors". If that's defined anywhere, I don't know it. (It probably is defined somewhere, but it certainly isn't defined in the constitution.) But practically what a president is impeached for is getting the leadership of the House of Representatives angry enough. The now Speaker of the House promised over two years ago to not impeach the president. Looks like she stays bought. I wonder who paid her off.
Because the Democratic Speaker of the House said she wouldn't support impeachment, and would do everything she could to block it. The villains aren't all Republicans.
Perhaps not, but if they don't their kids will go crazy. Hopefully in non-socially destructive ways, but that can't be guaranteed. Crazy is what can be guaranteed.
What does a 7 year old want with privacy? Privacy. Privacy, in and of itself, is a built in need. Lack of it can drive people crazy (as can too much, called isolation). Deprivation of privacy is, in and of itself, punishment.
OTOH, don't read this too strongly. The need for privacy doesn't immediately translate into the need for a password protected account and root control over one's computer. At 7-years old that seems excessive. But a reasonable middle ground should be taken. Say, the parent promises the child not to read any local odt files without the child being present and having taken the initiative (i.e., the child can show you things that have been written, but you don't ask), but states that mail is probably going to be scanned occasionally. And it's the parent who has root access. (If the root password gets changed, the system gets re-installed. If it happens three times, the computer disappears for awhile.) (Also, the browsing history MUST NOT be cleared without permission on penalty of loss of the computer for 2^n days [where n is the number of times this has happened].)
BUT: It's important that you keep your promise, except in cases of real emergency.
N.B.: A month before each birthday would be a reasonable time to "re-negotiate" what is permissible, and what supervision there will be during the coming year.
P.S.: Circumstances alter cases. The proposals that I made for a seven year old are ones that were deemed reasonable in a particular case. The nature of the child may well alter this.
P.P.S.: Since I've heard of "parental control" software that blocks sites that the parents wouldn't have chosen to block, e.g. sites teaching about evolution, I'm not at all enamored or trusting of commercial parental control software.
That's a possible hypothesis. I'm not going to believe it without a lot more reliable information. (Did you notice that your linked article carries the note "citation needed"?)